Shooting partner is not an option...

[Fluffy]

The more and more I read, the more I like pass rather than 3NT. I normally like ♣Axx as a stopper because you can keep the opponents unconnected if the suit is 6-3 or 5-3, but here RHO will have entries.

[the hog]

3H. Definitely not passing as partner would double with a decent, 13-14 4441 4450. Do you still want to defend 3C then?

[jdonn]

I agree (like I edited) that partner is never 18-19 balanced when we have a hand like this. What I meant was that if partner is 4450 and minimum, I admit that passing is more likely to be bad than good, but will still work out some very nontrivial percentage of the time. If partner is stronger and/or has a singleton club we are in very good shape, especially because as the previous posts have established, we are never going to play game on this hand even if it is right.

I agree and disagree with certain parts. You are right passing isn't automatically bad if partner is 4450, it's just not what you would do if you knew that was his shape. Sure if partner is a stronger hand passing is more likely to work, but I disagree that we are never playing game on those hands, he will at some point take a chance and raise to game if his hand is very good.

 

Anyway having said all that, I don't think pass is that bad at matchpoints but I still wouldn't do it. This looks to me like the sort of hand on which just going plus will beat some pairs since there will be such a mix of results. I do prefer pass to 3NT since I just don't think that would be likely to make (in fact most of my arguments against pass apply even more to 3NT.)

[655321]

I am bidding 4♣, planning to correct 4♠ to 5♦.

 

Partner should have a good hand here, and some shape - probably 4-3 in the majors and 0-1 club, with some extra values. 4♣ should get us to the right strain, even if we sometimes get too high.

 

Don't much like Pass, although it could work. Really dislike 3NT.

[rogerclee]

I agree and disagree with certain parts. You are right passing isn't automatically bad if partner is 4450, it's just not what you would do if you knew that was his shape. Sure if partner is a stronger hand passing is more likely to work, but I disagree that we are never playing game on those hands, he will at some point take a chance and raise to game if his hand is very good.

 

Anyway having said all that, I don't think pass is that bad at matchpoints but I still wouldn't do it. This looks to me like the sort of hand on which just going plus will beat some pairs since there will be such a mix of results. I do prefer pass to 3NT since I just don't think that would be likely to make (in fact most of my arguments against pass apply even more to 3NT.)

Another bad sentence by me, I need to cut my losses and stop posting in this thread! Obviously we will play game sometimes, I meant that we will never force to game ourselves. It is likely that if partner decides to bid game over our 3♥ call that I will have made a good decision. Still, I want to reiterate that this is unlikely given that our hand is so good.

 

I think I initially underestimated the chances that partner had a minimum, but I am still going to pass. If partner is 4351, I am also very happy to defend, since we only have one 8-card fit.

 

But we do have some common ground, I think 3NT is a terrible call.

[HeavyDluxe]

Thanks everyone for posting those musings. It's helpful for me to hear you think out the call, particular when the decision is thin.

 

So, thanks.

[Winstonm]

4D I think is the best call.

 

Partner is more likely to be 34(43)51 or 3361 in this auction so why guess where else we might play when we hold a virtually guaranteed 8-card fit. After that it is a matter of expessing our values. 3D could be a 4333 zero count so I think more action is needed - 4C overstates our hand.

 

By default, 4D seems about right. Invitational but passable.

 

Edited: Another thought. If indeed the opposition holds a 9-card fit then we are looking at a minimum of 17 total tricks and 18 if partner is 3361, which argues for bidding on rather than defending.

[han]

Partner is more likely to be 34(43)51 or 3361 in this auction so why guess where else we might play when we hold a virtually guaranteed 8-card fit.

I don't think 4D is unreasonable, but you are aware that you need only 10 tricks for game in hearts while you need 11 for game in diamonds. Playing in our 8-card diamond fit if we also have an 8-card heart fit doesn't look like a good idea.

 

By default, 4D seems about right.

 

What on earth does that mean?

[Winstonm]

Partner is more likely to be 34(43)51 or 3361 in this auction so why guess where else we might play when we hold a virtually guaranteed 8-card fit.

I don't think 4D is unreasonable, but you are aware that you need only 10 tricks for game in hearts while you need 11 for game in diamonds. Playing in our 8-card diamond fit if we also have an 8-card heart fit doesn't look like a good idea.

