Easy 4S - Assign the Blame

[marcD]

♠[hv=d=n&v=b&n=sak75h852d7ckqt73&s=sq9632ha6djt82cj4]133|200|Scoring: XIMP

1C - 1D - 1S - P

2S - x - 3S allP[/hv]

 

 

1C = balanced 12-14 or unbalanced with C 11+

2S 4 cards consistent with weak NT type or minimum unbalanced

 

Who is to blame ? N ? S? system ?

 

thanks

[andy_h]

Did South respond their 4card diamond suit as opposed to the 5card spade suit!?

[mikeh]

I think that North's first two calls were fine, and S's first call is obvious.

 

I think S did very well indeed, on the actual hand, to bid 3♠ if intended and understood to be a game try as opposed to an attempt to shut LHO out of the auction.

 

If 3♠ was a gametry, then North is clearly 100% at fault. He has a full value 2♠ raise.. it is difficult to construct a hand that could be much better and still only worth 2♠. It may only be 12 hcp, but he has a stiff and, very importantly, all of his hcp are in his suits... this is an often overlooked aspect of hand valuation.

 

I confess that I wouldn't even be in 3♠ :P

[hotShot]

North showed 3+♣, 4♠ and should not have 4♥.

South has 5♠ and 4♦ and he can conclude that his partner is short (0-1) in ♦. (His side has a 9 card ♣ fit, opps will have a 9 card ♦ fit or 2 8-card fits in ♦ and a 2nd suit.) So his shortages in ♣ and ♥ gain in value. But this also means that partner is only 11+ unbalanced and I don't think that bidding 4♠ is obvious.

 

North has a high minimum and not much reason to bid over 3♠.

 

I don't think one should assign blame to the players, if a near minimum hand and an invitational hand make game because of perfectly fitting shape and honors.

 

There are methods to investigate more below 3♠, but you did not mention any.

[mike777]

North 100%

wtp?

[kenrexford]

North, wake up please.

[rogerclee]

No blame.

[cherdano]

Huh? Is really anyone playing 3S as invitational? Or did those who claim it is invitational miss that RHO doubled again?

 

I would bid exactly the same I think :P

[Guest Jlall]

3S is not invitational but north should kick it in anyways on this auction. My dad and I used to call this "Indian bidding" but north has the hand for it imo.

[kenrexford]

3S is not invitational but north should kick it in anyways on this auction. My dad and I used to call this "Indian bidding" but north has the hand for it imo.

Exactly.

[matmat]

what would a pass instead of 3♠ be and then a pull of wherever they land to 3♠?

[Guest Jlall]

what would a pass instead of 3♠ be and then a pull of wherever they land to 3♠?

You might do this if you were interested in defending one suit, but not another (ie, you're not sure whether you want to compete to 3S yet or not). If you know you will always compete to 3S over whatever they're bidding you should always bid it directly in order to preempt them.

[gnasher]

what would a pass instead of 3♠ be and then a pull of wherever they land to 3♠?

It would be a bad idea. (Edit: unless you have a hand such as Justin suggests.)

 

If you know you're going to compete to 3♠, it's usually best to do so before they exchange any further information that might help them to judge whether to compete further, or to double 3♠. If South wants to make a game try, he has redouble, 2NT, 3♣, 3♦ and 3♥ available. Does he really need a 3♠ bid for the same purpose?

[gnasher]

North showed 3+♣,  4♠ and should not have 4♥.

South has 5♠ and 4♦ and he can conclude that his partner is short (0-1) in ♦.

Those are two rather surprising assertions. How would South bid with Axxx Qxxx Kx Kxx ?

 

Edit: Sorry, that should read "How would North bid with Axxx Qxxx Kx Kxx ?"

Edited July 8, 2008 by gnasher

[gnasher]

I blame West, for not raising to 2♦.

[hotShot]

North showed 3+♣,  4♠ and should not have 4♥.

South has 5♠ and 4♦ and he can conclude that his partner is short (0-1) in ♦.

