too many bad hands to post

[jillybean]

Hand1

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=s832h6432dt7ckq96&w=sak5hj98da8cjt752&e=sqjt94hktdj42ca83&s=s76haq75dkq9653c4]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

West North East South

 

 -     Pass  1♠    Dbl

 4♣    Dbl   4♠    5♦

 Dbl   Pass  Pass  Pass

 

 

 

Hand2

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=s832h6432dt7ckq96&w=sak5hj98da8cjt752&e=sqjt94hktdj42ca83&s=s76haq75dkq9653c4]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

West North East South

 

 -     -     Pass  2NT

 Pass  3♥    Pass  3♠

 Pass  Pass  Pass  

[the hog]

Hand 1 I would have overcalled 2D rather than double. North's doubleof 4C shows Cs here, so South certainly does not have another D bid. Btw, what the hell was 4C?

 

Hand 2 South has an easy superaccept of the transfer, (3NT in my methods, but a 3S superaccept is also fine). Regardless, nth should bid 3NT over over 3H.

[EricK]

On hand 1 the only calls by anybody which I agree with are the 4 passes.

[brianshark]

Hand 1: I dislike Dbl. It looks like a ♦ overcall to me. 5♦ was not good. I'm not sure whether south was compensating because they should have bid ♦s earlier or they thought for some reason that pard will have a different hand. South has no business going to the 5-level with an off-shape minimum which has been devalued when pard shows values in your singleton.

 

Hand 2: You should specify the range of 2NT. Assuming 20-21, kind of unlucky I have to say. North has a hand that's not quite worth an invite and i dislike super-accepts with 4333.

[andy_h]

Hand 1 my auction would go:

P - 1S - 2♦ - 3D

P - 3S - P - 4♠- All Pass.

 

Hate X, and I have no experience in Equal-Level-Conversions.

 

Hand 2:

2NT-3H

4C-4H

4S

 

Assuming 2NT=20-21, 4C is my only form of superaccept, 4H a re-transfer.

 

If South is not superaccepting, I would still bid 3NT with N's hand. It's vul, 4count with some intermediates - good things can happen and then South would have an easy 4S bid over 3NT.

[TimG]

On hand 1 the only calls by anybody which I agree with are the 4 passes.

I think second two doubles are fine, too. But, agree with your general sentiment.

 

ELC: the way I play this is that double followed by correction is for hands that were inappropriate for a diamond overcall in the first place. Is this an unusual view? Here I would be happy to overcall 2♦ and later double for takeout if the auction made that convenient.

[jtfanclub]

Here I would be happy to overcall 2♦ and later double for takeout if the auction made that convenient.

Not sure if I buy that.

 

After 1♠ 2♦ 2♠ P P, what now? If you X, isn't partner going to think you have clubs? On the other hand, if you're at the 3 level, do you really want to X? Your hand isn't all that strong.

 

I think this is a one bid hand. Bid diamonds, and if partner isn't strong enough to bid hearts on his own, well, too bad. If you allow a short club with ELC, then I dunno, maybe it works (never played it myself). But whichever way you start, outside of ELC you don't have a second call.

[han]

First hand west and south were way off.

 

Second hand everybody is playing bridge but both players were a bit shy. Gotta bid your cold games at IMPs.

[mikeh]

1. I don't like the double. I really dislike elc, but I know that some fine players like it, so maybe I'm being unkind. I really don't understand 4♣... maybe it was artificial and the club length merely coincidental? Anyway, North has a borderline double of 4♣ IF it was artificial. If it was natural, I think North should pass because he has NO defence..... S announced club length, West showed club length so opener has very short clubs, and now N has a defensive zero count. If it was artificial, the double might be interpreted as lead directional (good) or as suggesting a save (bad)

 

However, no matter which way one looks at any of the calls to 5♦, 5♦ is HORRIBLE. Of course, this is another strike against the use of ELC... South has no idea whether it is right to save... well, maybe the double of 4♣ should be some clue... but consider... overcall 2♦ and if it is right to save in diamonds, surely that is now partner's job?

 

2. I agree with S's actions. S's hand is not (quite) worth a super-accept. While it is near maximum in hcp (all aces and kings merits an upgrade), the spade Queen is not pulling its full weight. AKxx with the Queen elsewhere is usually going to be a better hand... consider... AKxx opposite Jxxxx is odds-on to play for no losers, so the Queen adds less than a trick. Put the Queen in a red suit, and it is worth a full trick. Also, 4333 shape is a negative factor: opposite partner's 5332 shapes (which are common) we offer no ruffing value, while a 4432 hand at least offers a chance of finding our doubleton opposite one of his 3 card suits, plus the 4th card in our side suit may be a winner or allow a dummy-reversal. So two reasons not to upgrade...potentially wasted spade queen and ugly shape.

