6-4 minors matchpoint problem

[Robert]

Hi Apollo 81

 

I was one of the 2NT=Good Bad posters.

 

Simply avoid playing with random players without some decent methods, unless she is good looking and you are playing ftf. If you do not have good methods, ignore the results and simply go by guess and by gosh.

 

Third paragraph of my last post, "I play double=4 clubs(and a good hand and a direct 3Cs shows 5(+) and a good hand since I 'do play' Good Bad 2NT."

 

The one suit double seems strange to me after one partner suggested it, however, it does make sense after looking at the alternatives. Partner denies spades with his 1NT bid so...

 

Regards,

Robert

[awm]

I don't really like east's bidding on this hand.

 

First he passes 3♣. Of course, it's not clear whether 3♣ shows extras, but it could be extras. Even if opener has some nice 5-5 minors hand (say xx x AKxxx AQxxx as a typical minimum for 3♣) the odds of making a game are not bad, and opener can easily have more than this. With a super-max for the 1NT call (I agree with 1NT by the way, just think east's hand could hardly be better for it) it seems normal to try 3NT over 3♣.

 

Then the double of 3♥ is also strange. East has two defensive tricks (heart king, spade ace). The minor suit length may tend to reduce opener's tricks. Certainly if opener has real extras I'd expect to set, but if opener had real extras we were cold for game and just passed 3♣. If partner has some shapely hand with points in suits (but not real extra values) then 3♥ could easily make and we might still have been cold for game when we passed 3♣. In any case, I think double here should deliver three tricks (or at least 2.5 tricks), not two tricks with defense-reducing length in the minors.

[Guest Jlall]

Even if opener has some nice 5-5 minors hand (say xx x AKxxx AQxxx as a typical minimum for 3♣)

Wow, I'm sure I would bid 3C with any 5-5 in the minors that I had opened. Partner is a big favorite to pass out 2H and we for sure have a double fit or a 9 card fit and need to be competing over 2H like always.

[awm]

I perhaps have different ideas about what qualifies for an opening bid with 5-5 minors than most people. I've noticed that:

 

(1) Opening 1m makes it easier for opponents to bid, not harder, because an overcall shows less for most people than an opening.

 

(2) Opening 1m doesn't help as much in competition as one might think, because partner often can't raise directly when it's right (preferring a negative double, or just being afraid to raise a possible 3-card suit on 4).

 

(3) When you have both minors, the most likely game is 3NT. Having "extra shape" doesn't help you much in 3NT. So if you open some 5-5 ten count (say) you often end up in 3NT with no real fit and 22-23 high, failing. This is not true if you are 5-5 in the majors, since the most likely game is now 4M and the extra shape does help.

 

(4) Holding both minors, you can often bid 1NT/2NT after passing initially and show both suits. Certain two suiters including a major can be hard to show after passing initially.

 

So anyways, I don't open a lot of tens and elevens when I'm 5-5 in the minors, even though I'd always open these hands if I had 5-5 in the majors. So the given hand is really not far from a minimum for me.

[mikegill]

Isn't it normal for opener to bid 3c here on 5-4 minors hand (or 2N if you think that shows 5+ diamonds and 4 clubs)? Responder's 1N bid is very unlikely to hold 4 spades (in our style, anyway), so if opener is 2254, he knows the opponents have at a minimum 8 hearts and 8 spades. Responder might have some 33(34) hand and pass out 2h when cold for 3m. Again, here my style is generally that the hand short in their suit has more of a duty to act.

 

I actually was East on this and - I'm not so much defending my actions as trying to find out where my thinking went wrong. Here was my thought process as the hand went on. Well, partner is under some pressure to bid over 2H, so he doesn't really need to have a great hand (I think awm's style of opening 5-5 minors hands is pretty nonstandard). Actually if partner had bid 3d, I'm sure I would have tried 3n, because now I just need him to have AK of diamonds and a trick. Over 3C, 5-5 hands aren't so good for 3n, and it seems like I need AK diamonds plus 2 side tricks. I figure that bidding 3n because partner might have extras at matchpoints isn't so good, since minimum hands are more likely than hands with extras.

 

Once they bid 3H, I'm thinking "well, I sure think 3c is making, so I have to do something here." I thought it was very likely that 3h was going down, since my opponents were not subtle enough to be trying to get doubled, and thought it was a tossup whether we were making 4m. I knew this could be really bad if partner had 10-card in the minors, but I just don't know how likely it is that is what's happening. Certainly xx54 hands are much more likely than xx55 or xx64 hands, but partner might not bid on all xx54 hands, so maybe this is poor reasoning.

[awm]

It just seems sort of contradictory to pass 3♣ (when a good hand from partner makes 3NT) and then double 3♥ (when you need a good hand from partner to set). Does partner have a good hand or not? I don't think the opponents bidding 3♥ makes it more likely that partner has a good hand...

 

I don't think I would normally bid 3♣ (or 2NT) with a 5-4. This kind of bid is (at best) competing in an eight card fit over an eight card fit, and one or both fits could easily be seven cards, not to mention partner has advertised wastage in hearts. It's too hard for partner to guess what to do if I make the same call on a minimum 5-4 that I make on a 6-4 with extras. Partner is still there and can bid 3♦ with four, or double with extras, or 2NT with a competitive hand.