Who dropped the ball?

[jillybean]

[hv=d=e&v=n&n=sat87h76dak63cq32&s=sk3h98dqj54cakjt8]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

West North East South

 

 -     -     Pass  1♣

 Pass  1♦    Dbl   2♦

 2♥    2♠    Pass  3♦

 Pass  4♦    Pass  Pass

 Pass  

 

Casual partner, no agreement other than we both think we are playing bridge.

[helene_t]

Did North intend 4♦ as forcing? It's not quite clear to me if it is, although I have the agreement with regular p's that 4m is forcing unless it's obvious that it isn't. Without such an agreement, 3♥ is better. Or just 5♦.

 

I can understand if N would invite only here. Then again, who wants to play 4♦, it is either pass or 5♦.

 

Anyway, I think S should have bid 5, for two reasons: 4♦ might be intended as forcing. And S has 14 points with decent shape and all honors working, that's significantly more than promised.

[jtfanclub]

I'm curious as to what you think of the 3♦ bid on this auction, Helene.

[helene_t]

I think 3♦ was ok. Maybe this was time for S to show extra's with 3♥, but N could have a hand that only wanted to invite for game if 3NT is an option. In fact 3♣ might make N recognize the value of ♣Q but if I say S should bid 3♣ for that reason I'm probably resulting. I'm curious as to what the better bidders on this forum would think of a 3♣ bid ;)

 

5♦ is good because the honors coloborate perfectly. Give N ♠Q instead of ♣Q and it's a lot less good.

 

Btw, what did S plan to rebid if N had bid 1♥ or 1♠? Maybe a 1NT opening would have been better.

[neilkaz]

I think 3♦ was ok. Maybe this was time for S to show extra's with 3♥, but N could have a hand that only wanted to invite for game if 3NT is an option. In fact 3♣ might make N recognize the value of ♣Q but if I say S should bid 3♣ for that reason I'm probably resulting. I'm curious as to what the better bidders on this forum would think of a 3♣ bid ;)

 

5♦ is good because the honors coloborate perfectly. Give N ♠Q instead of ♣Q and it's a lot less good.

 

Btw, what did S plan to rebid if N had bid 1♥ or 1♠? Maybe a 1NT opening would have been better.

As one who is not a fan of off shape NT openings, I'll point out that S has only 14 HCP. I can understand those who'd upgrade due to the fine ♣ suit, but the wide open ♥ and 2245 shape means that I won't upgrade. I"ll happily open 1♣ and rebid 2♣ over 1M which such a great 5 card ♣ suit. Note that by not playing Walsh I get to find my ♦ fit easily on this hand as did the players.

[pclayton]

I think I'd try 3♥ as North. 9 tricks are cheaper than 11 and the 4=2=4=3 wants to be in 3N if possible. I think its still possible South has a heart stopper, even though NT was bypassed over 2♠.

 

Even then, I think 4♦ is 100% forcing, so they both get a ding here.

[neilkaz]

Hmmmm...who dropped the ball. I think both players did and the result was missing a nice minor suit game due to good fitting cards. I'll assume SAYCish bidding without Walsh responses as that seems to be what was played and look at each bid.

 

1♣ normal opening with some extras

 

1♦ normal response and with a fine 13 HCP, 3 quick tricks, and Qxx in PD's suit, N should be thinking game all the way unless H is wide open and opener is a dead minimum so 5m has no play.

 

2♦ showing support over the delayed take out X is fine. I value Opener's hand as 16 support points. (perhaps Kx isn't worth 4, bit that K maybe onside, and the ♣ are very strong) so this is a max.

 

2♠ this high reverse is at least invitational and still looking for a possible 4-4 ♠ fit, as opener may have 4♠ and a min and not wanted to bid them over the take out double, IMHO.

 

3♦ just looks like a minimum to me. But with max values for what was allready shown and now my K of ♠ looks better, I'd bid 3♥ to show my max, and to play 3NT if PD has a stopper.

 

4♦ strongly invites game, IMHO. But with 14 pts in support of ♦ and good controls, I think I'd force game here. N may be reluctant to jump to 5♦ in case S opened some 2-2-4-5 trashy 11 count (but many pass those) but with 13 HCP I think N should bid 3♥ just in case S has a stopper. 13 fine HCP opposite an opening bid really should be strongly looking for game and leave no chance of a pass.

 

Pass .. this is too wimpy over N's invite (some may even play 4♦ as forcing) and especially since 4♦ is a poor place to play in an auction that only had weak comp from the opps. S has an absolute max for his bidding so far and passing 4♦ is very wimpy, IMHO.

