support with support

[han]

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=skqxha10xxdxxxcqxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

p - (p) - 1S - (3D)

??[/hv]

 

What's your call?

[BillHiggin]

4♠ undo 3♠ seems to most accurately describe this.

Since I do not actually do that sort of thing, 3♠ (have I told you how much I hate 4333)

[Mr. Dodgy]

double

[jdonn]

3♠ what am I missing? If pard was dicking around in 3rd seat that's his problem.

[Codo]

Double

 

I can handle any bid by pd, even a pass.

[foo]

South,Both,IMP,

♠KQx ♥ATxx ♦xxx ♣Qxx

 

p - (p) - 1S - (3D);??

 

What's your call?

4333's stink in terms of play potential.

 

A negative X here should strongly tend to show 4 cards in each of the unbid suits.

 

If GOP promises 5+M with their 3rd seat 1 opening, I raise to 3S.

 

If GOP makes frequent 4cM 1M openings in 3rd chair, I make a Negative X.

[joker_gib]

All honours probably works but this is 4333 so 3♠

 

Alain

[brianshark]

3♠ seems clearcut. Dbl is silly with support and 4♠ is just too aggressive with such a flat hand.

[Codo]

If 3 Spade is clear cut, there is no question.

Most people don´t pass with Kxx,Axxx,xx,xxxx after 1♠ (3 ♦).

So you better play 3 Spade as 6-9. You may downgrade because of your 4333, but if this is correct is no certainity at all.

[kenrexford]

When 3rd-seat can be light, Responder is conservative and Opener is aggressive.

 

Thus, 3♠. This shows a hand as a passer that would/might have bid game as a non-passer.

[drinbrasil]

3S, double denie support in my system in this position :-)

[pclayton]

Wouldn't we be bidding 3♠ with a 7 count and 4 trump here?

 

I hate my shape and my xxx of diamonds, but this is a good hand otherwise.

 

I think I'll double. Getting to hearts could be key if pard is 5=4=1=3.

[joker_gib]

Wouldn't we be bidding 3♠ with a 7 count and 4 trump here?

Only if we have shape....

 

I can strech a bit in this position of course but I tend to be conservative with flat hands.

[whereagles]

Seems like a textbook wide-ranging 3♠.

[brianshark]

Bidding with 7 counts for the sake of competing is the stretch. 9-11 limit raise hands is the norm.

[jdonn]

3♠ shows about 8 to 11. "A 7 count and four trumps" is pretty much 8. So if this is a maximum (but obvious in the sense that 4 is too much) 3♠, there isn't much point in saying "But we would make the same bid on a minimum 3♠ bid so we can't also do it on a maximum 3♠ bid!"

[pclayton]

3♠ shows about 8 to 11. "A 7 count and four trumps" is pretty much 8. So if this is a maximum (but obvious in the sense that 4 is too much) 3♠, there isn't much point in saying "But we would make the same bid on a minimum 3♠ bid so we can't also do it on a maximum 3♠ bid!"

Well ok. Part of this has to do with pard's tendencies opposite a passed hand negative double. Will he punt with 3♥ or 3♠ with a minimum? Will he just bash 3N with a diamond stopper (stupid I know).

 

My concern is that we could miss a game opposite some very acceptable minimums. We have three cover cards and possibly a 4th. Even the ♥10 could be valuable.

 

Would you move with a 6 loser hand like: AJxxx, KQxx, xx, Ax if pard bid a simple 3♠? I don't think I would.

[neilkaz]

This is a maximum 3♠ call, but I am allowed to hold a max. 4333's don't always offer the best play for game and I don't want to hang PD for possibly opening a bit light in 3rd seat.

 

Double is my close 2nd choice here, however.

[Edmunte1]

Some comments:

1) I don't like double at all. Suppose that partner holds something like:

A10xxxx Kxx x K10x. What would happen? He'll bid 3

[awm]

I think double is a good alternative to bidding game. After all:

 

(1) If partner leaves the double in, that's probably right.

