gwnn Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 imps, nobody vulnerable QJTT8xxKJxxxx opp KxxKQ9xxAQAxx p-p-1♥-2♣2♥-p-3NT-end please ATB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 100% to North and 90% to South. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 100% to North and 90% to South. seems equitable enough. North should have converted to 4♥ because he knows they have a 9 card fit. South should only bid 3NT if there is a reasonable possibility the partnership assets will exceed 27 HCP making 3NT a better place to play than an 8 card fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 Simple souls --1-2-4. I am not genius enough to try for all the matchpoints in a team game. But if I had different clubs, I might bid 3NT. Hence, first mistake gets the bulk of the blame. that would be South. He gave North a choice, so he also gets 1/2 the blame for North not pulling --plus for the bid of 3NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 South is a lunatic, IMO. If he really wants to, South has an easy call to include 3NT into the picture, IMO. He bids 3♣. That said, why F around? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 100% to North and 90% to South. seems equitable enough. North should have converted to 4♥ because he knows they have a 9 card fit. South should only bid 3NT if there is a reasonable possibility the partnership assets will exceed 27 HCP making 3NT a better place to play than an 8 card fit. Uh? I have seen many 9 card M suit fits play well in 3NT where 4M goes down.27HCP? Really? Personally, I would have bid 2NT with the sth hand, but 3NT is not a disaster. Pass with the NTh hand is not unreasonable. 3NT is not an unreasonable contract, and i should point out that on a C lead you may well lose 1C, 1S and 2H in 4H if the H do not play well. I don't see much blame to be laid anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 100% to North and 90% to South. seems equitable enough. North should have converted to 4♥ because he knows they have a 9 card fit. South should only bid 3NT if there is a reasonable possibility the partnership assets will exceed 27 HCP making 3NT a better place to play than an 8 card fit. Uh? I have seen many 9 card M suit fits play well in 3NT where 4M goes down.27HCP? Really? Personally, I would have bid 2NT with the sth hand, but 3NT is not a disaster. Pass with the NTh hand is not unreasonable. 3NT is not an unreasonable contract, and i should point out that on a C lead you may well lose 1C, 1S and 2H in 4H if the H do not play well. I don't see much blame to be laid anywhere. If you want guarantees see Lloyd's of London nevertheless you will have to produce more than "I've seen 4♥ go down with a 9 card fit while 3NT makes" and you left the key word out and that is "EXCEED" as in greater than and NOT equal to 27 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 "and you left the key word out and that is "EXCEED" as in greater than and NOT equal to 27" wtf? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 3NT is not an unreasonable contract, and i should point out that on a C lead you may well lose 1C, 1S and 2H in 4H if the H do not play well. I don't see much blame to be laid anywhere.Really? 3NT goes down, 4H might go down. If we choose 0 % over something more than zero percent --our teammates might have a different opinion about whether there is blame involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdanno Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 South 100%, North 0%. Given South's hand, 3NT has no chance unless partner has a club stopper, or specifically ♥A and another trick (♠A or ♦Kxx). You bid 3NT because you think you can get 9 tricks before they can get 5, not because you have 18 hcp balanced.North's hand does look notrumpy to me, if partner suggests it so strongly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 3NT is not an unreasonable contract, and i should point out that on a C lead you may well lose 1C, 1S and 2H in 4H if the H do not play well. I don't see much blame to be laid anywhere.Really? 3NT goes down, 4H might go down. If we choose 0 % over something more than zero percent --our teammates might have a different opinion about whether there is blame involved. Yes, if you get a C lead. Also place the honour cards a little differently in the Nth hand and 3NT may well make when 4H goes down. All I am saying is that the bidding is not as bad as some, particularly our fishy friend, suggest. My comment was more a reflection on the dogmatism of that poster. His post strongly suggested that all 5-4 fits should play in 4M, and that is an absurd proposition, of course. Also, where his(?) comment of 27HCP comes from and how this is relevant to this discussion is beyond me. I admit that this probably would not have happened to me, as I play Bergen raises and therefore would not have bid 2H on the Nth hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 3N is horrible with Axx of clubs. As ken said, the way to investigate 3N here is to bid 3C. Passing with 4 hearts and 2 small clubs is equally horrible. I guess that makes it 50/50... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 if you get a club lead? overcaller had all 8 of the remaining clubs, i guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 Why is passing 3 NT horrible? I would consider it as normal. I have a boring 3442 and my partner announced good stoppers in club.No way to run to 4 heart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 100% to South. North trusts his partner, a fine policy (except maybe when you're partnered with this South). South should either have clubs double stopped, or should have enough control everywhere else that he expects 8 tricks outside clubs before giving up the lead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 Hi, North knowes, that the partnership has a 9 card trump fit,he should bid 4H.I am neutral with regards to 3NT. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 imps, nobody vulnerable QJTT8xxKJxxxx opp KxxKQ9xxAQAxx p-p-1♥-2♣2♥-p-3NT-end please ATB. close to 50-50 dislike 2hdislike 3nt moredislike pass of 3nt a bit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 100% to South. North trusts his partner, a fine policy (except maybe when you're partnered with this South). South should either have clubs double stopped, or should have enough control everywhere else that he expects 8 tricks outside clubs before giving up the lead. Why does partner having clubs double stopped mean you should play 3N? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 100% to South. North trusts his partner, a fine policy (except maybe when you're partnered with this South). South should either have clubs double stopped, or should have enough control everywhere else that he expects 8 tricks outside clubs before giving up the lead. Why does partner having clubs double stopped mean you should play 3N? Because you have a balanced hand with your share on quacks too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rd6789 Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 I would think if S bids 3NT this is showing a hand which is confident of taking 9 tricks after hearing partner's support of H but less confident of taking 10 - maybe Ax,xxx,AKxxxx,AK I would pass as N trusting S to have this hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted November 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 I was South and a bit after I went for -150 (lucky!! -100 would have been worse cos then its a game swing) I had about the same thoughts, 3♣ would have been better and 3NT was terrible but partner should have removed it. I wasn't sure how strong each factor was. Thanks everyone. And sorry partner for being a genius (it's easy to apologize when I know he's not readin). Anyway we got -3 imps from every table ('Cavendish') so that was quite tough too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 I would think if S bids 3NT this is showing a hand which is confident of taking 9 tricks after hearing partner's support of H but less confident of taking 10 - maybe Ax,xxx,AKxxxx,AK I would pass as N trusting S to have this hand. I think you have some hearts mixed in with your diamonds. :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachy Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 South 100%, North another 80% .If South wants to investigate 3NT on the basis that 2H only promises 3-card support, fine - investigate but don't count on Axx being a double stopper LOL. If North wants to leave 3NT in, fine - just don't have have 4-card support and xx in their suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 South 100%, North another 80% .If South wants to investigate 3NT on the basis that 2H only promises 3-card support, fine - investigate but don't count on Axx being a double stopper LOL. If North wants to leave 3NT in, fine - just don't have have 4-card support and xx in their suit. nice one, peachy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfay Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 3NT is not an unreasonable contract, and i should point out that on a C lead you may well lose 1C, 1S and 2H in 4H if the H do not play well. I don't see much blame to be laid anywhere.Really? 3NT goes down, 4H might go down. If we choose 0 % over something more than zero percent --our teammates might have a different opinion about whether there is blame involved. LOL! Yes this is very well said :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.