Heck of a call

[jillybean]

[hv=d=w&v=e&s=sj97653h53d4cq762]133|100|Scoring: MP

(1♠) 2♠ (P) ?[/hv]

[JavaBean]

Heck of a call indeed. But at these colors I make it too. Prepared to apologize if partner has clubs.

[jillybean]

Hmm West opened 1♠, your partner bid michaels 2♠ - your bid?

[matmat]

i suppose i should find out what p's minor is. so whatever that is for you systemically. if it's diamonds, correct to h and pray.

[TylerE]

I bid 2NT. Pass [3cl], correct 3♦ to 3♥. Playing a 7 card fit, I'd rather trumps be split.

[jjbrr]

3♣ p/c

[hrothgar]

We're white, they're red...

 

Pass has a certain very perverse appeal. They'll never double us in 2S and if partner has a weak hand, this could work out brilliantly.

 

Hell, even if partner has a strong hand with the reds, 2S - 5 could score better than 4HX - 2...

 

I suspect that I'd ask for partner's minor and try to escape in 3♥.

However, I can definitely see myself passing at the table (especially if I disliked the opposing pair)

[cherdanno]

Why will they never double us in 2S?

[TylerE]

Because they know it won't be sat for, and they might not be able to double us somewhere else?

 

At the club the other night I had the auction (3♦)-p-(3N)-AP

 

My partner (wisely IMO) sitting on top of the 3N bidder didn't double holding AKQJTxx of ♠... We calmly collected our 50 a trick for +150, instead of being -150 or -400 if we actually talk them back into playing ♦.

[matmat]

Why will they never double us in 2S?

because they'll assume we forgot system and will not want to wake us up :D

 

of course this backfires if p has 10 tricks in two suits in their hand.

[cherdanno]

So you think opponents are assuming we are an idiot for passing 2S?

From the LHO's point of view, if he thinks he will beat 2S then he should double. The hand is 100% to be a big misfit, and unless his RHO is a huge idiot other contracts will go down, too.

[mohitz]

I bid 2NT. Pass [3cl], correct 3♦ to 3♥. Playing a 7 card fit, I'd rather trumps be split.

Shouldn't this sequence invite game in hearts?

[Phil]

The problem with passing isn't that we expect LHO to be so dense to pass it. The problem with passing is that when LHO does x and partner sits, does partner have real support like Tx / Qx? I think partner should rightfully expect much better spades from us and assume we know what we are doing. Spades might play better than you think - we can ruff a few diamonds in hand and possibly endplay LHO out of a late trump winner as well. But its not my idea of an enjoyable Saturday afternoon.

 

I'll try 3♣, p/c. If partner has clubs, the bullet has missed us completely, and if partner bids the expected 3♦, then I can take a preference to hearts. This auction doesn't scream "DOUBLE ME" and they might not if hearts are a not unlikely 3-3, although I'm certainly getting a trump lead here.

 

By the way, in this style, a direct 3♦ is typically an invite in hearts.

[jillybean]

I bid 3♣ and wouldn't you know it, partner bid 3♦.

I played in 4♥, no fun.

[hrothgar]

So you think opponents are assuming we are an idiot for passing 2S?

In my experience, this is often a safe bet...

(The opponents assuming that I'm an idiot, that is)

[jillybean]

So you think opponents are assuming we are an idiot for passing 2S?

In my experience, this is often a safe bet...

(The opponents assuming that I'm an idiot, that is)

I considered passing, it would have worked for me I'm sure :D

[mikeh]

jb: the problem with your optimistic approach is that for many people the sequence 2N then 3♥ is used to show a better than than an immediate 3♥.

 

The idea is that 2♠ is so preemptive that advancer needs a way to distinguish between the 'let's play 3♥ and hope we aren't doubled' hands....like the one you held...and the 'let's play gane if you have a good 2♠ call'.

 

There are other ways to play, involving transfers, but those are not standard....certainly not standard in Vancouver where you play.

 

And, btw, if he holds clubs....well....maybe 3♥ will play well anyway.....and think if how many diamonds they can make in that case!

 

Sometimes it is hard to do the percentage action when we harbour a hope, no matter how unrealistic, that he may have the magic hand.

[Cascade]

Mike jb said she bid 3♣ pass or correct.

 

I don't think 3♣ then 3♥ should be construed as anything but a misfit.

[mikeh]

Mike jb said she bid 3♣ pass or correct.

 

I don't think 3♣ then 3♥ should be construed as anything but a misfit.

point taken, I had overlooked that relatively late clarification by jb.

 

I agree that 3♣ then 3♥ would bear a different meaning...but I am not at all clear that it should be 'to play'.