(2) If partner bids 3NT, that could be a better game than 4♠.

(3) If partner bids 3♥, we can play the 4-4 heart fit which is probably a superior game.

(4) We can always raise 3♠ to 4♠ anyway, or correct 4♣ to 4♠.

 

Of course, this doesn't solve the problem that this hand isn't really worth a game force...

 

I think opposite a partner in first chair, I'd go with double planning to bid game. After all, we are "close enough" to game values and 3♠ could be a worse hand for sure.

 

But opposite a third seat opening, it's more likely that partner has some minimum hand (after all he will open things that might not open in 1st seat) and it feels right to give partner some leeway by bidding only 3♠.

[Edmunte1]

Some comments:

1) I don't like double at all. Suppose that partner holds something like:

A10xxxx Kxx x K10x. What would happen? He'll bid 3 ♠, and we'll miss a cold vulnerable game. Even if we add a queen, probably he'll stil bid 3♠. Or let's suppose he holds a good 13-14hcp hand without 4♥: AJxxx Kx xx AJ9x. He would also bid 3♠. And even if partner bids 3♥, do we have a clear raise? Partenr still can have AJxxx KQxx xx xx and maybe a bit less. So we MUST show support

2) What support? 3

[jdonn]

Regarding double:

For one thing partner is not passing, quit dreaming. You have xxx of their suit and he is under the bidder.

 

For another partner has to bid 3♥ with three card holdings a lot, that is just standard. What else does a 5323 or 5332 with no good suits do? And hope he's not a minimum with four clubs.

 

Also if partner bids 3♠ you are now on the total guess whether to raise or not.

 

If partner bids 3NT it might be better, might be worse. However if he decides to bid 3NT over a 3♠ raise you can be a lot more confident that's right.

[Edmunte1]

Some comments:

1) I don't like double at all. Suppose that partner holds something like:

A10xxxx Kxx x K10x. What would happen? He'll bid 3 ♠, and we'll miss a cold vulnerable game. Even if we add a queen, probably he'll stil bid 3♠. Or let's suppose he holds a good 13-14hcp hand without 4♥: AJxxx Kx xx AJ9x. He would also bid 3♠. And even if partner bids 3♥, do we have a clear raise? Partenr still can have AJxxx KQxx xx xx and maybe a bit less. So we MUST show support

2) What support? 3♠ or 4♠? The normal way of thinking is to consider partner as a good minimum opening with 2 diamonds as an average hand and see what happens.

Suppose that's partner has AJxxx KJx xx Axx - if the heart finesse succeds we can make the contract on a squeeze. Or maybe AJxxx Qxx xx AJx - again a squeeze is possible with some winning finesses, and if we add a Jack we have really good game chances.

3) Another important point: we're vunerable, and missing the game will maybe cost us 10 IMP's, and just overbidding we'll lose only 6 IMP's, so it's a 62.5% win-loss raport. And even if we'll go down probably we won't be doubled (one of opps is a passed hand, another is a preemptor and they don't have trump honours)

 

So it's a choice between 3♠ and 4♠, and i'll probably go for the game

 

(Sry, misclicked on the previous posts)

[awm]

You can even double and then bid 3♠....

 

The "problem" with double is that you pretty much have to bid 4♠ over 3♠ from partner, and you have to correct 4♣ to 4♠. Obviously these could be overbids. My point was that double will generally work better than bidding 4♠. After all, it is hard to construct a sequence where where double causes us to "lose" the spades, whereas it's easy to construct sequences where double gets us to a better spot than 4♠ (most often 4♥).

 

Now, this is not to say that double is better than bidding 3♠. There are many sequences where after double, you end up in game -- for example partner bids 4♣ over the double and you have to bid 4♠, or partner bids 3NT over the double. It could be that nine tricks is the limit (or even eight tricks is the limit). It seems to me that this situation is more likely opposite the third seat 1♠ opening than it would be opposite a first seat 1♠ opening.

[Guest Jlall]

You can't play in a 4-4 heart fit when partner bids 3H because he can easily have 3 of them.