Bid one more?

[lexlogan]

Club matchpoint game, neither vulnerable. You deal (as South) and open

2H with this collection:

Qxx KJxxxx K10xx (void) The auction proceeds: 2H (3S) 4H

(4S) .Thoughts?

[Quantumcat]

If you thought your hand was worth 2♥ to start with, stick with it. Maybe you should have started with 3♥.

[the hog]

Thoughts? I hope partner doesn't lead a S.

[effervesce]

X, 'partner don't lead a heart'.

[karlson]

Some people play that x here says "I want to bid one more unless you think we're beating this" but even playing that I wouldn't use it. I could easily see us beating this oposite a pretty normal hand from partner.

 

Obviously lightner double would be great if you play that.

[Cascade]

X, 'partner don't lead a heart'.

Is that encouraging partner to lead the spade that Ron doesn't want ;)

[pooltuna]

Club matchpoint game, neither vulnerable. You deal (as South) and open

2H with this collection:

Qxx KJxxxx K10xx (void) The auction proceeds: 2H (3S) 4H

(4S) .Thoughts?

I answered this already on RGB and the answer is the same. When I bid 2♥ I made partner captain and all decisions are now his to make.

[andrei]

I will bid one more ....

 

I think there are too many layouts which allows 4♠ to make, against any lead ...

[neilkaz]

Pass for me. I bid my hand allready ! I also have decent defence vs 4♠. Even if playing some sort of Lightner-type double here, I am afraid to double since I just might be ruffing with a trump trick I may get anyhow (assuming PD leads ♣) and the opp might be making anyhow.

[babushkka]

5♣ telling partner to lead clubs. But you should only bid this unless you are 100% sure that is what partner will take it as. If your partner misunderstands you there is no telling what might happen... :D :lol:

[Cascade]

Club matchpoint game, neither vulnerable. You deal (as South) and open

2H with this collection:

Qxx KJxxxx K10xx (void)  The auction proceeds: 2H (3S) 4H

(4S) .Thoughts?

I answered this already on RGB and the answer is the same. When I bid 2♥ I made partner captain and all decisions are now his to make.

This seems a very simplistic approach for a bid that is typically wide-ranging. 2♥ is normally 6-10 or some similar range. That can include reasonably balanced distributions like 6-3-2-2 or more distributional hands like the 6-4-3-0 in this thread or perhaps something even more distributional.

 

Yes I know it is the standard advice and maybe it is applicable if you restrict your weak twos to two of the top three honours and no side aces and no side voids and no side four-card majors. But I don't think that is the current style for most players.

[rd6789]

Pass for me. I bid my hand allready !

Yep, that sums it up

[lexlogan]

Aftermath: I was North. Partner, judging I must have some preparedness for 4S

despite my obvious shortage, bid 5C for the lead. The full hand:

 

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sha10xxdaxxxcq10xxx&w=saj10xxxxhqxdxckjx&e=skxxhxdqjxxca9xxx&s=sqxxhkjxxxxdk10xxc]399|300|Scoring: matchpoints[/hv]

 

2H-(3S)-4H-(4S)

5C*-(Dbl)-P (P) *misexplained by me as a side 5-card suit

5H-(P) -P -(5S)

Dbl* (all pass) *asked and explained as penalty

 

Assuming partner had a diamond void, I led the Ace. When dummy hit

with 5 clubs, I assumed there weren't 15 in the deck, switched to a

high club spot, partner ruffed and returned a heart, second club ruff

for +300. A club lead initially beats 5S 3 tricks for +500, while we

can make at least +450 in hearts.

 

I'm surprised at the number who would've passed initially or opened

something else with partner's hand; lacking Aces I wouldn't consider a

1H opening, the suit quality is adequate fro 2H but inadequate for

anything more. Basically, we believe in opening 2 with a fair six-card

suit, 8-10 hcp and less than 2.5 quick tricks. We had explicitly

discussed opening 6-5 hands that way (a method I've seen advocated by

various experts) which is why I assumed that's what partner's 5C bid

showed (probably headed by the A or AK since I assumed it was also

lead directing.)

 

I might've passed over 4S with partner's hand if I didn't think too

deeply or as a matter of discipline, in which case 4S makes unless I

divine to lead a club at trick one or two. So it's a double-game swing

hand, and 5C is clearly the winning call.

 

As a matter of theory the suggestion that a raise to 4 of a suit below

their major is intended as cooperative seems possibly more useful than

the blanket assumption "partner knows what he wants to do over 4S." In

fact I didn't; I felt like 4H might make and 4S might go down, so

passing seemed wrong, but I was not prepared to double 4S or commit

our side to 5H. (I've lectured partner repeatedly about not chasing

them into a game we don't want to defend against, so he could

reasonably assume I had some defense to 4S.)

 

And now for the real story:

 

When partner bid 5C, West, a Gold Life Master who thinks anyone who

plays a different system or makes a bid she wouldn't make is being

underhanded or unethical, asked about partner's 5C and made few

negative comments along with her double. When partner doubled 5S she

announced "There's going to be a director call about this. I don't

like this. This happens all the time and I don't like this." I

suggested as politely as I was able that she call the director

immediately. The director listened, looked at partner's hand and made

no particular comment. Afterwards, of course, West kept bitching. It

took at least two director calls by me ("west is interfering with my

enjoyment of the game") before everyone was ordered to cease

discussion of the hand.

