Disaster!

[CSGibson]

Opponents silent, and NS have this auction.

 

[hv=d=s&v=b&n=sq84hk9852dj72c63&s=sjt75hadaq8cakqt4]133|200|Scoring: IMP

1♣-1♥,

2♠-3♣,

3♦-3♠,

4♥-4♠,

5♥-6♣[/hv]

 

Who is to blame for this disaster? What is the single worst bid here?

[rogerclee]

3♣?!? I think this was where the auction went nuts. I don't like 5♥ by S, but that's way less criminal than north's silliness.

[jdonn]

3♣?!? I think this was where the auction went nuts. I don't like 5♥ by S, but that's way less criminal than north's silliness.

??? 3♣ was normal. Through 3♦ I have no problem (south mainly doesn't want to bid 3NT in case north has a stiff spade) but over that I have no idea why north didn't bid 3NT. Also given the 3♠ bid south should certainly bid 3NT next. So I think both players missed their main chance to bid 3NT, and everything that happened after that doesn't interest me as much, although 4♥ and 5♥ strike me as quite awful.

 

I will vote 4♥ as the worst bid since it was the bid that bypassed the right contract, and at which point the auction went totally off the rails.

[655321]

North is to blame, that part is easy. :rolleyes:

 

The single worst bid? I choose 3♠. 3NT looks fairly normal here; 3♠ would convince South that 6 is certain, and 7 is likely. 3♣ was perhaps not pretty, but it was understandable.

 

More sensible auctions are

1♣-1♥

2♠-3♦

3NT

 

or

 

1♣-1♥

2♠-3♣

3♦-3NT

[marcD]

North made 2 weird bids : 3♣ instead of 2NT or 3♦ is mindboggling and then 3♠ over 3♦ is almost as bad. South could have bid 1♠ instead of 2♠ as is first rebid (stiff Ace is a liability) but it's more a matter of style

[gnasher]

We're rather spoilt for choice here, aren't we? For completeness, I'd like to put in a word for 4♠, which is my own personal favourite.

 

By the way, everyone so far seems happy with South's 3♦ call, so presumably they play it as showing diamond concentration rather than fourth suit forcing. If North had bid 3♦ over 2♠, would that have been naturalish too?

[the hog]

In my view the worst bid is 3D. 3C is fine, though I play and would prefer a blackout response of 2NT. Asking Nth to bid 3NT over 3D with only Jxx is absurd in the extreme.

 

Two autions:

preferred

1C 1H

2S 2N

3N

 

1C 1H

2S 3C

3N

[Halo]

3C

 

On the specific hand this needn't have turned out badly, but I would much prefer this to show three cards, with 2NT as a negative.

[helene_t]

3♣ is ok with me. It looks as if South thought it showed values - whether that assumption was justified we cannot tell without knowing this pair's agreements.

 

3♦ is probably fine although I'm not quite sure what it is supposed to mean, patterning out and/or showing a feature. In either case the bid is ok.

 

4♥ is a really weird bid. I have no clue what it is supposed to mean. I think S has an obvious 3NT at this point.

[655321]

Asking Nth to bid 3NT over 3D with only Jxx is absurd in the extreme.

And to me, North's bidding anything other than 3NT over 3♦ is absurd in the extreme.

 

;)

[brianshark]

2 sensible auctions:

 

1♣-1♥

2♠-3♦

3NT

(If 3♦ is artificial)

 

1♣-1♥

2♠-3♣

3NT

(If 3♦ by responder would have been natural)

[helene_t]

Asking Nth to bid 3NT over 3D with only Jxx is absurd in the extreme.

And to me, North's bidding anything other than 3NT over 3♦ is absurd in the extreme.

Maybe North thought that 3♦ was FSF.

[Finch]

Yes, where the real disaster hit seems to be the two different possible meanings of 3D.

 

i) If 3D is fourth suit forcing, South's 3D bit was crazy and he should have bid 3NT as he has a minimum for the 2S bid (extra points but horrible shape) and has two diamond stops.

 

ii) if 3D is patterning out, showing honours in diamonds, then North was crazy not to bid 3NT.

[hotShot]

2♠

Why rush? Both opps passed their first turn so there is no need to preempt.

South has a forcing 1♠ bid available and an easy ♦ bid as 4th suit forcing over any bid North might make.

 

I think modern bidding is to go slow on strong hands, so the jump to 2♠ implies an more unbalanced hand with less HCP.

 

I would guess that North expects South to have 6+♣ and 4+♠ and 3♣ is the weakest rebid North could make. ♥Kxxxx and ♠Qxx are harly the stopper you would bid NT with, and the South hand should play NT if its strong. So 3♠ promises help to stop ♠ and asks South to bid NT. South passing 3NT is a slam try.

