Thioughts on these please?

[NickRW]

[hv=d=w&v=n&w=sk9xxxhdkxcak98xx&e=sahajtxxxdjt9ctxx]266|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

FWIW, you're playing Swiss Acol style (5 card spades, hearts = 5 or 4/4 majors) wth a 14-16NT with T Walsh over 1C. The bidding went:

 

1♣ - P - 1♦* - 2♦** (1D = hearts, 2D = natural)

2♠ - P - 3♥ - P

3♠ - P - 4♥ - all Pass

 

What do you think of 3♥? Would you prefer 3♦ (4SF)?

 

What about 3♠ - it is the book bid with 6/5, but what about taking a stab at 3N?

 

What about 4♥ - hoping for too much?

 

For those who prefer to result, some extra hidden info:

 

 

Hearts broke 6-1 so 4H was in a bad way. 3N makes when the clubs break 2-2, and 5C will come in by the skin of its teeth when it is RHO that is the one short in hearts.

 

[aguahombre]

Turn it back to you. What do you think of a partner who wants to play the hand so much that he keeps bidding his supportless 6 card suit rather than ever mentioning that he has 3 card support for your 6 card suit? time to go shopping.

[NickRW]

Time to go shopping.

Well, I can hardly go shopping this time. P was my daughter and I only have one :rolleyes:

 

To be fair to her she's seen too many club players bully their way into 4M on a decent 6 card suit and fall on thier feet - though this wasn't the auction to try it on. I was more questioning the merit of 3♦ versus 3♥ on the second call - the former will find a 6-3 fit, but miss 6-2 when P has Kx or Ax in ♦ - which seems OK from an EV perspective.

 

Nick

[aguahombre]

T Walsh resp don't seem to matter here. Pretend responder bid 1H the fist time, and everything is the same. Then you showed your second suit (2S) over the interference. 3H showed six hearts, where 3d would have wasted a round of bidding for no particular reason. Your hand is not notrump oriented so you rebid spades to show five of them. Partner, now knowing you have six clubs and five spades can easily bid 4c. You end up in 5C, which seems to be a good contract. Might lose a diamond and a club. might lose a diamond and a spade.

[bill1157]

all bids are fine here, just a bit unlucky

 

Bill

[andy_h]

Assuming X of 2♦ would have been support double, then I would bid 3♦ as responder (assuming 3♣ by responder is not GF) because I have a fit for opener and a really good hand. That way it allows opener to bid 3♥ with 4216 having denied 3 hearts already. On the above auction, I would definitely bid 3♠ showing 6-5 because we could easily have a 5-3 spade fit. Wait, what kind of strength did 3♥ show? Do you play weak jump shifts? If not then I'd prefer passing 3♥. If 3♥ showed strength then I would want to search for a 5-3 spade fit and if that's lacking partner can still try 3NT at his last go.

 

I think 4♥ is the worst bid in the auction. East had more of a slam try in clubs and I don't understand why he still wants to insist on hearts when partner has shown 5-6 in the blacks AND has heart us announce 6 card hearts.

[aguahombre]

i assumed 3H was forcing because of the nature of the free 2S after the interference, making 2S very similar to a reverse although it isn't a traditional one.

[jdonn]

4♥ is absolutely awful. East got what people who refuse to support their partners in any circumstances usually get.

[MFA]

Yes, 4♥ is a fundamental error. Better to focus on that rather than a delicate decision between 3♥ and a cuebid (a decision she got right btw). So vital to learn that supporting partner is the most valueable bid in the bidding box.

[nigel_k]

These situations are a problem because 2♠ suggests reversing strength but you want to bid with 6-5 and the normal continuations after a reverse aren't available because the auction is higher.

 

I would bid 3♦ even if 3♥ is forcing because the hand is well suited to playing in other strains. Over 3♠ you can bid 4♣ and give partner a last chance to support hearts. Having chosen 3♥ instead of 3♦ East should probably just bid 5♣ over 3♠ unless certain that 4♣ is forcing.