Hands from Friday at the Portland Sectional

[CSGibson]

Played in the Portland sectional today with a new but familiar partner, here were some decisions that we had to make along the way.

 

Hand 1:

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sqhakj984d3cjt832]133|100|Scoring: MP

1♥-(1♠)-X-(2♠),

?[/hv]

 

Edit: I mis-remembered the vulnerability and some of the spots on hand 1. I have changed the vul from unfavorable, but left the spots the same so that the comments make sense

 

Hand 2:

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sqhakj984d3cjt832]133|100|Scoring: MP

1♥-(1♠)-X-(2♠),

?[/hv]

 

Hand 3:

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sqhakj984d3cjt832]133|100|Scoring: MP

1♥-(1♠)-X-(2♠),

?[/hv]

 

Hand 4:

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sqhakj984d3cjt832]133|100|Scoring: MP

1♥-(1♠)-X-(2♠),

?[/hv]

 

And one from my partner

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sqhakj984d3cjt832]133|100|Scoring: MP

1♥-(1♠)-X-(2♠),

?[/hv]

[se12sam]

My attempt at answering:

 

1. 3♣. If partner acts again, we can hope to play 4♥ or 5♣. If he is minimum with scattered values, our side may have 4 losers in 4♥

2. Pass?

3. Dbl. The info of your 4-card heart suit (and some diamond length) may be useful to partner in competition

4. 2♠. Natural suit.

5. 3♥. If contract reaches 6♣, the strong hand will anyway declare.

[Gerben42]

Hand 1: 2NT good bad if you play that, otherwise Pass

 

Hand 2: The toughest one, I'd Pass and feel guilty about it.

 

Hand 3: Pass, insufficient length in ♣ for 3♣

 

Hand 4: 2♠, natural

 

Hand 5: 3NT. I will show my hand first.

[rogerclee]

1) 4♥, it's matchpoints and my hearts are fine opposite a singleton. Maybe we can't make a game but I'm never not bidding one, 4♥ seems as good a guess as any. There's some argument for 4♣; good problem.

2) 3♥, easily the best description.

3) 3♣, good agreement to have on this hand. The main point of this is to let partner save intelligently.

4) Double, then bid 2♠.

5) 4♣, let's tell partner that we're interested. I hope to bid keycard eventually, putting us in either 6NT or 7NT depending on what partner says.

[MFA]

1. 3♣. I surely want to get my clubs in and partner is still there if we should play game.

 

2. 3♥.

 

3. 3♣. Hopefully partner and I agreed that this is adequate for 3♣ - otherwise we should do so.

 

4. Double then 2♠. A direct 2♠ is too big an underbid for me.

 

5. 4♣. I expect to make a slam here, since partner's hand can hardly be worse than ♣KJxxxx and a card on the side.

[Free]

1. 3♣ WTP

2. 3♥ I just can't pass this

3. Pass WTP

4. 2♠ natural

5. 4♣ I guess

[655321]

1. 3♣. Would like to bid 4♣, but would feel uncomfortable when partner doubles 4♠.

2. 3♥.

3. 3♣.

4. 2♠. Yes, this is a heavy 2♠ bid, but it is not completely clear to me that double followed by 2♠ shows spades. I could see the auction taking some unpleasant turns.

5. 3NT. Perhaps I should raise clubs, but 3NT shows a balanced 23 count, and I have a balanced 23 count with a doubleton club.

[dicklont]

1. 3♣ we don't sell out yet, do we?

2. Pass, partner has a weak hand with maybe 2 (or 3) spades

3. Pass, obvious don't get silly

4. 2♠, natural

5. 4♣, being sensible includes a good lenght (6 or more) when the suit is headed by KJ

[mtvesuvius]

1. 3♣. Would like to bid 4♣, but would feel uncomfortable when partner doubles 4♠.

2. 3♥.

3. 3♣.

4. 2♠. Yes, this is a heavy 2♠ bid, but it is not completely clear to me that double followed by 2♠ shows spades. I could see the auction taking some unpleasant turns.

5. 3NT. Perhaps I should raise clubs, but 3NT shows a balanced 23 count, and I have a balanced 23 count with a doubleton club.

This was exactly what I was thinking... I agree 101%!! :P

[655321]

1.  3♣.  Would like to bid 4♣, but would feel uncomfortable when partner doubles 4♠.

2.  3♥.

3.  3♣.

