Trigger Finger (or not?)

[pclayton]

All vul, IMPs

 

♠Kxx ♥A7xxx ♦Jxx ♣Jx

 

1♣ - 1♠ - double - 2♠

3♦ - 3♠ - ?

[rogerclee]

Uh, thought it was an easy 3N then read the poll options... Gotta be honest I still think it's an easy 3N.

 

We all agree partner has reversed right? He has forced to the 4 level opposite a minimum preference and bid a new suit at the 3 level that we have not implied any length in so 3D must logically be forcing and thus a reverse.

 

I don't understand doubling (they could easily just be cold if they have any shape at all which seems likely given their vul 3S bid), or passing (we have a spade stopper and a pretty decent hand). Doubling would be much more attractive with more defensive values like KQ of hearts instead of the ace.

[pclayton]

Uh, thought it was an easy 3N then read the poll options... Gotta be honest I still think it's an easy 3N.

 

We all agree partner has reversed right? He has forced to the 4 level opposite a minimum preference and bid a new suit at the 3 level that we have not implied any length in so 3D must logically be forcing and thus a reverse.

 

I don't understand doubling (they could easily just be cold if they have any shape at all which seems likely given their vul 3S bid), or passing (we have a spade stopper and a pretty decent hand). Doubling would be much more attractive with more defensive values like KQ of hearts instead of the ace.

I didn't include 3N because it is a ridiculous gamble without a club filler or a 2nd spade stopper. Does pard promise 6 club runners for a reverse? Furthermore, pard could have 3♠'d with something like x Kx AQxx AKQxxx.

 

I share your curiosity about the reverse, however. It is one of the reasons I posted the hand.

[jdonn]

3NT, wtp? We have enough strength that I don't usually anticipate a problem, a lot of losers for other contracts, and I don't fancy doubling.

[655321]

3NT, agree with clee and jdonn.

 

Sure, we would prefer to have KJx instead of Kxx in spades - then the problem would be a complete non-problem. As it is, our stopper is not as robust as we would like, but we still have to bid 3NT because what else is there?

 

Pass can't be right when we are sure we want to be in game opposite partner's 3♦ bid. And double seems horrible to me - only 3 trumps, and we don't even have shortage in partner's suits.

[whereagles]

I'm not so sure pard will come up with extras (unless you're playing good-bad or something), so I definitely won't bid 3NT.

 

We cannot find out whether pard has 1-3 or 2-2 majors, so it's a toss between double and 4♥.

 

This uncertaintly also shows our previous bidding was wrong. A so-very-slight overbid of 2♥, instead of double, would have avoided all of these problems and guessing, so typical of walter the walrus :rolleyes:

[pclayton]

I'm not so sure pard will come up with extras (unless you're playing good-bad or something), so I definitely won't bid 3NT.

 

We cannot find out whether pard has 1-3 or 2-2 majors, so it's a toss between double and 4♥.

 

This uncertaintly also shows our previous bidding was wrong. A so-very-slight overbid of 2♥, instead of double, would have avoided all of these problems and guessing, so typical of walter the walrus :rolleyes:

I think with 1=3=4=5 pard finds a double of 2♠ doesn't he?

[whereagles]

I think with 1=3=4=5 pard finds a double of 2♠ doesn't he?

Perhaps he should. But we cannot be certain he will do so 100% of the time.

[Finch]

3NT is horrible, I wouldn't expect it to make. I expect partner to be something like 0=2=5=6.

 

I wouldn't double either.

[rogerclee]

I didn't include 3N because it is a ridiculous gamble without a club filler or a 2nd spade stopper.

lol.

 

Furthermore, pard could have 3♠'d with something like x Kx AQxx AKQxxx.

 

lol.

 

I share your curiosity about the reverse, however. It is one of the reasons I posted the hand.

 

lol.

 

I expect partner to be something like 0=2=5=6.

 

With all due respect Frances I have no idea why you would think this. I suppose you are implying that partner will double with 2245, 2146, 1246 etc, but I just don't really agree with this. You are really overloading your double by doing this since you are also doubling with normal 1345, 2335(18-19 bal), 1336, perhaps even some 2326 just to make a 3D bid show 5-6.

 

It seems greatly preferable to me to bid 3D naturally, especially when I'm 4-6, rather than have a huge range for my double. For starters it might be hard to sort out the level of heart fit you have, even if they don't bid 3S, because a 3H bid from partner over your double is not forcing. Secondly, it might be hard to figure out when you have a real diamond fit or not, especially if it is a 4-4 fit when you have such an overloaded double. It can be crucial for both game and slam bidding to be able to sort this out. It seems like you are really giving up a lot to make a 3D bid in this auction promise 5-6 and I don't understand why you are doing it, or would think that it is normal.