 

There was no break in tempo beyond the normal pause over West's jump

( a pause I strive for over every jump, whether or not I have anything

to consider), and no accusation that partner acted with unauthorized

information. The sole basis of West's complaint was that "In Standard

American, when you open a weak two you don't bid again." At some point

she actually tossed out the word "unethical." Of course partner's

bidding might be undisciplined and/or unwise, but not unethical.

 

The director took notes and, in a whisper to me, said she had reported

West before for such behavior.

[skjaeran]

If he had reported her for such behaviour before, it was time to come down on her with some heavy DP IMO.

[gordontd]

This seems a very simplistic approach for a bid that is typically wide-ranging.  2♥ is normally 6-10 or some similar range.  That can include reasonably balanced distributions like 6-3-2-2 or more distributional hands like the 6-4-3-0 in this thread or perhaps something even more distributional.

Partner's range (and aims in bidding 4♥ ) are even more wide-ranging. Partner knows what I have better than I know what partner has. Perhaps I should have opened 3♥ if I'm not content to pass now?

[neilkaz]

If he had reported her for such behaviour before, it was time to come down on her with some heavy DP IMO.

I hope West leaves the club some night and finds her tires slashed.

[Fluffy]

Bit late on this, 6430 I normally open at the 3 level, but the heart quality is just so poor, so 2 hearts is right.

 

But when partner supports the heart quality isn't an issue anymore and maybe I have the rights to bid one more.

 

The fact that opponents support spades where I ahve 3 cards makes it even more appealing to bid once again.

 

 

So never say never :(.

[lexlogan]

This seems a very simplistic approach for a bid that is typically wide-ranging.  2♥ is normally 6-10 or some similar range.  That can include reasonably balanced distributions like 6-3-2-2 or more distributional hands like the 6-4-3-0 in this thread or perhaps something even more distributional.

Partner's range (and aims in bidding 4♥ ) are even more wide-ranging. Partner knows what I have better than I know what partner has. Perhaps I should have opened 3♥ if I'm not content to pass now?

I think the fact we had agreed that certain types of hands (the 6-5 I was expecting) can open 2♥ and bid again allows opener some license in our partnership. I don't think 1♥, 3♥ or 4♥ are good descriptions of opener's hand; as Fluffy says, the suit quality was adequate for 2♥ but not necessarily anything higher. Once I competed to the 4 level partner's hand increased in playing strength, and the opp's bidding and raising spades made it easy to visualize a singleton or void in my hand.

 

I have no idea whether I would've bid again with partner's hand but, in the future, I'm sure I would. We've now agreed to treat a raise to 4 below the opp's major as a cooperative rather than unilateral bid.

[Winstonm]

Didn't anyone else notice the bidding? West JUMPED to 3S (!) holding:

♠ AJ10xxxx

♥ Qx

♦ x

♣ KJx

 

and then has the audacity to complain about opponents' bidding?

[babushkka]

So yeah, I happened to be sitting at the next table over while all of this occurred. So as far as I can tell, west thinks you all playing precision is unethical? Thus ends up complaining about all of your bids?

 

It might be fun to make some absurd psyche against her sometime if I feel like it. But yeah, her behavior was way out of line, especially since she kept complaining after the game.

 

The most remarkable thing about her whole outburst was that she finished second place, and by a good margin. So it wasn't like she had a bad game, or that board decided if she finished 1st or 2nd. Attitudes like hers holds bridge back a lot. Next time know the club is on your side on this matter, and don't respond to her.

[Quantumcat]

Bidding again once you've pre-empted, assuming you're not a complete beginner, is like saying "stuff you partner, your judgement's awful, I bet I know what you've got and that you should have bid 5♥. Since you aren't capable of bidding your own hand, I guess I'm going to have to do it for you". Which is fine for a professional playing with a 99 year old altzheimer's patient who is being paid to look after them, but not for a partnership of two actual players. The partner should take it as a grave insult.

[Cascade]

Bidding again once you've pre-empted, assuming you're not a complete beginner, is like saying "stuff you partner, your judgement's awful, I bet I know what you've got and that you should have bid 5♥. Since you aren't capable of bidding your own hand, I guess I'm going to have to do it for you". Which is fine for a professional playing with a 99 year old altzheimer's patient who is being paid to look after them, but not for a partnership of two actual players. The partner should take it as a grave insult.

Again while this is standard advice and it may well be good or even great advice to players that are new to the game I don't think it can be applied blindly to every hand.

 

This is especially so if your weak twos are wide-ranging in terms of high-card strength and side distribution.

[cherdanno]

Bidding again once you've pre-empted, assuming you're not a complete beginner, is like saying "stuff you partner, your judgement's awful, I bet I know what you've got and that you should have bid 5♥. Since you aren't capable of bidding your own hand, I guess I'm going to have to do it for you". Which is fine for a professional playing with a 99 year old altzheimer's patient who is being paid to look after them, but not for a partnership of two actual players. The partner should take it as a grave insult.

This is the kind of comment that makes BBF so tiring to read. Yeah, this is your opinion. I don't even have anything against it. But to just repeat your opinion, completely ignoring the well-argued points against it (see Fluffy's post above), is a complete waste of a post.

[Phil]

Which is fine for a professional playing with a 99 year old altzheimer's patient who is being paid to look after them, but not for a partnership of two actual players.

Now, now. My clients aren't 99. The oldest is only 85 and she's sharp as a tack.

 

By the way, if you aren't playing a double here as, I really, really want to bid 5♥, there is a mild amount of latitude given to a preemptor to take another call.

 

This business about "if you are thinking about taking another cal, you should have bid 3♥" isn't ironclad. We are allowed to listen to the auction and see how it has affected our hand.