Hand from Singapore Open

[Rossoneri]

[hv=d=s&v=e&s=s8632hq87dacq6543]133|100|Scoring: IMP

Bidding goes, pass, 1♣, double, pass to you[/hv]

 

Your bid now?

[Guest Jlall]

easy 1S, I would not consider any other bid.

[jdonn]

1♠ is perfect, I can treat this as a maximum and bid notrump later if the opportunity presents itself.

[ArtK78]

1♠ seems obvious.

 

Therefore, it cannot be right. :P

[whereagles]

1♠. Usually I stretch to bid 2♠ on 8 hcp, but this hand is a bit uuugh-ish to do it.

[Apollo81]

For a minute I thought this hand's partner opened 1♣, but then I realized that this is the partner of the doubler. Agree obvious 1♠.

[andy_h]

Agree, easy 1S

[pclayton]

1S. I'm waiting for the story because there's nothing interesting or unusual about this call.

[655321]

Yes, you should have made this a poll (but that would have meant thinking up alternatives to 1♠ ;) ) so that we could have a unanimous poll.

[Rossoneri]

I bid 1♠, bidding went pass pass and now RHO comes alive with 2♦!

 

Do you now agree with 2♠? Partner goes on with 3♠ and i just bid game.

 

Misdeclared the game and so I lost 10 imps....This was a set where I lost 20 imps in 2 boards through sheer loss of concentration. (Misdefended the other one)

[kenrexford]

Another good Herbert Negative hand.

 

1♣-X-P-1♦ = artificial, bust; if bid spades next, weak.

1♣-X-P-1♠ = I would have responded 1♠ if you had opened 1♦.

 

I really don't understand why people do not use Herbert Negatives after 1♣-X-P, 2♣(Precision)-X-P, and 3♣-X-P. Other situations might have some downsides. This does not have any real downsides in comparison to the pluses.

[655321]

What was partner's hand - could partner have bid 2♠ immediately?

 

I like 2♠ by doubler with 4 card spades even with most minimums here.

[Codo]

Like Nuno I like to bid 2 Spade with 8 HCPs but this hand has less then this.

But after 2 Diamond I can easily show my maximum with 2 Spade.

So far this hand is really a no brainer.

 

And after 3 Spade I had taken the shoot on 4 Spade too.

[Rossoneri]

Partner had:

[hv=s=saqj95hkj32d8743c]133|100|[/hv]

 

And yes, Ken, I know about the Herbert Negative...use it when I play Overcall Structure, but for the past few months I've been stuck with playing standard SAYC...and most of them have no idea what Herbert Negative is.

 

P.S. If you are wondering how I went down, I got too excited and crossruffed.

[kenrexford]

Don't you hate that! LOL

 

Playing with the peasants! Bah!

 

That said, and glad we agree, partner should immediately raise to 2♠ IMO.

[Rossoneri]

I must add: Team captain (not my partner for that round, though I did partner him in another round) suggested I bid 2♠, though he says it's really borderline. He made his decision based on losing trick count....

 

LOL Ken, I am in a serious need of more adventurous partners...

[skjaeran]

Clear 1♠, not even close to 2♠.

 

I can't understand the pass over 1♠ by partner. 2♠ is stand out, and I'd rather bid 3♠ (sure, it's a huge overbid) than pass.

 

Ken, the only position I play Herbert negative is after (3♣) x (p) ?

[Free]

1♠ wtp

[kenrexford]

Clear 1♠, not even close to 2♠.

 

I can't understand the pass over 1♠ by partner. 2♠ is stand out, and I'd rather bid 3♠ (sure, it's a huge overbid) than pass.

 

Ken, the only position I play Herbert negative is after (3♣) x (p) ?

Why?

[skjaeran]

Clear 1♠, not even close to 2♠.

 

I can't understand the pass over 1♠ by partner. 2♠ is stand out, and I'd rather bid 3♠ (sure, it's a huge overbid) than pass.

 

Ken, the only position I play Herbert negative is after (3♣) x (p) ?

Why?

Because that's the only position I really feel I need it.

[Guest Jlall]

Another good Herbert Negative hand.

 

1♣-X-P-1♦ = artificial, bust; if bid spades next, weak.

1♣-X-P-1♠ = I would have responded 1♠ if you had opened 1♦.

 

I really don't understand why people do not use Herbert Negatives after 1♣-X-P, 2♣(Precision)-X-P, and 3♣-X-P. Other situations might have some downsides. This does not have any real downsides in comparison to the pluses.

A lot of the juniors play it over 2C X P when playing against precision.

[kenrexford]

Another good Herbert Negative hand.

 

1♣-X-P-1♦ = artificial, bust; if bid spades next, weak.

1♣-X-P-1♠ = I would have responded 1♠ if you had opened 1♦. 

 

I really don't understand why people do not use Herbert Negatives after 1♣-X-P, 2♣(Precision)-X-P, and 3♣-X-P.  Other situations might have some downsides.  This does not have any real downsides in comparison to the pluses.

A lot of the juniors play it over 2C X P when playing against precision.

That's interesting.

 

If I sit down against Precision, I seem to often have the same conversation with partners. Them: "What do you want to play against their strong club?" Me: "Whatever. Natural works, but I'll bid too much. But, we have to play 2♣-X-P-2♦ as Herbert." Them: "What the Hell is Herbert?" Me: "Lebensohl 2♦."

 

I won't bother with 3♣-X-P-3♦ until the second year of the partnership.

 

1♣-X-P-1♦ looks good, and I like it, but there are usually too many other things to get to first.

[nige1]

[hv=d=s&v=e&s=s8632hq87dacq6543]133|100|Scoring: IMP

Bidding goes, pass, 1♣, double, pass to you. Your bid now?[/hv]

IMO

• Over (1♣) X, 1♠ = 10, 1N = 9, 2♠ = 6.
  
• After (2♦), 2♠ = 10, _X = 8, _P = 7.
  
• When partner competes reluctantly with 3♠, _P = 10, 3N = 7, 4♠ = 5
  

Length in LHO's suit tends to be a liability :(