 

OK now..I change my original assessment and the blame is 20% N and 80% S as I really can't dream of passing 4♦ on this auction.

[jdonn]

I would have been in 3NT for sure unless west overcalled on the first round. So you did well in a sense.

[hrothgar]

2♠ this high reverse is at least invitational and still looking for a possible 4-4 ♠ fit, as opener may have 4♠ and a min and not wanted to bid them over the take out double, IMHO.

2♠ is not a "high reverse" and should not be referred to as such

[neilkaz]

2♠ this high reverse is at least invitational and still looking for a possible 4-4 ♠ fit, as opener may have 4♠ and a min and not wanted to bid them over the take out double, IMHO.

2♠ is not a "high reverse" and should not be referred to as such

Perhaps my terminology is incorrect..I guess it is a normal reverse by responder ?

 

Anyhow it is at least GI .. neilkaz ..

[hrothgar]

Hi Kathryn

 

If I had set down opposite a random partner I would have (probably) opened 1♦, intending to rebid 2♣ if partner advanced 1M or 1N. Hard to say how the auction would have developed. Depends a lot on whether you get a 2♥ overcall, whether 2♥ gets raised, etc.

 

1NT also looks reasonable, give the quality of the club suit (which I suppress in the initial sequence) and the positional Spade guard.

 

Quick question for the peanut gallery about North's 2♠ call... What would a double show in this same sequence?

[neilkaz]

I would have been in 3NT for sure unless west overcalled on the first round. So you did well in a sense.

This is true as this auction will often go 1♣-1♠-1NT-3NT as lots of players will bid their 4 card major before their 4 card ♦'s and the opps who don't have much may then not get their chance to show ♥.

 

Unfortunately, on BBO IMPs you'll usually find that you have to make game with this many HCP to get a decent score, since not everyone will lead a ♥ and some may do so and still fail to set it.

 

I was in this type of dead 3NT the other day and after a ♥ lead and return won by the opening leader, he shifted and after the hand, stated that he felt certain I had it stopped !

[jtfanclub]

Quick question for the peanut gallery about North's 2♠ call... What would a double show in this same sequence?

I suppose I'd be laughed out of the room if I proposed hearts well stopped, penalty oriented?

[Walddk]

I think you did very well until South sounded weak/weak (3♦). Given the auction after partner's 2♠, South has excellent cards, a very healthy minimum. In my view 3♥ should get that message across.

 

"Good cards, no heart stopper".

 

2♠ promises a rebid, but it's possible to stop in 4♦. However, with two aces and ♦K North could perhaps jump to game now, alternatively bid 4♣ as a game try. If he does, South can bid game.

 

I confess that all this is much easier with all cards in view, and I don't think it's a serious error to stop in 4♦. Perfect fit which is not always easy to spot.

 

Roland

[skjaeran]

IMO 4♦ is forcing here. But even if it was invitational only, south's got an obvious raise. Thus south dropped the ball.

 

For those where 4♦ is invitational, both dropped the ball. Still south's fault is the bigger one since after that there was no way back.

[pclayton]

Here's why I think 4♦ should be forcing. You may or may not agree with me.

 

If North was solely interested in a heart stop for 3N, he could have asked via 3♥. If the partnership doesn't have shortage or high cards in hearts, then 4♦ is an attractive stop.

 

However, North has bidding his hand like a strong 5-4 with poor round suit controls that has bigger aspirations than 3N. Wouldn't you bid: AKxx, xx, AKQxx, xx much the same way? Doesn't 4♦ sound like a hand that is fishing for a heart control?

 

What tempers my thinking is that this a SAYC situation. Doesn't SAYC play SJS? I'd be surprised if the rules were as rigid as the ones for a Soloway JS and that a hand like AKxx xx AKQxx xx would qualify as a SJS.

[jillybean]

I was north here and thought 4♦ was 110% forcing. I didnt go looking for a ♥ stop since pard bypassed 2nt and we had a fit in both minors.

Maybe I should have been happy with game, oh well.

[han]

I like the auction up to 3D.

 

I would have bid 3H with the north hand.

[Walddk]

I was north here and thought 4♦ was 110% forcing. I didnt go looking for a ♥ stop since pard bypassed 2nt and we had a fit in both minors.

Maybe  I should have been happy with game, oh well.

Slam from North's point of view is virtually out of the question for a couple of reasons:

 

- 1. South is unlikely to have have the ♥A, or king (guarded); else 2NT over 2♠.

