mp bidding problem

[karlson]

[hv=d=e&v=b&s=saxxha9xdxxxcjxxx]133|100|Scoring: MP

P P P 1♦

P 1N 2♥ 3♣

3♥ ?? [/hv]

[whereagles]

4♥, to follow up with 5♣, on grounds pard probably has a singleton heart.

[Apollo81]

Clear 4♥. We have the nuts.

[helene_t]

Dbl, we have the smallest number of minor-suit cards and except for ♣J the smallest amount of minor-suit honors possible. It may be right for p to pull this double, if so he will.

[Matadi49]

Double, I am not sure if we have game, but my partner must know I have a good hand.

[Finch]

4H seems about right.

[Guest Jlall]

Guess others expect a lot for this 3C bid. I don't even take 3C as showing that much, and don't like my chances to make game with no honors in the minors. I would just double them and take the sure thing, the field probably won't be in game anyways.

[whereagles]

Guess others expect a lot for this 3C bid. I don't even take 3C as showing that much, and don't like my chances to make game with no honors in the minors.

Why is that? Pard rates to be 55. There is 1 loser in the majors, plenty of entries to dummy to finesse minor-suit honors through overcaller... I'd say 5♣ has chances. Sure, if pard has a min 55 you're going down, but there's no clear-cut way to invite a game here (unless you have a 'kenrex' sort of agreement that 3♠ now is an artificial invite), so you might as well try for the game, cueing in case pard has a better than expected hand.

[Guest Jlall]

Yes the fact that we have a major suit loser if partner is 5-5 concerns me. Why won't we have 2 minor suit losers? Surely xx x AQxxx AQxxx is a normal hand for this bidding (and not even a minimum). Heaven forbid partner doesn't even have a pure 5-5 and has bid 3C with something like Qxx x AKxxx KQxx because he knows they have 9 hearts and knows we have at least a 9 card or 2 8 card minor suit fits, and he has short hearts so there's a very good chance of you passing out 2H.

[Apollo81]

Guess others expect a lot for this 3C bid. I don't even take 3C as showing that much, and don't like my chances to make game with no honors in the minors. I would just double them and take the sure thing, the field probably won't be in game anyways.

IMO playing partner, a 4th seat opener, for a hand that sets 3♥ and won't make 5m here is a huge position.

[whereagles]

Justin, I agree with all that, but pard can also have a slightly better hand, say,

 

xx

x

AQJxx

AKxxx

 

and game is pretty good. What you really need is an invite, but, bar the muddy 3♠ call, I can't see how you're gonna make an invite, so might as well bid game.

 

(Ok, this is a bit imps-thinking, but you get the point.)

[Guest Jlall]

Guess others expect a lot for this 3C bid. I don't even take 3C as showing that much, and don't like my chances to make game with no honors in the minors. I would just double them and take the sure thing, the field probably won't be in game anyways.

IMO playing partner, a 4th seat opener, for a hand that won't make 5m here is a huge position.

Wow, couldn't disagree more, why should a fourth seat opener that made a non forcing 3C bid have a hand where we make game (and are worth a slam try?). For game to make you need partner to be 5-5 for starters, and then you need him to be loaded in the minors, something like:

 

xx x KQJxx AKQxx. If you remove either the CQ or the DJ from the construction game is pretty bad. This hand must be at the upper end of a NON FORCING 3C bid, and partner could easily be much weaker than this, and not 5-5, he just competed opposite a hand he knows has length in the minors and some points. Partner does not always have a totally pure, 5-5, maximum.

 

As far as making a slam try, I'm not sure what hand people are hoping for partner to have that makes slam, but I bet it's not a 3C bid.

[Guest Jlall]

Justin, I agree with all that, but pard can also have a slightly better hand, say,

 

xx

x

AQJxx

AKxxx

 

and game is pretty good. What you really need is an invite, but, bar the muddy 3♠ call, I can't see how you're gonna make an invite, so might as well bid game.

 

(Ok, this is a bit imps-thinking, but you get the point.)

This is a much better hand, and I'd still rather take my chances doubling them in 3H if he has this hand. +200 (or more) when partner has this hand will definitely be a very good result, I don't feel the need to gamble on going down in 5 of a minor when he has this hand.

[jdonn]

Guess others expect a lot for this 3C bid. I don't even take 3C as showing that much, and don't like my chances to make game with no honors in the minors. I would just double them and take the sure thing, the field probably won't be in game anyways.

If you think 3♣ might be on the light side then why would you ever double 3♥? You have a club fit with nothing special. Your AQ AQ example could be KQJ KQ couldnt it? You are totally right though that 4♥ is way too much, I wouldn't even bid 5♣ I would just bid 4♣. I think it's easy for people to think the major suit aces are amazing for offense when really they aren't, they are tricks that help develop nothing. I would rather have the king of a minor than either ace in a heart beat.

[Apollo81]

I guess the moral of the story is that GB 2N would be helpful so we know whether pard has a min (pass, bid 4c or what have you) or not (double, bid game)

[pclayton]

Heaven forbid partner doesn't even have a pure 5-5 and has bid 3C with something like Qxx x AKxxx KQxx because he knows they have 9 hearts and knows we have at least a 9 card or 2 8 card minor suit fits, and he has short hearts so there's a very good chance of you passing out 2H.