4.  2♠.  Yes, this is a heavy 2♠ bid, but it is not completely clear to me that double followed by 2♠ shows spades.  I could see the auction taking some unpleasant turns.

5. 3NT.  Perhaps I should raise clubs, but 3NT shows a balanced 23 count, and I have a balanced 23 count with a doubleton club.

This was exactly what I was thinking... I agree 101%!! :P

LOL, I am not sure that I do. :o

 

The more I think about (5), the more easily I could be persuaded that 3NT is a bad bid and 4♣ is right.

 

If partner has KJxxx clubs and the Ace of spades slam is almost cold. Or Kxxxxx clubs and the ♠K. There do seem to be many hands where partner would pass 3NT but slam is good or cold. Not sure how many hands there are where slam is poor but we get there by raising clubs.

[skjaeran]

1. 3♣

2. pass

3. pass

4. 2♠

5. 4♣

[andy_h]

1) At first I thought 4♣, thinking 6-5 should compensate enough for it since if I bid 3♣ now and LHO bids 4♠, is partner able to judge well? But then again, we are unfavourable and don't seem to be the type to be sacrificing. I think I will bid 4♣ anyway as we're most typically at least 5-5 for this action and partner can x if he so wishes. He could have a singleton heart with declarer's diamond finesses wrong. 2nd choice is 3♣

 

2) Hmm MPs and we're favourable. Is partner the type to respond with <4 counts? He could easily just have a 7 count anyways, so 3♥ it is.

 

3) Length of 1♣ was not defined? If for whatever reason 1♣=4+♣ then I bid 3♣, if not this seems like a wtp pass. Nil vul at MP, don't see a reason to bid when partner can be 4333, right?

 

4) Ideally I want to X and then bid 2♠. What if in the offchance that LHO rebids 2♥ and partner bids 3m? Is 3♠ natural? I honestly don't have that agreement with my partnership. A direct 2♠ seems like an underbid, what about pass then 3♠? That could turn out bad as well, so I will bid 2♠.

 

5) Hmm matchpoints.. Quite a few hands will make slam I think so I will bid 4♣. But I do feel like bidding 3NT because it 'describes my hand' but if we do bid that, wouldn't partner also think 3♣ also 'described his hand' also? Anyway, I will be declaring clubs so that makes it look more attractive.

[rogerclee]

On the last hand bidding 3NT to "describe your hand" is completely backwards, partner has already made a slam try and we are staring at a fantastic hand for clubs, much better than most minimum balanced NT hands. I would bid 3NT on something like KQx AKJx AKJx Jx which is not very suitable for a club slam unless partner can go on. Here we have a monster (♥ trick source and ♣AQ), and even very minimum hands for 3♣ are likely cold for slam.

[jdonn]

1. 4♥

2. 3♥

3. 3♣

4. 2♠

5. 4♣

 

The most unbelievable to me is that anyone would pass on 2, that is really bad, it shows a lack of understanding of the auction imo. I think 1 was the hardest problem. And of course 3NT on the last one is silly, KJxxxx of clubs and out is slam.

[pretzalz]

On 5, don't most people play 3N as forcing[surely 4N is always safe on this auction]? I think 3N is normal and is the best preparation for the rest of the auction. 4C seems a distortion to me.

[bill1157]

thought somebody might pass #4, after all, pd is unlikely to have many points.

 

Bill

[CSGibson]

I'm going to post the results of the hands separately throughout the day. Some of the spot cards might have changed slightly, as I just got ahold of the hand records for the afternoon session.

 

Hand 1:

[hv=d=s&v=b&n=sa63hq42dkt96ck53&w=skjt42ht3dq87ca94&e=s9875h97daj543cq6&s=sqhakj865d2cjt872]399|300|Scoring: MP

1♥-(1♠)-X-(2♠),

4♣-(P)-4♠-(P),

5♣-(P)-6♥-All Pass[/hv]

 

I know my partner's negative X and subsequent bidding will draw some attention. He plays that a direct cue-bid raise suggests 4 card support. We didn't agree on it beforehand, but he reverted to the agreement anyway in the bidding. He also knew the opponents, and thought they'd be good for at least a trick in defense, so he stretched opposite my own overbid.