 

By default, 4D seems about right.

 

What on earth does that mean?

I really don't know what any of it means. 4C seemed like a nifty bid until I realized I didn't really know what it meant - or is it one of those Alice-in-Woderland bids that means exactly what I wish it to mean and no more.

 

I guess 4C couldn't be confusing as 1) pick a major, 2) I have a maximum pass and no clear cut bid 3) I have a 3433 7-count and don't know what to do 4) I have one major and not the other and when you bid the one I have I'll bid 5D and you'll know it's to play and not a cue bid. 5) I have a top-end bottom pass but I have diamonds and shape and we might make game now that I know you have a hand.

 

Whereas 4D means: I have diamond support. I am inviting game.

 

So it must mean that it is de fault of the whoever picked the confusing 4C bid.

[cherdano]

4C is a game force that doesn't know which strain to play.

[Fluffy]

3H. Definitely not passing as partner would double with a decent, 13-14 4441 4450. Do you still want to defend 3C then?

I expect more from partner, he doesn't need to act at the 3 level over a partner who has passed 2♣, our double of 3♣ i spenalty, and our 3x bids are limited, we don't need to be protected.

[Gerben42]

In the actual hand, partner had a 4441 with 15, and we make nothing on the 3-level. 3♣ doesn't make either. So Pass you get a top, something else you get an average at best.

 

Not that it proves anything, because Kxx vs AJTx in ♦ doesn't always make 3 tricks on defense...

[benlessard]

This is a very classic problem.

 

Surely you understand how bad is to pass when the auction is

 

1H----(2C)-----???

 

and you hold.

 

xxxx

xxx

Kxx

Axx

 

Here its the same thing but it depend on the likeliness of opener having 5D

 

In a weak Nt setup its clear that you have to bid 2D on first turn and its not close.

 

In a strong Nt setup partner is still favorite to have a 5card D suit so 2D is probably a better bid than pass.

 

The reason is that if partner got a minimum balanced hand you want to play in 2D anyway (expecting to make vs a 15-17 and making a save facing 12-14) and if hes 18-19 pts hand he will make a balancing X but wont raise you. If hes unbalanced he will be glad to hear you bid 2D and you wont have further problems about showing strenght.

 

 

 

Its the same thing with

 

Qx

xxx

AKxx

xxxx

 

and the bidding goes

 

1S-----(2C)-------???

 

Bidding 2S or making a negX is way better than passing. If you pass and partner reopen you will be stuck.

[Winstonm]

4C is a game force that doesn't know which strain to play.

Seems in this case it shows a balanced 7-count that doesn't know what else to bid. :)

[foo]

In the actual hand, partner had a 4441 with 15, and we make nothing on the 3-level. 3♣ doesn't make either. So Pass you get a top, something else you get an average at best.

 

Not that it proves anything, because Kxx vs AJTx in ♦ doesn't always make 3 tricks on defense...

Responder's hand here is K7x_87xx_87x_A7x , So I'm not sure why the example of ♦Kxx+AJTx on defense is being brought up?

 

 

Another thing. 1D-(2C)-X would show a minimum of ~8-9 HCP. So when we as responder passed instead, we strongly implied that we had 0-7 or 0-8 HCP.

 

Therefore, 1D-(2C)-pa-(3C);X should usually show more than 15 HCP. For Us to rate to be safe at the 3-level, it needs to show ~17+.

 

 

Upon more reflection, I have more sympathy with us passing at MPs (not IMPs) if They are Red. Take Our likely +200 or better and go home.

 

At IMPs, I do not think you can ever afford to pass, but given my 10 loser 4333, I'm not willing to GF w/ 4C even if I do have maximum values for the auction. At IMPs, IMHO you are endplayed into bidding 3H

[jdonn]

Responder's hand here is  K7x_87xx_87x_A7x , So I'm not sure why the example of ♦Kxx+AJTx on defense is being brought up?

I'm sure we can use our imaginations to realize Gerben meant spades, not diamonds.

 

Another thing.   1D-(2C)-X  would show a minimum of ~8-9 HCP.  So when we as responder passed instead, we strongly implied that we had 0-7 or 0-8 HCP.

Or a shape with which we can not double?