North can only assume that South is even more unbalanced, if he ignores partners weak hand and bids on. Notth has only 2 possibilities to stop at game level, 4♠ (assuming South has 5) and 5♣ unfortunately he choose 4♠.

[Finch]

2♠

Why rush?

South has a forcing 1♠ bid available

1S is not forcing in standard methods.

[hotShot]

2♠

Why rush?

South has a forcing 1♠ bid available

1S is not forcing in standard methods.

Introducing an unbid suit from an unlimited hand is not round forcing in std methods?

I don't think that North is allowed to pass.

[matmat]

Introducing an unbid suit from an unlimited hand is not round forcing in std methods?

I don't think that North is allowed to pass.

1♠ rebid by opener is non-forcing.

[helene_t]

Frances is right. In standard methods, 1♠ denies GF values. North can pass with an absolute minimum and typically 3-card spades.

[hotShot]

Introducing an unbid suit from an unlimited hand is not round forcing in std methods?

I don't think that North is allowed to pass.

1♠ rebid by opener is non-forcing.

Learned something new today, I was not aware we play non standard methods around here.

[kenrexford]

1♣: OK

1♥: OK

2♠: OK

3♣: OK, but I would like the ability to bid 2NT as a weak relay, even though this is not a reverse.

3♦: OK

3♠: OK

4♥: Bizarre; head exploding bid

4♠: Squirrels running back and forth on the road get hit by the car. Panic is understandable, but run straight for your escape when this happens.

5♥: Sure, let's try for the grand

6♣: 5♠ or 5NT, although desirable as possible escapes, probably would have been further squirrel bids, yielding a grand.

[neilkaz]

Frances is right. In standard methods, 1♠ denies GF values. North can pass with an absolute minimum and typically 3-card spades.

Yes, but this is not a method I care for as often the opps can balance into two of the unbid suit, or there's a better contract available than the 4-3 ♠ fit.

 

However, noting that quite a few players are responding to 1m with 1♥ with less than 6 pts, they really need to be able to stop the auction to avoid getting hammered in some hopeless game. Noting that PD may respond a bit light, you need a darn good hand to force game with 2♠ and the hand given here seems to have sufficient playing strength in spite of the stiff ace in responder's suit.

 

The problem with the given auction,IMO, is the combined failure to try to put the breaks on.

 

Apparently, N intended 3♣ as a preference and didn't want to bid 2NT with no true ♦ stop and was also hoping to have the huge hand play the 3NT. I'd find a different call than 3♣.

 

I dislike S's 3♦ call, but he's probing for more than game I think as he suspects real ♣ support. I'd have bid 3NT which has to show ♦ stop(s) and allows PD to pass his lousy min.

 

I hate N's 3♠ call. OK it shows 3 card support, but knowing ♦ is now stopped and aided by your J, why continue to encourage PD with your junk ? PD suspects that you have better ♣ support and some slam interest. Put on the breaks with 3NT !

 

As we see the wheels fell of this jump shift auction inspite of the early GF of 2♠. This is not the first time this has happened and the main fault is N since he knows 2 things. 1) He doesn't really fit the S hand all that well and 2) S failed to open 2♣ so without at least 1 good fit and some ruffing values, slam is very unlikely so put the breaks on.

 

Just my opinion .. neilkaz ..

[kenrexford]

Have you ever noticed a similarity between a dog jumping all over you in the morning, trying to wake you up, not stopping no matter what you do, all excited and such, and a partner who gets it in him on a hand and you just cannot get him to stop?

 

Well, if you don't lie completely still and pretend to be asleep, you have no hope at all. Any twitch will start that dog up worse than before.

 

3♠ was a twitch. 4♠ was shaking a stick at the dog. But, South was the dog.

[gnasher]

Learned something new today, I was not aware we play non standard methods around here.

You don't. You play methods that are standard where you play, but non-standard where Frances, MatMat and Helene play.

[CSGibson]

OK, brief moment of honesty here. I was the S player (Woof!), and thought that 3♣ showed real support. Afterwards, I thought every bid was a cue in support of clubs.

 

We had not discussed bidding after a jump shift prior to the hand, so I thought principles such as bidding the 4th suit as artificial with a hand with no clear direction would apply, while my partner was under the impression that 3♣ on xx is expert standard (in North America, at least) on these auctions.

 

What is expert standard? Is it to give a false preference to allow partner an extra level of room to describe her hand, or should a bid of the first suit show real support?

[jtfanclub]

No expert here, maybe that's why I'm shocked by people objecting to the 3♠ bid.

 

North has fairly cruddy hearts, and three spades to an honor. Partner may still have 5 spades, he may be looking for slam, 3♦ may not show anything exciting in diamonds (wanna play 3NT if partner has Ax in diamonds?).

 

All of this assumes that 3♣ is the bust bid. I thought some people used a rebid of the first suit, others used 2NT. Maybe I'm mistaken.