Assign the Blame - 3 10 08

[pclayton]

Here's a hand a friend passed along to me and he wanted to know what the worst call in the auction was. Matchpoints, local club game:

 

Personally, I think most, if not all of the calls here could be scrutinized, but lets focus on the worst one or two:

 

[hv=d=w&v=b&w=saqxxhdkjxxcjt98x&e=sxxxxhqt9xdaxxckx]266|100|Scoring: MP

1D (1H) 1N (2H)

3C (pass) 3N (pass)

All pass[/hv]

 

The final contract of 3N was mercifully undoubled.

 

What say you?

[Echognome]

Yes. A whole lot to criticize. I don't see how opening 1D is a good idea here on a hand with only one potential rebid problem (1NT response). Anyway, I'm singling out 3♣ as the worst call. The hand is a minimum and should be passing. I think it's the bid that was the root of the bad board.

[Guest Jlall]

I think west bid fine, 1C is my style but I know some people open 1D so whatever, having opened 1D I would happily bid 3C, I'm not selling to 2H with a void in hearts and an (almost) sure fit. My partner showed his hand with 1N so I don't see how he can bid 3N now. 3C is not an invitational bid to me as 1N is already fairly well defined.

 

I think 1N was fine (resulting to say otherwise for me since I would def have bid 1N), but I think 3N is ridiculous. If partner can make 3N opp that he would bid it.

[Echognome]

I think if playing a g/b 2NT i could stomach a 2N bid. Otherwise 3♣ is just too wide ranging. However, I do agree with Justin that East has shown his hand. I bet East though West's 3♣ showed a better hand.

[matmat]

3♣ makes me cringe -- then again, maybe i just don't understand what the bid is supposed to show.

 

1n not so hot either, but i understand it.

[han]

Oh come on, you guys can't seriously consider passing 2H at MPs with a void, you might as well give up. There is no way that partner will bid against after having bid 1NT. I think pass is really really bad.

 

I also agree with the 1NT call and don't understand what matmat is complaining about. Q109x is a wonderful holding to bid 1NT with and the 9-count is also perfect. I'd go so far as to say that double would be a beginner call.

 

I dislike the 1D opening, but the 3NT bid is worse. Only G/B players think this auction is forward going, the rest applies common sense.

[cherdano]

I think if playing a g/b 2NT i could stomach a 2N bid. Otherwise 3♣ is just too wide ranging. However, I do agree with Justin that East has shown his hand. I bet East though West's 3♣ showed a better hand.

There is no need for G/B opposite the rather limited 1N bid. Opener just can guess whether to compete or force to game, and maybe invite with 2N in the rare case he needs to.

[jdonn]

I like west's bidding. I would open 1♦ which I rarely do with 4-5, but it's not only a 1NT response that is problematic. What about when lho overcalls spades and partner negative doubles or bids hearts? I mentally vomit at the thought of rebidding notrump when I have a void in partner's suit and have never mentioned my own longest suit.

 

1NT was a great (and dare I say obvious?) bid too. Really the whole auction was perfect until the 3NT bid I'd say, which was clearly wrong.

[Codo]

I dislike 1 Diamond, there is no reason for this. You have no rebid problem after 1 Club.

 

1 NT is okay, you lose the spades, but this could be the much better partial and you limited your hand at once.

 

If 3 Club is nonforcing, this is nice. But without discussion it is not. It looks like a new suit at the three level, you need good rules to judge this as nonforcing.

And after the praised 3 Club bid the spades are burned forever. Another "great success" for this bid.

 

If you don´t want to sell out to 2 Heart, you may find rules that a double of two heart is not showing the wish to punish them but shows all suits besides hearts.

This would solve your problems too- and maybe one level lower-.

I know that "some" people are not able to double negativ after partners 1 NT any more, but maybe they should be?

 

3 NT was surely under the impression that 3 Club was strong and I cannot see how any other bid is justified if 3 Club shows a strong hand. There is no reason to belive that 5 Diamond scores better.

[whereagles]

I blame methods. Situations like this are common and need a gadget like good-bad 2NT to sort out competitive from genuinely invitational hands. Disagree that East hasn't got a 3NT bid. In fact, I think 3NT was automatic with the fitting honors.

[dcvetkov]

I blame methods. Situations like this are common and need a gadget like good-bad 2NT to sort out competitive from genuinely invitational hands. Disagree that East hasn't got a 3NT bid. In fact, I think 3NT was automatic with the fitting honors.

I agree with this. While it seems that passing 2H can not be winning action, without some agreement or good -bad 2NT, 3 clubs just simply has a too wide range. You would make the same bid with some good 17 point hand and then shoot partner when he fails to bid the obvious game. These contested auction come fairly often.

[TylerE]

This hand is a lot easier if E finds a negative double.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I dont like the opening bid, and I dont like 3C.

I think 1 NT is ok, you either make the decision

to hide the spades or you dont, and similar is 3NT.

 

I cant say what I find worse the opening bid or

3C, but both are ...

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[brianshark]

I agree much more with east's bidding than with west's. Though I personally would probably show the ♠ suit.

 

While in isolation, competing to 3♣ might be the % matchpoint call assuming partner had to pass, partner doesn't have to pass, partner can and should bid 3N bid with close to max values and fitting honours and imo the fault lies with west for the odd diamond opening and aggresive 3♣ call.

[Apollo81]

where did 3N come from

 

other than that I think it's unlucky, the other calls were OK

[kfay]

1♦ is the worst bid. It sucks. 3NT is also terrible... you already said what you had with 1NT.