Those are two rather surprising assertions. How would South bid with Axxx Qxxx Kx Kxx ?

I argued that South can't bid 4♠ over 2♠.

I don't see how that is related to your question.

Holding Axxx Qxxx Kx Kxx he can only place 7♦ cards and can no longer assume that North is short in ♦ and with only an 8 card fit on their side, it not even clear if opps have a fit at all.

 

To answer your question with Axxx Qxxx Kx Kxx, South can bid redbl, 2NT or 3♥ depending on agreements. 3♠ should be reserved for a different type of hand e.g. with a 5th ♠.

[hotShot]

North showed 3+♣,  4♠ and should not have 4♥.

I apologize for my poor English, I meant to say:

North showed 3+♣, 4♠ and usually won't have 4♥.

[gnasher]

North showed 3+♣,  4♠ and should not have 4♥.

South has 5♠ and 4♦ and he can conclude that his partner is short (0-1) in ♦.

Those are two rather surprising assertions. How would South bid with Axxx Qxxx Kx Kxx ?

I argued that South can't bid 4♠ over 2♠.

I don't see how that is related to your question.

Holding Axxx Qxxx Kx Kxx he can only place 7♦ cards and can no longer assume that North is short in ♦ and with only an 8 card fit on their side, it not even clear if opps have a fit at all.

 

To answer your question with Axxx Qxxx Kx Kxx, South can bid redbl, 2NT or 3♥ depending on agreements. 3♠ should be reserved for a different type of hand e.g. with a 5th ♠.

Sorry - my rather poor English made me write "South" when I meant "North".

 

So, starting again, how does South know that North has 0-1 diamonds, and why can't North have Axxx Qxxx Kx Kxx ?

Edited July 8, 2008 by gnasher

[marcD]

Thanks for your answers; I was South and felt we got a bad result without anybody doing something terrible. Guess we were fixed because West did not raise diamonds. 3S was not a game try in our methods but clearly shows a good ODR and North might have raised (it is always aggravating for the opponents when you bid a cold game on such an auction :blink:.

The hidden agenda was actually to find out how many would suggest 3S instead of 2S with the North hand; nobody seemed ready to reevaluation that nice 12 count by that much ...

[gnasher]

Maybe one should play 2♦ by opener as a good (unbalanced) raise to 2♠, and 3♦ as asking for a diamond stop.

[benlessard]

North has to bid 4S. 3S isnt invitationnal but your are in imps so 3S doesnt say im just saving against 3 something it says that i have a fair shot at making 3S. So north can gamble to 4S.

 

Im not sure i would have bid 3S with south hand though. I might pass and compete over 3H but not over 3D.

[Guest movingon]

..agree with gnasher who blamed opp for not raising the diamond overcall..... Now bidding game by north makes sense.

[Finch]

While it's really tempting to raise to game on the North cards anyway, I really think you shouldn't.

 

The last few times I've raised it's gone 1 or 2 off, and partner has pointed out that he had xx, 2NT, 3C, 3D, 3H as game tries and that I wasn't invited to bid.

[kenrexford]

While it's really tempting to raise to game on the North cards anyway, I really think you shouldn't.

 

The last few times I've raised it's gone 1 or 2 off, and partner has pointed out that he had xx, 2NT, 3C, 3D, 3H as game tries and that I wasn't invited to bid.

Yeah, but partner's 3♠ bid preempted you out of many of your own game tries. Plus, 3♠ usually shows a hand, in an auction like this, that is not right for a game try but is right to accept a game try.

[cherdano]

While it's really tempting to raise to game on the North cards anyway, I really think you shouldn't.

 

The last few times I've raised it's gone 1 or 2 off, and partner has pointed out that he had xx, 2NT, 3C, 3D, 3H as game tries and that I wasn't invited to bid.

Yeah, but partner's 3♠ bid preempted you out of many of your own game tries. Plus, 3♠ usually shows a hand, in an auction like this, that is not right for a game try but is right to accept a game try.

Game tries after raising 1S to 2S?