I would think pard makes a takeout x with this shape over 2♥.

 

A lot of this depends on pard's tendencies. G/B really helps here, since we can differentiate between a shapely 11 and a 17.

 

If I'm making a slam try, I think its sounder to try 3♠ first. Over pard's expected 4m, I can then bid 4♥. I'm not worried about the opps bidding 4♥. If they do, pard will (I hope) pass and I can double.

 

So, with someone very old-fashioned where a 3 level free bid actually means something, I'll bid 3♠. With some whipper-snapper, I'll double and lead the A♠.

[whereagles]

I guess the moral of the story is that GB 2N would be helpful so we know whether pard has a min (pass, bid 4c or what have you) or not (double, bid game)

indeed :)

[Finch]

4H seems about right.

I missed the 2H overcall.

 

Now I agree with Justin about partner's hand type, but I don't like double because it might well make.

 

I'll go with the murky 3S bid.

[Guest Jlall]

I double as opposed to pass (or raise) because the dude on my right passed in third seat then overcalled 2H, and is probably a bad player and probably has a dumb hand. I obviously have been playing too many club games, but assuming the opponents are not good I'd say they are going down a very significant amount of time on their auction, and I'm not willing to pass and get 100 when we can make 110.

[karlson]

This is kind of a funny hand, because given our 1N bid, we have the minimum length in the minors that we could possibly have. Because of that, I didn't really want to raise (I certainly wasn't thinking about slam, that seems nuts). As far as placement, well the aces in the majors are higher ODR than we might have, but as jdonn says, we'd gladly trade one for a minor suit K. In particular ♦xxx seems really bad.

 

I thought double was pretty clear at the table, but a local world class player said he would bid 4♣ for sure. Pass is perhaps also an option. I have to say that the discussion hasn't been particularly illuminating, as in, I still don't know what I'd do next time.

 

4c is the winner (well, I don't know what partner would do over 3s), as the full hand was

 

[hv=d=e&v=b&n=sxxhxdajxxxcakqxx&w=sqtxxxhkqtxxxdtcx&e=skjxhjxxdkq9xctxx&s=saxxha9xdxxxcjxxx]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

[karlson]

In response to Justin's last comment and some others -- I didn't give the information about the players because that's not often available, and I thought it was interesting in a vacuum. But in this case, both opponents were very good club players playing together for the first time, and partner was an intermediate-level junior who is on the conservative side.

[han]

I'm with Frances on the murky 3S. Who knows where we'd end up.

[skjaeran]

I'm with Frances on the murky 3S. Who knows where we'd end up.

Me too. But I'm quite sure we'd end up in 4♣. I'd not be too excited with the north hand.

[mike777]

This is kind of a funny hand, because given our 1N bid, we have the minimum length in the minors that we could possibly have. Because of that, I didn't really want to raise (I certainly wasn't thinking about slam, that seems nuts). As far as placement, well the aces in the majors are higher ODR than we might have, but as jdonn says, we'd gladly trade one for a minor suit K. In particular ♦xxx seems really bad.

 

I thought double was pretty clear at the table, but a local world class player said he would bid 4♣ for sure. Pass is perhaps also an option. I have to say that the discussion hasn't been particularly illuminating, as in, I still don't know what I'd do next time.

 

4c is the winner (well, I don't know what partner would do over 3s), as the full hand was

 

<!-- FULLHAND begin --><table border=1> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td>Dealer:</td> <td> East </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Vul:</td> <td> Both </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Scoring:</td> <td> MP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> </th> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> xx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> x </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> AJxxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> AKQxx </td> </tr> </table> </th> <th> </th> </tr> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> QTxxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> KQTxxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> T </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> x </td> </tr> </table> </th> <th> </th> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> KJx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> Jxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> KQ9x </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> Txx </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> <tr> <th> </th> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> Axx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> A9x </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> xxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> Jxxx </td> </tr> </table> </th> <th> </th> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- FULLHAND end -->

I guess west was not allowed to bid 2d over 1nt? Geez let's not tell partner our hand and let her in on the decisions.

 

I am not even going to ask why west passed first round in third seat

[jdonn]

I think 3♠ bidders are kidding themselves to say they won't end up in game. Partner has about the most he can have to not do more (if you add the diamond queen to his hand would you seriously just bid 3♣, a bid that can be a 5-5 minimum?), and you didn't bid his shortness so he will think it's a great fit. Why shouldn't we have, for example, Axx xxx Kxx xxxx is either misdefense (try to cash 2 hearts) or finesse. AQx xxx Qxx Jxxx is even better, etc. These are not game bids as, among other reasons, partner can easiliy have two heart losers. Saying partner will bid 4♣ over 3♠ seems to me like subconcious resulting.

 

I think 4♣ turned out to be right for the exact reasons that should have been expected. We had a major suit loser and avoiding two losers in the minors turned out to be too much to ask.