Assess the Blame

[grrigg]

[hv=d=w&v=e&n=saj10xhk9xxd9xxxxc&s=sxxhqjxdaqjxcaxxx]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

The bidding was:

 

West   North   East   South

pass   pass    pass   1D

1H       X        1S        pass

pass    3D     pass    3NT

 

3NT was down 3 for -150 and a bad board. Who is to blame? Which bid(s) do you find bad?

[hotShot]

I don't like North dbl with 5 card ♦-support, ♣ void and 4♥.

I would expect dbl to be neg. with ♣'s and ♠'s. I guess so did South.

North now finds a 3♦ reopening. I would read that as 3 card support, 4 good ♠ and ♥ shortage. North must be maximum for a passed hand (11 HCP) and there is a good chance that the minors produce up to 8 tricks and there are stopper in ♥ and ♠. So 3 NT seems to be a reasonable contract from South's point of view.

 

I blame North for misdescribing his hand in shape and strength.

[Guest Jlall]

I'd have bid the same way I think.

[vang]

3!D too aggresive for MP. i think 2!D is enough.

[P_Marlowe]

The only questionable call is 3NT.

 

You have to show the 4 card spade suit, either

via a neg. X or 1S, what ever the agreement.

 

The Pass by Sout over 1S is fine as well, and

North does not want to sell out to 1S, and is

certainly worth a inv. call, although the inv. raise

is shape based.

 

And because it is quite likely that the inv. raise

is shape based, and because north is a passed hand.,

you may or may not make the 3NT bid.

At least at MP pass over 3D is certainly an option.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[jdonn]

I think north should pull to 4♦, but maybe I'm just being double dummy, hard to be fair knowing both hands. Certainly he can see this sort of thing is a real possibility.

[Apollo81]

3!D too aggresive for MP. i think 2!D is enough.

Agree, but I would bid 3♦ to show an aggressive invitation if that was an available option. I wonder what 2♥ should mean here by a PH.

[cherdano]

I don't like North dbl with 5 card ♦-support, ♣ void and 4♥.

I would expect dbl to be neg. with ♣'s and ♠'s. I guess so did South.

North now finds a 3♦ reopening. I would read that as 3 card support, 4 good ♠ and ♥ shortage. North must be maximum for a passed hand (11 HCP) and there is a good chance that the minors produce up to 8 tricks and there are stopper in ♥ and ♠. So 3 NT seems to be a reasonable contract from South's point of view.

 

I blame North for misdescribing his hand in shape and strength.

Double just shows 4 spades (at least in NA expert standard). Better to think of it as a transfer than a takeout double.

[han]

Josh, I don't think that it is right to pull from 3NT when all your highcards are in the two suits the opponents bid.