 

Lead was the Jack of spades, run to the Queen. Ace of hearts, heart to the queen, and a diamond pitch on the ace of spades followed. Now a spade ruff, followed by the jack of clubs, LHO popping ace, and returning the diamond queen to the king-ace-ruff. A small club to the king followed, making 6 for a 25 out of 25 top. All it took was a spade lead, a couple of finesses, a guess in the club suit, and a reprehensible defensive error, wonder why no one else was in it, lol.

[CSGibson]

Hand 2:

 

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=sqjhj642dat87cj42&w=s98765hq83dj93caq&e=s3ht75dkq542ct863&s=sakt42hak9d6ck975]399|300|Scoring: MP

1♠-1N (forcing),

2♣-2♠,

3♥-4♠[/hv]

 

I played this one down 2 on the bad spade break after a spade opening lead. 3N is the garden spot, because the 9 of diamonds is onside. This was worth 5.5 matchpoints out of a 17 top. (and perhaps the more interesting problem on the hand is what to do with partner's hand over 3 hearts).

[MFA]

thought somebody might pass #4, after all, pd is unlikely to have many points.

 

Bill

This is terribly backwards. We have a strong hand with a strong suit, so we act. We will often have a game here, which is why I think even 2♠ is too soft. But I'm not having those weird thoughts of partner misunderstanding my later spade bid(s). Of course they would be natural.

[CSGibson]

Hand 3:

 

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=skt76hk7da2cakjt2&w=sj9haqj2dqj84c763&e=saq85432ht86dk5cq&s=sh9543dt9763c9854]399|300|Scoring: MP

1♣-(1♠)-3♣-(X),

All pass[/hv]

 

Opponents had a bit of a bidding misunderstanding on this one. LHO thought they were playing responsive doubles at the 3 level, and RHO thought that they were only playing them through the 2 level (which was accurate on the convention card), making X penalty-oriented. They did not find optimum defense, so 3♣X was worth 570 and a 17 out of 17 top.

[CSGibson]

Hand 4:

 

[hv=d=w&v=b&n=s8hqt75d985c76532&w=s4hkj9862da6caqt8&e=sj9762hadjt742cj9&s=sakqt53h43dkq3ck4]399|300|Scoring: MP

(1♥)-P-(1♠)-2♠,

All Pass[/hv]

 

I bid 2 spades. RHO started out with Ace of diamonds, diamond, but even with the help there I was only able to scrounge together 7 tricks. -100 was still worth 11 of 17 matchpoints.

 

Incidentally, this would be a much better hand if I were slightly weaker, as there would be a better chance that partner has some sort of entry I could use.

[CSGibson]

Hand 5: (some of the spots have changed slightly upon recovery of the hand record)

 

[hv=d=e&v=n&n=sat3hakqjdk964caq&w=skj5h9762dt753cj8&e=s862h843dqj82c643&s=sq974ht5dackt9752]399|300|Scoring: MP

P-2♣,

3♣-4♣,

4♦-4♥,

5♣-5♦,

6♣-7♣

All Pass[/hv]

 

7N is cold on the lie of the cards, but 7♣ was still worth 25 on a 25 top. Partner assumed that because I make a slam try on a king high suit with only one outside control, that I probably had 6 clubs. The auction probably gets to 6N (which is where most people played it) if you rebid 3N, which is not an excellent contract on a diamond lead, but still comes home.

 

Overall a fun day playing bridge, we wound up with a 66% in the afternoon and a 61% in the evening in a mixed-strength field, and certainly enjoyed our share of gifts along the way.

[gwnn]

I don't understand partner's bidding on hand 5. Looks like he dragged you to the 7 level after hearing of the ♦ control. Why not bid 7♣ directly over 4♦ then?

[CSGibson]

I don't understand partner's bidding on hand 5. Looks like he dragged you to the 7 level after hearing of the ♦ control. Why not bid 7♣ directly over 4♦ then?

He wanted to figure out whether 7N or 7 clubs was a better contract, and to offer me a choice between the two, which he figured he did by going slowly. If I can show the king of spades, which I just barely have room for, 7N is our likely spot.

[jdonn]

On 5, don't most people play 3N as forcing[surely 4N is always safe on this auction]? I think 3N is normal and is the best preparation for the rest of the auction. 4C seems a distortion to me.

And if partner raises to 4NT what do you do? How do you agree clubs and either start cuebidding or ask for keycards? All you will know is partner has no second suit, he can still easily have xxx xx Ax KTxxxx, or more in spades and no ace of diamonds. So much easier to just take control when you know what way you are headed.