 

The problem lies with North. Yes, it is a bad hand, but we know we hold 24-25 hcp between us and if our spade suit is useless as a source of tricks, our clubs may come in handy and our red suit honours, low as they are, may be very valuable. Imps, red, N has 100% of the blame on this one.

 

BTW, another reason to bid is that on a bad day, 3♠ goes down while 3N makes!

[jillybean]

My thought process here

 

Hand1 On this type of hand I dont want to bid the ♦ and conceal the 4 card Major. (Bid yer hand!) I thought I was saving with the ghastly 5♦ bid.

 

Hand2: 'Everyone' except me is super accepting. I haven’t exactly embraced super accepts as I’m still thinking I should leave the decision to partner, he could have a weak transfer to play 2♠, defective thinking Im sure! We have a 9card fit so the 3level probably isn’t too high should partner have a weak hand and a jump makes it easy for his next bid.

 

 

4♣ was explained as 'suit'

[mikeh]

My thought process here

 

Hand1  On this type of hand I dont want to bid the ♦ and conceal the 4 card Major. (Bid yer hand!)  I thought I was saving with the ghastly 5♦ bid.

 

Hand2:  'Everyone' except me is super accepting.  I haven’t exactly embraced super accepts as I’m still thinking I should leave the decision to partner, he could have a weak transfer to play 2♠, defective thinking Im sure! We have a 9card fit so the 3level probably isn’t too high should partner have a weak hand and a jump makes it easy for his next bid.

On the first one, 2♦ is exactly the bid that amounts to 'bidding your hand'. Think about this: what would you open? 1♥? I think not :ph34r: Bidding 2♦ may make finding hearts difficult (which is why elc exists as a concept) but not impossible (consider LHO raising to 2 or 3♠ and partner making a responsive double, for one route to the heart fit), and, in the meantime, using the same double on 1=4=4=4 and 2=4=6=1 (for example) is often a recipe for disaster.

 

On the second, superaccepts are especially important over 2N.. far more so than after 1N.

 

After 1N, responder can always make an invitational bid and get out below game when opener rejects, but after 2N, responder has to force to game or pass.

 

Now, most play a 2 point range for 2N and a 3 point range for 1N, so the 2N bidder is slightly more defined than the 1N bidder. But game may well depend as much on degree of fit as well as hcp.

 

Yes, responder could hold a zero count that offers no play for game opposite the world's best 2N opener, but you can't approach bridge with that mindset... why get out of bed in the morning if your world is so disappointing? In the meantime, he will far more often hold borderline 3-4 counts with weak spades... the type of hand that becomes far more attractive if a big fit is shown.

 

No method bids every good game and avoids every bad one, but superaccepts increase the partnership accuracy.

[jillybean]

Thanks Mike, my comment "bid yer hand" was a reminder that I SHOULD be bidding my hand rather than suggesting I had bid my hand :)

[han]

The intuition that you should try to keep hearts in the picture is a very good one. However double with a singleton club should be very uncomfortable. This hand is so far from what partner will expect from a double that 2D stands out. If your hand was ♥AQxx ♦KQxxxx ♣xxx then a double would be much more attractive.

[Mbodell]

Hand 1 is awful all around: The 1♠ is pushy. If you play ELC then the first double is not horrible. I'd say it is still clearly wrong and 2♦ is better, but make one of the small diamonds a small spade and X seems a reasonable ELC choice. If you don't play ELC then that makes the X even worse. 4♣ is very weird, some kind of fit jump? Much better, if that's your agreement, if the points were in clubs and the bid was at the 3 level (but maybe that is some form of Bergen? Which arguably might be a better bid if we have that agreement). The second dbl is a little pushy too, but it does show where our values are. I'm not sure if it might suggest more defense though. 4♠ seems reasonable to play the major game, although it depends on what the 4♣ showed because if I expected KQxxx opposite my Axx I might try the 4♣X game. The 5♦ is a standout for the worst bid though. Awful. Could very well be a phantom sac.

 

Hand 2: I'd be tempted to upgrade this to a 2♣...2nt hand. One quick silly formula for nt is HCP+[((#A+#T)/2)-1]. So, in otherwords, give yourself half a point for each A and T but then take away 1 point for the "expected" 1 A and 1 T you have. That turns this hand into a 22 point hand. Now maybe the 4333 and the T of spades not really being that needed with the AKQ above it might have me not upgrade, but still it is very close. Given that and given partner just transfered into my AKQT suit, I have to force to game. If I can do that leaving partner with the choice of 3nt or 4♠, all the better. If not 4♠ should make much of the time.