 

I think we can usefully start with the proposition that in any given situation....here the 2♠ bid...we should not use two different sequences to convey the same message.

 

Consider 2N and 3♣

 

3♣ will end the auction if partner has clubs...but will keep it alive otherwise. So we would want to bid 3♣ when we have a bad hand for clubs and hearts, and a preference for clubs...and a good hand for diamonds...if he corrects, we bid again.

 

2N otoh allows us to find clubs if he has them and then bid again. We also, of course, get to bid again if he has diamonds.

 

The fact that there is some considerable overlap here suggests that this scheme is not the most efficient, but it is the one we seem to have.

 

But the overlap is not complete..... with 2N we get to bid if we like either minor and we also get to invite in hearts.

 

With 3♣, we are stuck in clubs opposite a rounded-suit 2-suiter, but can move forward over 3♦.

 

This suggests that 3♣ then bidding again means we have a GOOD hand opposite a red 2 suiter......maybe something like xxx Ax Kxxxx xxx....let's play 3♣ opposite x KQxxx xx AQxxx and let's look for game opposite x KQxxx AQxxx xx...make the hearts KQJxx and the 5-2 fit is great.

 

probably too esoteric for the B/I forum, tho the idea that we never use two sequences, in any particular auction, to show the same hands is important at any level, and well known at the A/E level, I think.

 

And, yes, I know that bidding 2N intending to pass 3♣ and bid over 3♦, with my example hand, is another possible overlap....tho I would argue that 2N then hearts promises a better fit than Hx.

[TylerE]

Hands like this make me unhappy with the standard 2 suiter calls.

 

With bid_em_up I play:

 

2M: 2 highest unbid (e.g. ♥ and ♦ here)

2N: 2 lowest unbid (minors over 1M, ♥+unbid minor over 1m)

3♣: Lowest unbid minor + the higher unbid major.

 

So over 1♠, 2♠ is ♥+♦, 2N is ♣+♦, and 3♣ is ♣+♥.

 

Sure, you give the weak 3♣ bid (Which I rarely miss) and it's often very helpful to know both suits immediately, since when appropriate you can immediatly boost the preempt. Also very help for hand evaluation, not usual to have an invite (or even direct signoff in 2/3M) vs one minor, and a GF oppoiste the other.

[hanp]

The problem with passing isn't that we expect LHO to be so dense to pass it.

Why would it be dense to pass when we have just a normal opening bid? Partner passed and RHO made a guesspass with an unlimited partner. Unless we have serious extras or strong spades, we probably can't be sure we are beating 2S.

 

It seems rather dense to double 2S when we have no reason to think that the opponents are in their best contract, and also no reason to think we are beating 2S.

[cherdanno]

I believe it is standard that 2N asks for partner's minor and shows game interest, while 3♣ is pass/correct and denies game interest. In particular, bidding 3♣ and 3♥ over 3♦ just shows a hand with longer clubs than hearts than diamonds.

[pooltuna]

[hv=d=w&v=e&s=sj97653h53d4cq762]133|100|Scoring: MP

(1♠) 2♠ (P) ?[/hv]

I would start with 2NT(presummably asks for partner's minor) and over 3♦ try 3♥

[cherdanno]

I think we are MORE likely to get doubled if we pass 2S than if we bid 3C. The odds seem pretty good that LHO has good spades, and extras. With that he should be able to double 2S, over which his partner may help doubling our runouts, whereas he might not be able to act over a directly 3♣.

[Phil]

The problem with passing isn't that we expect LHO to be so dense to pass it.

Why would it be dense to pass when we have just a normal opening bid? Partner passed and RHO made a guesspass with an unlimited partner. Unless we have serious extras or strong spades, we probably can't be sure we are beating 2S.

 

It seems rather dense to double 2S when we have no reason to think that the opponents are in their best contract, and also no reason to think we are beating 2S.

Well, pick a side.

 

What exactly is wrong with doubling 2♠ even if it is their best spot, if we can beat it LOL? Do we love our RHO so much as to say, 'wow great judgment for sitting for 2♠ with J-6th, I won't x you'. I don't think AKQTx + a card is really an unusual layout here and it certainly isn't 'serious extras'.

 

Or are you concerned by doubling that the opponents can run to a better spot, that partner can't double after the opponents wriggle out (assuming they can even find their 'best spot')? Obviously if we run with the 6214 hand, then that's a sign of weakness, and we are getting doubled (except maybe in 3♣. Even if the Michaels bidder has extras (assuming the 1♠ opener doesn't) why shouldn't that hand sit for 2♠ x'd?