[cphastrup]

3♦ isn't too hot a contract either - and I guess that's what East is supposed to bid on his second turn.

 

1♦, 3♣ and 3NT are to blame, at least if I were playing, but the first two bids of course depend on methods 'n style.

 

If the West hand is worth 3♣, why not bid 2♠ instead?

[ArtK78]

I dislike opening 1♦ on 4-5 in the minors unless there is no choice. Here, there is a choice. There is no rebid problem after a 1♣ opening bid. If partner responds 1NT, you have to decide whether you prefer to play in 1NT with a maximum of 3 hearts between your two hands or would you rather rebid 2♣ which should be a playable spot. But at least you know what your choices are.

 

On this auction, the partnership could have a 10 card club fit and it has not bid the suit (What would you bid as responder holding xxx QJT xx KQxxx?). Passing 2♥ at matchpoints with the West hand is out of the question, but West has painted himself into a corner with his 1♦ opening.

 

Admittedly, 1♣-(1♥)-1NT-(2♥) is also a problem auction. But at least West will have bid his longest suit. Passing is not as unreasonable now.

 

3NT only makes sense if the 3♣ bid showed extra values. But it sure sounds like it shows extra values.

[Apollo81]

1♦ is the worst bid.  It sucks.

Wow I completely disagree. I nearly always open 1♣ when 4-5 but here I would consider opening 1♦.

 

There are a lot of people who regularly open 1♦ on 4-5 hands if they arent planning to rebid 1NT.

[kfay]

1♦ is the worst bid.  It sucks.  3NT is also terrible... you already said what you had with 1NT.

Wow I completely disagree. I nearly always open 1♣ when 4-5 but here I would consider opening 1♦.

 

There are a lot of people who regularly open 1♦ on 4-5 hands if they arent planning to rebid 1NT.

What are you afraid of, that you can't bid 1♠ over partner's 1♥?

 

I don't really see how this hand becomes difficult to describe after basically most followups. I have some sympathy for opening 1♦ on some 4-5 hands but I totally fail to see how any hand that's worth an opening when you have this 'usually open 1♣ mentality falls to a 1♦ opening when you have a void, especailly a heart void.

[kfay]

Alright, but I concede that 1♦ isn't the worst call of the auction. But I still don't like it.

[Apollo81]

Alright, but I concede that 1♦ isn't the worst call of the auction. But I still don't like it.

Right thats all I was arguing, 3NT obv worse than 1♦.

[Apollo81]

I have some sympathy for opening 1♦ on some 4-5 hands but I totally fail to see how any hand that's worth an opening when you have this 'usually open 1♣ mentality falls to a 1♦ opening when you have a void, especailly a heart void.

What if LHO bids 1♠ and partner doubles? What if partner responds NT without competition? I'd want to have started 1♦ in these cases. Also partner may be able to raise diamonds to the 3-level over a 1♥ bid when he couldn't raise clubs except maybe to the 2-level. Opening 1♦ has some merit.

[pclayton]

There's a moral to this story, and I think it shows up in several places. While its important to compete in low level auctions (especially at MPs), there's a limit and occasionally you can push yourself overboard when both partners take aggressive calls.

 

Here's my 2 cents:

 

1. 1♦. Definitely NOT my style. While 1♣ may lead to some rebid problems, 1♦ is far from foolproof. I suppose it's reasonable as a lead director, which may be a tie breaker here. Oddly, I don't mind a pass, which is something no one has mentioned. 5440's are overrated, and our hand is very minor-oriented. I give 1♦ an 8/10, since its hard to see how it contributed to the result.

 

2. 1N. OK, its matchpoints, fine, I get it. However, its hard to see how a negative double is 'wrong'. Frequently when pard has a weak NT type hand, he will be the one rebidding 1N anyway, so there's no rush to get to NT. Spades, OTOH, will be buried unless we make a negative x. 7/10.

 

3. 3♣. Maybe the partnership hasn't discussed what a double means here. Maybe it doesn't show this hand type. 3♣ is a serious overbid. Wouldn't you make the same call on Ax x KQxxx AQJxx? Agree 100% with Gnome that good-bad is useful here. Many hands that want to take a push to 2N are frequently better off hitting 2♥. I also disagree that the 1N bidder will automatically sell out to 2♥. I think that shows a lack of faith in partner who can see short hearts in your hand, and understands you couldn't find a call. I give it a 3 and I think I'm being generous.

 

4. 3N. The 'blame' for this call is similar to opening 1♦. If 3♣ shows extras, then how can 3N ever be wrong. We have a max 1N call, a likely double stop, and fitters in both minor suits. Frankly I think its clear. 10/10.

 

I give 3♣ the dinger. 1N is a distant 2nd. East gets 70%, West gets 30%.

[cherdano]

I have some sympathy for opening 1♦ on some 4-5 hands but I totally fail to see how any hand that's worth an opening when you have this 'usually open 1♣ mentality falls to a 1♦ opening when you have a void, especailly a heart void.

What if LHO bids 1♠ and partner doubles? What if partner responds NT without competition? I'd want to have started 1♦ in these cases. Also partner may be able to raise diamonds to the 3-level over a 1♥ bid when he couldn't raise clubs except maybe to the 2-level. Opening 1♦ has some merit.

What on Earth is the problem with 1♣-1N on this hand? You have found your club fit, don't worry, be happy.

I agree 1♣ (1♠) X is a problem, but it is the only problem auction I can see. I am surprised 1♦ is drawing so much sympathy.