- 2. South does not have a singleton heart either. With 10 hearts between them and non-vulnerable we would likely have heard more noise by EW.

 

And finally, the fact that South bid no more than 2♦, then 3♦ strongly suggests that he has no heart control. If he had a singleton heart, his hand would probably have been worth more than 2♦/3♦.

 

Roland

[awm]

I think it would be fairly normal for south to bid 2NT over 2♠ if holding a heart stopper. After all, the diamond fit is already known. It seems to me that 3♦ should say "I have a minimum and no heart stopper." If north follows this with 3♥, I wouldn't take that as "just a stopper ask" since south already denied a stopper by bidding 3♦. Probably 3♥ is a cuebid looking for a diamond slam (or maybe looking for a partial heart stopper).

 

In contrast to Phil, I think 4♦ is not forcing because with slam interest north would either bid 3♥ (heart control) or just blast 5♦ (knowing we have no heart control based on south's 3♦ call). On the other hand, I have no problem with a non-forcing 4♦ by north. Note that south's bidding is consistent with the same hand minus the ♦Q, and 5m is in fact quite poor opposite that hand. I blame the missed game on south, who showed a minimum over 2♠ (by rebidding 3♦) and then showed a minimum again over 4♦ (by passing) when holding a queen more than minimum and what certainly looks like working cards for 5♦.

[neilkaz]

I was north here and thought 4♦ was 110% forcing. I didnt go looking for a ♥ stop since pard bypassed 2nt and we had a fit in both minors.

Maybe I should have been happy with game, oh well.

These minor suit auctions can be touchy, indeed. As one who isn't convinced that 4♦ is 100% forcing, here's a way I think you can force with a good hand interested in slam (this one is not good enough).

 

To force in ♦ or ♣ here, why not ask for a stopper with 3♥ and then pull 3NT to 4 of a minor or continue on over 4m if no stop in PD's hand ? That would certainly force to game and show an SI hand.

 

As it stands, however, S has an absolute max, IMHO for his bidding so far and really is a wimp for leaving it in 4♦.

 

You could just have jumped from 3 to 5♦ but you are in trouble if PD has a min. and I think it dangerous to assume a pickup has no ♥ stopper for his 3♦.

 

.. neilkaz ..

[jtfanclub]

I think you did very well until South sounded weak/weak (3♦). Given the auction after partner's 2♠, South has excellent cards, a very healthy minimum. In my view 3♥ should get that message across.

Now, I know I'm sort of weird, but with partner bidding a mere 2♦, and then bidding a "I'm sorry I opened" 3♦, I'd just give up as North. There's only so much poking with a stick I can do before I get convinced that partner is really and truly dead.

 

I think 4♦ showed considerable courage by North, if it's nonforcing. There is no way that I'd bid 5♦.

[Guest Jlall]

For yet another take, I would say 3D denies a stopper in hearts. 3H can be bid on something like Qx or Jxx or some kind of Axx holding looking for 3N. 4D is not forcing because its the only way to give south, who keeps saying "screw you pard" an out.

 

Personally I really admire the 4D bid, and like to think I'd find it as well. It shows a good appreciation for the value of the hand in context of partners bidding, and shows that north is not a bean counter. To make 5D in a 4-4 fit when you immediately have 2 top losers takes a LOT of high cards, especially when partner likely is 2245 and the discards you get on the clubs, if there are any, do not do you any good. Hands like:

 

Jx xx QJxx AKJxx, Kx xx QJxx AJxxx, Kx Qx Jxxx AKxxx make game very poor. These are "minimum minimums" of the type that north is asking for. South, in context of his 3D bid, has a very nice hand and should definitely trust the 4D bid enough to bid 5.

[kenberg]

A question: How should the bidding go with the given hands, and how should the bidding go with the king of spades changed to the queen of spades? A virtual certain 11 tricks in one case, a virtual certain 10 (exactly 10) in the other. No matter how the hearts lie, the opponents, after hearing of no heart stop, should cash the hearts and wait for the spade.

 

 

Now when it's that close, I wouldn't be too hard on a casual partnership that fails to reach game. But I agree with I guess about everyone that it's South's job to get them to game. To be a little simplistic, he is the one who is looking at the king and not the queen.

[goodwintr]

The arguments that South is good enough to accept even if 4D is merely invitational, not forcing (primes, maximum for previous bidding, every indication that the honors are a superfit), are the same arguments that should have persuaded South to bid 4D, not just 3D, over 2S. The proposed 3H bid (over 2S) is a lot more fashionable than jump-raising partner, but not necessarily more effective.