[precpj]

funny topic : ) this is for a good laugh

 

2 years ago, i got a real TRIGGER FINGER on my left index finger

 

THIS DOCTOR ( an out of network specialist wrongly referred by my Primany's receptionist but woring with ANOTHER insurance company) spent about hlaf hr on my initial visist : took x Ray which showed nothing really serious, gave me a tiny cotizone shot and prescription for a few pills ..

 

I was all well in 2 weeks but good boy went back for the follow up.. 5 minutes i was out of his office.

 

want to guess the bill:

 

$875 for first visit and $250 for follow up.. sad to say: if i went to my network specialist, i would pay $35 each for a visit and Dr proablbly at most got paid for at most $400 TOTAL

 

I keep on asking myself: why do Drs charge more than they can get paid by insurance IF THEY ARE WORKING WITH INSURANCE

 

My daugher now a DR promised SHe will NOT be that kind of Dr. when she practices on her own i will give her a sign to hand outside the office

 

"NO $ No Problem !"

 

Cheers

 

Precpj

[Finch]

I don't think 3D promises a 5-6, just that I won't be surprised if he has one.

I agree (21)46 is quite possible if he has a good hand. I'd still be surprised if 3NT were reliably a good contract opposite a good (21)46: we need to run 9 tricks, so he needs solid clubs and the ace of diamonds which seems quite a small target.

 

I haven't actually voted yet, because I still don't know what to do.

 

It's not a common auction; last time it came up my partner was 1-1-4-7.

[Finch]

duplicate post

[rogerclee]

I'd still be surprised if 3NT were reliably a good contract opposite a good (21)46: we need to run 9 tricks, so he needs solid clubs and the ace of diamonds which seems quite a small target.

Why is this such a small target? You are apparantly giving partner very few spade/heart cards, and you are not giving him credit for ever having the HK or SA, so what values is he going to have? Sure there are combinations where we are off a club card, or we have all the diamond honors except the ace, but I don't think it's at all unlikely he has the necessary cards. We do probably have 25+ HCP, and sometimes they are making 3S anyways. I think it is really pessimistic to pass with this hand opposite a reverse.

 

Your point that partner might be 5-6 and thus light is taken though, but in that case again they are probably making 3S at least anyways.

[Finch]

I think it is really pessimistic to pass with this hand opposite a reverse.

I didn't say I was passing. I said I didn't know what to do.

 

If my spade and heart cards were reversed (SA and HK), I would probably try 4C.

[TimG]

I haven't actually voted yet, because I still don't know what to do.

The round was called a long time ago, move along to the next table, please.

[pclayton]

I didn't include 3N because it is a ridiculous gamble without a club filler or a 2nd spade stopper.

lol.

 

Furthermore, pard could have 3♠'d with something like x Kx AQxx AKQxxx.

 

lol.

 

I share your curiosity about the reverse, however. It is one of the reasons I posted the hand.

 

lol.

 

I expect partner to be something like 0=2=5=6.

 

With all due respect Frances I have no idea why you would think this. I suppose you are implying that partner will double with 2245, 2146, 1246 etc, but I just don't really agree with this. You are really overloading your double by doing this since you are also doubling with normal 1345, 2335(18-19 bal), 1336, perhaps even some 2326 just to make a 3D bid show 5-6.

 

It seems greatly preferable to me to bid 3D naturally, especially when I'm 4-6, rather than have a huge range for my double. For starters it might be hard to sort out the level of heart fit you have, even if they don't bid 3S, because a 3H bid from partner over your double is not forcing. Secondly, it might be hard to figure out when you have a real diamond fit or not, especially if it is a 4-4 fit when you have such an overloaded double. It can be crucial for both game and slam bidding to be able to sort this out. It seems like you are really giving up a lot to make a 3D bid in this auction promise 5-6 and I don't understand why you are doing it, or would think that it is normal.

LOL is actually playing 3N opposite x Qx AKQx AT9xxx which is pard's hand.

[rogerclee]

LOL is actually playing 3N opposite x Qx AKQx AT9xxx which is pard's hand.

