Another evaluation problem

[cnszsun]

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sa108xxxha10daxxxcx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

1♠-ps-1NT-ps

2♦-ps-2♠-ps

??[/hv]

I feel no confidence at such judgment.

[Codo]

I would pass playing sayc or any other system where partner has 2 spades here.

[rogerclee]

Pass, I need just a little more.

[kenrexford]

Pass for me also.

 

Here's some thoughts, though.

 

First, this seems like an example of where a 1♠-P-2♠ auction when Responder has Hx and a 9-11 count would help.

 

However, this also seems like a place where 1♠-P-1NT-P-2♠ might also help. 1♠...2♠ might alternatively help. 1♠...2♦ has a "worst case scenario" of five bad spades and a Rule-of-Twenty opening. 7 1/2 losers is distinctly possible. Heck, even a cruddy 5332 with 8 losers is possible.

 

1♠...2♠, however, gives Responder info necessary to invite himself with some prospects. He will know when his Hx actually establishes a fit, and he will know that your hand is better than a weak 2 in spades.

[Fluffy]

Fitting minimums produce 30% games, seems like a pass.

 

Opponents are too silent if partner has 3 spades 4-7, it is unlikelly. Not sure if we have better chances at the 3 level opposite 3 spades and 5 points or opposite 2 spades and 7 points.

[whereagles]

The hand has excellent playing strength, with a decent chance of a double fit. I would make one final try with 3♠.

[y66]

Give me AT9xxx of spades and a short suit game try in clubs and I'll try it. Know that sounds ridiculous. But it expresses perfectly my judgment skills in these situations. :P

[neilkaz]

It's always nice to know, here in the SAYC & 2/1 forum what the pair's methods are. Are you playing constructive raises ? Are you playing forcing NT (you could possibly have only 3♦ if playing FNT. These questions don't seem terrible relevent to this problem but sometimes they are, and I think that if playing constructive raises (not my preferred method but so what) I'd certainly make a game try after an immediate 2♠ but here I just pass.

 

Anyhow..not knowing what your agreements are, I wimp out and pass as I assumed responder has only 2♠ or that he has a bare flat min if he has 3♠.

 

I fear that he has wastage in ♣ here, noting that the opps have stayed out of the auction. If you could make a short suit ♣ game try I would think that may be OK.

 

However, sometimes PD will accept game and trumps will split 4-1 and the side with 4 has the missing honors and you go for a number. Othertimes the game try results in -1 whether accepted or not.

 

I'll wimp out and pass.

[skjaeran]

I'm a passer.

 

There might be game on, but I think raising to 3♠ is losing IMPs in the long run - we end up going down more often than making game.

[JLOL]

This is not even close. I mean consider that Kx xxxx KQx xxxx is a terrible game, and then consider how good of a freaking hand that is for this auction.

[mikeh]

I agree with Justin... thinking about bidding is an overbid.

 

Is it possible to conjure up hands on which game may make? Yes. It almost always is possible to do that kind of thing. But that's only the tempting part of any analysis.

 

Even if you can come up with such a hand.. how do you invite partner to evaluate properly? I am willing to bet that if you conjure up suitable hands for partner, you will find that there will be many unsuitable hands on which he would also, correctly, accept your try.

 

And a huge number of hands on which he rejects your try and you fail... heck, it is easy to conjure up a large family of hands on which you are too high already.

 

xx Qxxx Jx KJxxx.. how do YOU bid as partner with this (not a minimum) holding? They lead a spade and how do you like your chances?

[the hog]

The hand has excellent playing strength, with a decent chance of a double fit. I would make one final try with 3♠.

Where is the double fit Nuno? Responder didn't raise ds and simpley bid 2S. Sounds like a misfit to me. I bet responder has a fistful of Cs and a doubleton S.

Pass.

[whereagles]

The hand has excellent playing strength, with a decent chance of a double fit. I would make one final try with 3♠.

