Matchpoints, Oh Matchpoints

[mikeh]

3N seems clear.

 

1. 3♠ is almost certainly wrong if partner holds 2 (or 3) hearts: even if we have a 9 card fit, and there is no reason to think that this is probable, opening leader may well bang down the ♥A and have an entry. And, of course, if partner has 4 mediocre spades, a 4-1 break will be trouble in spades even without a ruff.

 

2. Our hand has improved in positional values, especially now that partner has shown extras (compared to the minimum needed to respond initially). I would never have bid 3♠ over 3♥: I agree 100% with Justin on that issue, but I am happy to upgrade now.

 

3. When we have RHO's suit double-stopped, and enough length that RHO cannot (probably) gain by ducking twice, 9 tricks are often easier than 10.

 

4. Even if we have a good spade fit, my shape and the chances of a bad spade break combine to suggest that we may make as many tricks in notrump as in spades: if both games make, we score a great board for the overtrick(s) in notrump.

 

5. The third choice (I would rank it as second-best) is pass for penalty. I would happily pass if I felt that game chances were less than 50%, but I don't. I also think that 500 requires too much, especially since I am willing to bet my hunch that this hand plays best in 3N.

 

My personal scoring: 3N 100 Pass 70 3♠ 50

[helene_t]

You guys have convinced me, 3♠ is actually quite pointless. It just feels so automatic at some point to show the 4-card support.

[skjaeran]

I think it's quite close between pass and 3NT. Not absolutely sure which is best. I'd probably bid 3NT at MP and pass at IMPs.

[Guest Jlall]

I think it's quite close between pass and 3NT.

That was my feeling. I slightly prefer pass. It's interesting a lot of people consider this an automatic something, but they differ on what is automatic :P

[mikeh]

I think it's quite close between pass and 3NT.

That was my feeling. I slightly prefer pass. It's interesting a lot of people consider this an automatic something, but they differ on what is automatic :)

'clear' is not the same as 'automatic' :)

 

I still think that 3N is 'clear' but, at least for me, that decision was far from 'automatic': indeed, my first reaction was 'I have 4 spades'. My second reaction was 'I have two trump tricks and a flat hand'. It was only reflection that led me to thinking that, on balance, 3N was sufficiently better than pass so as to lead me to conclude that the choice was 'clear'.

 

My approach (which I don't always follow) is to try to recognize and evaluate all rational options, but not to end up waffling. Once I conclude that one approach has a real edge on the others, it becomes 'clear' to take that approach.

 

Thus, faced with two lines of play, one of which is 87% and the other 86%, it is (probably) hardly automatic which one takes, because most of us can't work out this difference without a lot of work. But once and if we have worked it out, then unless there are other factors at play, it becomes 'clear' to take the 87% line.

 

I happen to think that the edge that 3N enjoys is a bit bigger than the difference between 87 and 86%, but obviously any of the 3 rational calls might work best.

[Guest Jlall]

Results (for completeness): If you bid 3S you will play 4S down 1. If you pass you will get 500. If you bid 3N you will get 400 or 430. If you get 430 or 500 you get a top, 400 is a near top.

[jdeegan]

:lol: 3♠

wtp?

Hateful hand with my awful KQx in ♥, but I have just the perfect minimum. Let partner do what needs to be done. I am not in the right spot to be the mastermind. So I lose on this hand? Too, bad.