a huge hand over a 2S preempt

[rbforster]

As South I held the following huge hand (25 HCP!) at unfavorable in a recent MPs club game. What's your plan over the annoying first seat weak two bid?

 

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=sajhakqjxxdkxcakx]133|100|Scoring: MP

(2♠)-?[/hv]

If you double, partner has 2N Lebenshol available to show a minimum and will use it. Opponents remain quiet.

 

I guessed at various strong auctions, but I may have forgotten some. If you've got a good feeling for the relative strengths of the various strong auctions in the poll, I'd love to hear about them.

[ArtK78]

There are two options on this hand.

 

Double then 4♥ over 2NT Lebensohl. This shows a hand that expects to make 4♥ based on power.

 

Double then 3♠ over 2NT Lebensohl, with the intention of bidding 4♥ next. This shows a hand even stronger than the hand represented by the first sequence.

 

I would go with the second sequence. If partner bids 4♥ over 3♠, I would bid 4♠.

 

It takes very little to make a slam on these cards. Qxxxx of clubs is enough on a 3-2 club break. Whether you can find what you need is a problem, but that is almost always the case when you have a very strong hand facing a very weak hand. Add the preempt into the mix and it becomes still more difficult.

 

There is no guarantee that the 5 level is safe. But it is worth running that risk on these cards.

[keylime]

I like the longest way around to get this hand into context. Let's hope pard doesn't have garbage as usual. lol

[neilkaz]

Art said " Double then 3♠ over 2NT Lebensohl, with the intention of bidding 4♥ next. This shows a hand even stronger than the hand represented by the first sequence."

 

I agree and this is my bidding here as well with this monster.

[bhall]

Double, then 3N over 2N. This should be stronger than the immediate jump to 3N, and therefore only a slight underbid for the given hand.

[jdonn]

Double, then 3N over 2N. This should be stronger than the immediate jump to 3N, and therefore only a slight underbid for the given hand.

It's not stronger, it's just more balanced. You double first because if you just bid 3NT partner won't go to his 5 or even 6 card major, for all he knows you are on a running minor for the direct jump. I'm quite sure that would be normal treatment.

 

I'll go with double then cuebid then 4♥. Not that I expect partner to move over that very often.

[pclayton]

1. Start with Double. Pard can show us a little something-something with a non Lebensohl call. We will justifiably go nuts.

 

2. Over 2N, cue bid. Hopefully we have a way to sort out a 7 count from drek.

 

3. Then 4♥. I don't know if we can reach 6♥ across from ♣Qxxxx and out, but it seems like the best attempt.

[bhall]

Double, then 3N over 2N. This should be stronger than the immediate jump to 3N, and therefore only a slight underbid for the given hand.

It's not stronger, it's just more balanced. You double first because if you just bid 3NT partner won't go to his 5 or even 6 card major, for all he knows you are on a running minor for the direct jump. I'm quite sure that would be normal treatment.

 

I'll go with double then cuebid then 4♥. Not that I expect partner to move over that very often.

I guess I'm a bit more conservative. For me, an immediate 3N shows about 8 tricks on the expected ♠ lead, and may be based on a running minor, or not. The delayed 3N shows about 9.

 

This hand is worth 10 tricks when partner holds the ♦A, and we may miss a slam when he also holds a minor Q. I will pay off to that, gaining in exchange the cases where 3N makes and 4♥ fails. There are cases where more tricks are available in ♥, but they are pretty rare.

[mikeh]

I'm torn here between double then cue then 4♥ (the sequence I would always use at imps) and the greedy double then 3N. I don't need a lot happening for 3N to be right.

 

If I were on play in 3N, that might be enough to swing my vote, but while 3N will sometimes be the only making game (or may take the same tricks as 4♥), every now and then, RHO will lead his partner's diamond suit against 3N and we go down when 4 or 6♥ was cold. That is just enough to tip me back to what I am sure is the technically correct sequence of double, cue and 4♥.

 

That isn't going to get me to the laydown slam opposite xxx 10x xxx QJxxx (if it did, it would get me there opposite xxx 10x QJxxx xxx as well :P ).

[whereagles]

Robson/Segal recommend bidding 4♥ on this one. Sure, 6 can be on, but lets just stay fixed.

[Apollo81]

I'm torn here between double then cue then 4♥ (the sequence I would always use at imps) and the greedy double then 3N. I don't need a lot happening for 3N to be right.

 

If I were on play in 3N, that might be enough to swing my vote, but while 3N will sometimes be the only making game (or may take the same tricks as 4♥), every now and then, RHO will lead his partner's diamond suit against 3N and we go down when 4 or 6♥ was cold. That is just enough to tip me back to what I am sure is the technically correct sequence of double, cue and 4♥.

 

That isn't going to get me to the laydown slam opposite xxx 10x xxx QJxxx (if it did, it would get me there opposite xxx 10x QJxxx xxx as well :P ).

Well expressed, my thoughts exactly.

[han]

Agree with the doublecue4Hers.

[Guest Jlall]

Double, then 3N over 2N. This should be stronger than the immediate jump to 3N, and therefore only a slight underbid for the given hand.

It's not stronger, it's just more balanced. You double first because if you just bid 3NT partner won't go to his 5 or even 6 card major, for all he knows you are on a running minor for the direct jump. I'm quite sure that would be normal treatment.

 

I'll go with double then cuebid then 4♥. Not that I expect partner to move over that very often.

Just to be clear, I totally agree X then 3N is just a more flexible hand than 3N immediately, and I think the same about X then cue then 4H (more flexible hand than X then 4H or 4H immediately). I can't imagine anyone doing anything but X then cue then 4H with say xx AQJxx AKx AKQ.

 

In the old days people thought that the differences between jumping to game, Xing and bidding game, Xing and cuebidding and bidding game etc was strength (this is how I was taught actually). Now we know it is more important to distinguish between flexibility rather than whether we have 23 or 26 HCP.

[Fluffy]

I would X then 3♠ then 6♥ over 4♣, but 4♥ opposite anything else

[beatrix45]

:unsure: One argument for bidding an immediate 3NT is that failing a horrible heart split, it is unbeatable from your side. Playing lebensohl you will often have to play 3NT from partner's side and might get a diamond lead through the king. Also, we don't have a tenth trick in 4♥.

 

Of course, I hate to miss my slam, so double seems right with most partners. Opposite a really weak partner, I'm bidding 3NT though.

[benlessard]

Agree with Justin. For me X,cue and 4H wouldnt show solid H au contraire it would show doubt & minors possiblility.

 

I see nothing wrong with X followed by 4H.

 

3H tend to show (7.5-8.5 tricks)

 

4H tend to show (9-9.5) tricks.

 

X followed by 4H is stronger.

 

X followed by cue is no clear cut path.

[rbforster]

Thanks everyone for the comments. At the table I chose the X...4♥ route, where we played predictably. Of course on this hand, 4♥+2.

 

This was the hand:

 

[hv=d=e&v=n&n=sxxh9xxdxxxxcq9xx&w=skxxhtxxdqjxxcjxx&e=sqtxxxxhxdaxxctxx&s=sajhakqjxxdkxcakx]399|300|Scoring: MP

(2♠)-X-(P)-2N*

(P)-4♥-AP

 

K♠ lead[/hv]

Not a great hand to want to be in slam, but a cue bid will drag 4♣ out of partner and might get there.

[han]

Quite a poor slam.

[mikeh]

Quite a poor slam.

Quite an understatement

[dake50]

Cue 3S first to show 6+controls -relieve partner of slam fear with no controls. 4D -> 4H, 4C -> 6H try.