Where is the double fit Nuno? Responder didn't raise ds and simpley bid 2S. Sounds like a misfit to me. I bet responder has a fistful of Cs and a doubleton S.

Pass.

Well, responder didn't bid 3♣ or 2♥ over 2♦, so he doesn't have a fistful of that. He should have something like 2434, 2443 or 2344. (Note that pard wouldn't pass with 4 diamonds if he has 2 spades and 8-9 hcp.)

 

Anyway, I can't really explain why I try for game. It's just a feeling.

[effervesce]

Pass.

[helene_t]

Modified LTC is 4.5 which makes it "obvious" to bid on, but

- p usually has only two spade so probably cannot ruff a diamond, this means one loser more.

- p made his 1NT response based on HCPs rather than mLTCs, so the fact that we have three aces increases his expected mLTCs.

 

So this is an example of when not to use mLTC. I like Justin's argument.

[Finch]

The hand has excellent playing strength, with a decent chance of a double fit. I would make one final try with 3♠.

Where is the double fit Nuno? Responder didn't raise ds and simpley bid 2S. Sounds like a misfit to me. I bet responder has a fistful of Cs and a doubleton S.

Pass.

Well, responder didn't bid 3♣ or 2♥ over 2♦, so he doesn't have a fistful of that. He should have something like 2434, 2443 or 2344. (Note that pard wouldn't pass with 4 diamonds if he has 2 spades and 8-9 hcp.)

 

Anyway, I can't really explain why I try for game. It's just a feeling.

We're not told how strong 2/1s we are playing, which affects partner's potential club length (what did he need to respond 2C?)

 

I agree that his expected spade length is a doubleton, but expecting 3+ diamonds is a little optimistic. What do you want him to do over 2D on a 2425, 1435 or minimum 2326 etc?

 

I pass 2S, and don't think it's close.

[whereagles]

I agree that his expected spade length is a doubleton, but expecting 3+ diamonds is a little optimistic. What do you want him to do over 2D on a 2425, 1435 or minimum 2326 etc?

I don't think 3-4 diamonds is that optimistic. In fact, I think it's quite realistic. Still, even if he has 2, maybe we can ruff somethng. Agree that the shapes you mentioned make game rather miserable. In fact, agree also that Justin's fitting hand doesn't make a good game and that's probably the best you can hope for.

 

But, as I said, my bidding on is just a feeling. I'm not claiming it to be right - you can't explain feelings anyway.

[straube]

I agree with Kenrexford. You should have rebid 2S. With a 6/4, you only rebid in your 4-card suit if you are hoping to have an extra chance to bid; in this way, you get to describe your pattern (so that partner can see if his cards are working) and you have the possibility of showing a 6-card suit which is worth more than a simple rebid but not worth a jump rebid. Btw, imo even with 6S and 4H your rebid should have been 2S based on the same reasoning.

[P_Marlowe]

Pass.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[whereagles]

I agree with Kenrexford. You should have rebid 2S. With a 6/4, you only rebid in your 4-card suit if you are hoping to have an extra chance to bid; in this way, you get to describe your pattern (so that partner can see if his cards are working) and you have the possibility of showing a 6-card suit which is worth more than a simple rebid but not worth a jump rebid. Btw, imo even with 6S and 4H your rebid should have been 2S based on the same reasoning.

This is the US style of bidding. Not so common in Europe, though, where you usually skip a side minor only if it's like xxxx or so (and a min).

 

There is a point to the US style, though.

[jdonn]

I agree with Kenrexford.  You should have rebid 2S.  With a 6/4, you only rebid in your 4-card suit if you are hoping to have an extra chance to bid; in this way, you get to describe your pattern (so that partner can see if his cards are working) and you have the possibility of showing a 6-card suit which is worth more than a simple rebid but not worth a jump rebid.  Btw, imo even with 6S and 4H your rebid should have been 2S based on the same reasoning.