 

Therefore,  1D-(2C)-pa-(3C);X  should usually show more than 15 HCP.  For Us to rate to be safe at the 3-level, it needs to show ~17+.

How do you reach that conclusion? Do you take your supposed 0-7 (or 0-8? which is it?) and add the average of that to what partner would need for us to have half the deck, which you then declare to give us safety? And anyway, why are you implying a bid should only be made if it's safe? On the actual hand the opponents were in a 9 card fit with less than half the deck, is letting them play there winning mps?

 

Upon more reflection, I have more sympathy with us passing at MPs (not IMPs) if They are Red.  Take Our likely +200 or better and go home.

I agree, passing is quite reasonable and this thread has swayed me more in that direction. Maybe I was wrong and it's 'correct' at mps. I certainly don't mean to pretend this is an obvious problem.

 

At IMPs, I do not think you can ever afford to pass, but given my 10 loser 4333, I'm not willing to GF w/ 4C even if I do have maximum values for the auction.  At IMPs, IMHO you are endplayed into bidding 3H

You believe this is a maximum, claim you will bid it as though it were minimum, give no reason why, and conclude by saying you are endplayed into that choice? What if partner opened 2NT, would you pass because you have a 10 loser 4333?

[Winstonm]

This is a very classic problem.

 

Surely you understand how bad is to pass when the auction is

 

1H----(2C)-----???

 

and you hold.

 

xxxx

xxx

Kxx

Axx

 

Here its the same thing but it depend on the likeliness of opener having 5D

 

In a weak Nt setup its clear that you have to bid 2D on first turn and its not close.

 

In a strong Nt setup partner is still favorite to have a 5card D suit so 2D is probably a better bid than pass.

 

The reason is that if partner got a minimum balanced hand you want to play in 2D anyway (expecting to make vs a 15-17 and making a save facing 12-14) and if hes 18-19 pts hand he will make a balancing X but wont raise you. If hes unbalanced he will be glad to hear you bid 2D and you wont have further problems about showing strenght.

 

 

 

Its the same thing with

 

Qx

xxx

AKxx

xxxx

 

and the bidding goes

 

1S-----(2C)-------???

 

Bidding 2S or making a negX is way better than passing. If you pass and partner reopen you will be stuck.

I think there is some merit to these views.

[foo]

Not that it proves anything, because Kxx vs AJTx in ♦ doesn't always make 3 tricks on defense...

jdonn

 

I did not realize the quoted was typo and actually about ♠'s rather than ♦'s

[Fluffy]

IMO pass of 2♣ normally shows a weak hand unless trap passing, I am sure you can find exceptions where you will have 9 HCP, and pass but not accept the double, but those are just unlikelly exceptions.

 

 

After 2♣-p-3♣, partner should not protect us with a double with a weak hand, if its ok to compete, we should find it by ourselves, and if it is ok to double, we can double ourselves as well.

[the hog]

This is a very classic problem.

 

Surely you understand how bad is to pass when the auction is

 

1H----(2C)-----???

 

and you hold.

 

xxxx

xxx

Kxx

Axx

 

Here its the same thing but it depend on the likeliness of opener having 5D

 

In a weak Nt setup its clear that you have to bid 2D on first turn and its not close.

 

In a strong Nt setup partner is still favorite to have a 5card D suit so 2D is probably a better bid than pass.

 

The reason is that if partner got a minimum balanced hand you want to play in 2D anyway (expecting to make vs a 15-17 and making a save facing 12-14) and if hes 18-19 pts hand he will make a balancing X but wont raise you. If hes unbalanced he will be glad to hear you bid 2D and you wont have further problems about showing strenght.

 

 

 

Its the same thing with

 

Qx

xxx

AKxx

xxxx

 

and the bidding goes

 

1S-----(2C)-------???

 

Bidding 2S or making a negX is way better than passing. If you pass and partner reopen you will be stuck.

I think there is some merit to these views.

Yes, I agree with Ben and Winston.

[the hog]

This is a very classic problem.

 

Surely you understand how bad is to pass when the auction is

 

1H----(2C)-----???

 

and you hold.

 

xxxx

xxx

Kxx

Axx

 

Here its the same thing but it depend on the likeliness of opener having 5D

 

In a weak Nt setup its clear that you have to bid 2D on first turn and its not close.

 

In a strong Nt setup partner is still favorite to have a 5card D suit so 2D is probably a better bid than pass.