Hmm, interesting Phil, did you change the hand from real life to try and actually give partner his reverse since he didn't have one? Here is a link to the real hand:

 

http://online.bridgebase.com/myhands/fetch...ayed=1223755219

 

Interesting how partner only had the HJ instead of the HQ :D

 

Also, I would say that trying to disprove a bid based on the actual hand when it does a full 530 points better than the bid actually chosen by well known bridge professional and world class player Phil Clayton is pretty foolish, especially when 3S is going to make for -140 anyways, so 3N does not fare much worse than pass anyways (yes, I am aware a diamond lead beats it, but world class player Phil Clayton did not lead a diamond so it seems impossible!).

 

Also, I would say trying to disprove that a bid is correct based on 1 sample hand which you had to try to CHANGE because your intermediate partner did not know that 3D was a reverse, thus nullifying the merit of your sample hand all together is pretty foolish!

 

But that's just me, Roger Lee, and as you have told me before on this forum, I am not good enough to "insult" you.

[655321]

LOL is actually playing 3N opposite x Qx AKQx AT9xxx which is pard's hand.

It is not a big surprise to find 3NT is 2 down, but that does not in itself mean that that 3NT is the wrong bid.

 

For example, we might guess that 3NT will make one third of the time, and go 2 down undoubled two thirds of the time, while 3♠ makes one third of the time, and goes 1 down two thirds of the time.

 

So making each of the bids (Pass, double, 3NT) 3 times:

• 3NT:        600 - 2*200 = 200 after 3 times.
  
• Double:   2*200 - 730 = -330 after 3 times.
  
• Pass:       2*100 - 140 = +60 after 3 times.
  

I stress that I have made these numbers up, just for illustrative purposes - I am not using them to try to prove that 3NT is best - if you significantly change these numbers, a different bid might of course work better than 3NT. Just noting, that even though 3NT will land you -200 two thirds of the time, it is still the percentage bid under my assumptions.

[pclayton]

LOL is actually playing 3N opposite x Qx AKQx AT9xxx which is pard's hand.

Hmm, interesting Phil, did you change the hand from real life to try and actually give partner his reverse since he didn't have one? Here is a link to the real hand:

 

http://online.bridgebase.com/myhands/fetch...ayed=1223755219

 

Interesting how partner only had the HJ instead of the HQ :)

 

Also, I would say that trying to disprove a bid based on the actual hand when it does a full 530 points better than the bid actually chosen by well known bridge professional and world class player Phil Clayton is pretty foolish, especially when 3S is going to make for -140 anyways, so 3N does not fare much worse than pass anyways (yes, I am aware a diamond lead beats it, but world class player Phil Clayton did not lead a diamond so it seems impossible!).

 

Also, I would say trying to disprove that a bid is correct based on 1 sample hand which you had to try to CHANGE because your intermediate partner did not know that 3D was a reverse, thus nullifying the merit of your sample hand all together is pretty foolish!

 

But that's just me, Roger Lee, and as you have told me before on this forum, I am not good enough to "insult" you.

Yeah Roger the difference of the ♥J instead of the ♥Q really makes a whole lot of difference. So sue me.

 

Are you accusing me of doctoring a hand to prove a point? This was about a week ago. I really don't remember, but if the record says its a point off, the record is right. Big *****ing deal.

 

I'm not going to respond to any more of the bullshit in this childish post, because frankly, I don't give a ***** anymore. The tone of the forums has regressed to a level that even I am uncomfortable with. I used to think people like roger C Lee used to appreciate my viewpoints and that they became better players as a result. I too enjoy fresh perspectives, but when I read the above drivel, I have no interest anymore in helping or listening to anyone.

 

Post anything you want in reply because I won't read it.

 

I have too much going on in my personal life to give another ounce of attention to this forum. I was looking forward to making it to 10,000, but I guess not.

 

Have a nice life.

[dburn]

All vul, IMPs

 

♠Kxx ♥A7xxx ♦Jxx ♣Jx

 

1♣ - 1♠ - double - 2♠

3♦ - 3♠ - ?

Would certainly not double at IMPs. Might double at matchpoints, but would not be surprised to concede 730 - the opponents also know that they are vulnerable. Would probably just bid 4♣ - perhaps it will make anyway, or perhaps my RHO will have ♠A and lead it, allowing partner to pitch a heart. If partner bids five, I expect him to make it. 3NT is absurd - partner would have bid 3♠ if we could make that. 3♦ was not forcing, even if it showed a full reverse (which is questionable).

[Hanoi5]

I'd probably double (not quite sure) at MP's but at imp's there's too much at stake.