This is the US style of bidding. Not so common in Europe, though, where you usually skip a side minor only if it's like xxxx or so (and a min).

 

There is a point to the US style, though.

I'm not so sure it's the US style, I would rebid 2♦ on this hand 100% of the time. With three aces it will play very very well if we have a diamond fit.

[JLOL]

It's probably still the normal style, but there has been a big shift in the past 10 years to people who (almost) always bid their second suit. That style seems much better to me.

[mtvesuvius]

It's probably still the normal style, but there has been a big shift in the past 10 years to people who (almost) always bid their second suit. That style seems much better to me.

I agree... There is only so much you can accomplish in these auctions and finding the 4-4 instead of the 6-2 seems kind of important, besides with 3♦ and 2♠ partner will bid 2♠ anyway. I pass, and this is not close.

[straube]

I agree with Kenrexford.  You should have rebid 2S.  With a 6/4, you only rebid in your 4-card suit if you are hoping to have an extra chance to bid; in this way, you get to describe your pattern (so that partner can see if his cards are working) and you have the possibility of showing a 6-card suit which is worth more than a simple rebid but not worth a jump rebid.  Btw, imo even with 6S and 4H your rebid should have been 2S based on the same reasoning.

This is the US style of bidding. Not so common in Europe, though, where you usually skip a side minor only if it's like xxxx or so (and a min).

 

There is a point to the US style, though.

I'm not so sure it's the US style, I would rebid 2♦ on this hand 100% of the time. With three aces it will play very very well if we have a diamond fit.

 

The method I suggested is geared toward getting to game. I think there are some hands that responder will raise spades...

1S-1N, 2S-3S

where he would only correct to 2S as in...

1S-1N, 2D-2S

for which opener would be pleased to accept game.

 

It's much harder for opener to make his own invitation after...

1S-1N, 2D-2S

because responder may have as few as 6 HCP and 1 spade.

 

The hand ATxxxx AT Axxx x is probably something like a 16 count if you did the Kaplans and Rubens evaluation or perhaps a 5 loser hand if you used Klinger's Modern Losing Trick Count method. It probably should accept game after

1S-1N, 2S-3S.

 

but the hand has endplayed itself after 1S-1N, 2D-2S.

[jdonn]

The method I suggested is geared toward getting to game.  I think there are some hands that responder will raise spades...

1S-1N, 2S-3S

where he would only correct to 2S as in...

1S-1N, 2D-2S

for which opener would be pleased to accept game.

I agree there are such hands, although not that many.

 

It's much harder for opener to make his own invitation after...

1S-1N, 2D-2S

because responder may have as few as 6 HCP and 1 spade.

Well what's the difference, I think it's pretty clear to pass with this hand where partner preferences back anyway. The odds of reaching a good game are much slimmer than the odds of getting too high.

 

Anyway, it seems to me that the possibility responder has a singleton spade is a good reason to bid 2♦ instead of 2♠. Hands where either responder can pass 2♦ and reach a better partscore or where he can raise diamonds but would have passed 2♠ and we reach a good game that way are far more common than the rare hand where responder has to preference back to 2♠ with a singleton.

 

The hand ATxxxx AT Axxx x is probably something like a 16 count if you did the Kaplans and Rubens evaluation or perhaps a 5 loser hand if you used Klinger's Modern Losing Trick Count method.  It probably should accept game after

1S-1N, 2S-3S.

 

but the hand has endplayed itself after 1S-1N, 2D-2S.

As stated above I think it's easy to pass on that auction. Anyway I think it's more important to find a many great diamond contracts that would be missed than to make bidding toward game in spades just a tiny bit more accurate.

 

I don't always rebid the second suit with 6-4, but I think it's clear on this hand due to the aces. With the same hand but KQT9xx of spades I would rebid 2♠, even though I know some people who would rebid 2♦ even then.