 

The reason is that if partner got a minimum balanced hand you want to play in 2D anyway (expecting to make vs a 15-17 and making a save facing 12-14) and if hes 18-19 pts hand he will make a balancing X but wont raise you. If hes unbalanced he will be glad to hear you bid 2D and you wont have further problems about showing strenght.

 

 

 

Its the same thing with

 

Qx

xxx

AKxx

xxxx

 

and the bidding goes

 

1S-----(2C)-------???

 

Bidding 2S or making a negX is way better than passing. If you pass and partner reopen you will be stuck.

I think there is some merit to these views.

Yes, I agree with Ben and Winston.

[foo]

Another thing.   1D-(2C)-X  would show a minimum of ~8-9 HCP.  So when we as responder passed instead, we strongly implied that we had 0-7 or 0-8 HCP.

1= Or a shape with which we can not double?

 

Therefore,  1D-(2C)-pa-(3C);X  should usually show more than 15 HCP.  For Us to rate to be safe at the 3-level, it needs to show ~17+.

2= How do you reach that conclusion? Do you take your supposed 0-7 (or 0-8? which is it?) and add the average of that to what partner would need for us to have half the deck, which you then declare to give us safety? And anyway, why are you implying a bid should only be made if it's safe? On the actual hand the opponents were in a 9 card fit with less than half the deck, is letting them play there winning mps?

 

Upon more reflection, I have more sympathy with us passing at MPs (not IMPs) if They are Red.  Take Our likely +200 or better and go home.

3= I agree, passing is quite reasonable and this thread has swayed me more in that direction. Maybe I was wrong and it's 'correct' at mps. I certainly don't mean to pretend this is an obvious problem.

 

At IMPs, I do not think you can ever afford to pass, but given my 10 loser 4333, I'm not willing to GF w/ 4C even if I do have maximum values for the auction.  At IMPs, IMHO you are endplayed into bidding 3H

4= You believe this is a maximum, claim you will bid it as though it were minimum, give no reason why, and conclude by saying you are endplayed into that choice? What if partner opened 2NT, would you pass because you have a 10 loser 4333?

1= ...and what shape would that be? Most 8-9 HCP hands can take action:

a= 5+ card suit, makes a Neg X and then passes or corrects.

b= the obvious 4cM hand makes a Neg X

c= 8-9 HCP w/o a 4cM but with 4+D can raise 1D: 1D-(2C)-2D...

 

All that's left of your hypothetical set is 8-9 HCP =3334.

On some of those, one might =still= raise ♦'s.

 

 

2= We are in a misfit auction and Opener is considering taking action at the 3 level all by himself. Clearly, opener needs extra values to make a forward going call. Unless you like bad scores. If They have the balance of power, We might even get X'd and get a =really= bad score. Particularly at IMPs.

 

b= As you well know, HCP are an approximation of playing strength. Particularly in contested auctions.

 

c= Do I really need to start quoting Robson & Segal, Cohen, or Lawrence on the contested auction in the 18-22 HCP per side range?

Yes, sometimes our best odds (MPs) or expectation (IMPs) to get a good score, or at least to avoid a bad score, is to defend.

 

 

3= Glad we agree on something here. My initial reaction matched Han's. Yuck!

I'm reminded of some of the better examples Mike Lawrence has in his books.

 

 

4= This hand is a minimum response. 7 HCP. It's HCP values are maximum =for the auction=. It is a flat 10 loser hand. 4333 is the worst trick taking shape, and the most defensive shape, in Bridge. If Opener passes, I'm fairly sure We'd all pass (a unanimous action on the BBO forums! Sacrilege!) with this hand.

 

But Opener did not pass. They X'd. And our hand does not offer much in the way of tricks. Offensive or defensive. Therefore IMHO you are endplayed into treating this hand as a minimum no matter what you do with it.

 

b= That last is silly since We know when pard opens 2N= 20-21 that they have enough power tricks to rate to have 7+ tricks opposite our likely 2. That situation and this situation are not analogous.

 

We know pard does not have 20-21 flat. They do not rate to have 7+ tricks based on power in this auction. 4-5 is more like it. Maybe 6 if we are very lucky.

...And we do not have any length tricks or ruffing values to offer him to bolster Our combined tricks to 9+.