3NT over preempt by passed hand

[helene_t]

pass-(3♦)-pass-(pass)

3NT!

[Phil]

It isn't a 3 suited TO - that hand doubles. And it isn't 'to play'.

 

I'm inclined to say 'clubs and a major'.

[ArtK78]

Having two places to play is all well and good, but why does the major have to be at the 4 level?

 

I voted does not exist. If you do have two places to play, just bid the major at the 3 level. The auction does not have to end there.

 

After all, this is a hand that could not even open the bidding. Forcing the bidding to the 4 level is too big of a position to take.

 

It might make some more sense if the auction was (P) - P - (3♦) - P/ (P) - ?, as partner could have a good hand without an action and the preempter's partner was a passed hand. Here, though, the preempter's partner is not a passed hand and could have a good hand. That makes it more dangerous to force the auction to the 4 level on a two suited hand not good enough to open the bidding.

[JLOGIC]

If my partner bid this I'd definitely take it as clubs and a major. I think it should be able to exist, what else can you do with like 5-7?

[manudude03]

I was watching when this auction came up. My guess is that it should show clubs and a major (like 6-4). I try to avoid balancing overcalls into a new suit at 3 level on a 4 card suit.

[whereagles]

how about a bal 11??

[jamegumb]

Seems dangerous for 5-5. Maybe some weak 6-6?

 

♠JTxxxx

♥x

♦

♣JTxxxx

[Free]

DNE for me. The only possibility for me is some 2-suiter, but we would've opened that already in 1st seat...

[Vampyr]

"I have a diamond stopper. Do you happen to have 8 top tricks?"

[hanp]

Clubs and a major but not 4-6, needs to be more shapely than that. None of the options say this.

[WellSpyder]

I've had a similar auction against me from a strong pair. The bidder had a 6-6 with good playing strength and felt the hand would be hard to show if he opened the bidding. Seemed a sensible meaning to me, but his partner was not on the same wavelength.....

[Free]

I've had a similar auction against me from a strong pair.  The bidder had a 6-6 with good playing strength and felt the hand would be hard to show if he opened the bidding.  Seemed a sensible meaning to me, but his partner was not on the same wavelength.....

A while ago there was a 6-6 or 7-6 hand where pretty much everyone passed, even people with 2-suited openings available (because the playing strength was too much for a weak single/two suited 2M but the hand was too weak for 1M). I guess we could use it for such hands actually...

[aguahombre]

"I have a diamond stopper. Do you happen to have 8 top tricks?"

Yep.

[gwnn]

I would take it as 55 (obviously it will usually be more than 10 cards) in hearts and clubs of course it could bid 3♥ so I shouldn't really take it as 55 but I still would.

 

Morale: don't bid 3NT as a passed hand if you're playing with me. Not even if you have hearts and clubs, maybe I'll change my mind.

[MFA]

Maybe the 2-suited interpretation with clubs and some (or any) major is good and logical, but absent partnership discussion I (or "we" rather) don't invent such things at the table. Never. By default 3N is natural if it is at all possible.

 

And it is possible here. There must be a club suit and hope to make 9 tricks opposite partner's likely weak NT type. Ax, xx, Tx, AJxxxxx. For instance. No diamond stopper seems more likely than not. Or perhaps there are only 6 clubs. Why bid 4♣ if we can bid 3N instead.

[helene_t]

I thought p would probably take it as either 4M6♣ or as clubs with a diamond stopper. I had 4♥6♣ and ♦Kx so I thought it would be ok in no matter how p took it.

[hanp]

Pretty aggressive Helene, especially with ♦Kx in front of preemptor.

[gnasher]

There must be a club suit and hope to make 9 tricks opposite partner's likely weak NT type. Ax, xx, Tx, AJxxxxx.

Isn't that example an opening bid? I think that would apply to any hand that is worth 3NT opposite a weak notrump.

[whereagles]

well, how about

 

Ax

xxx

Kxx

AT9xx

 

or

 

Axx

KQx

Qxxx

xxx

[hanp]

Yeah those are good passes, agree with wereagles.

[gnasher]

Yes, that first one is eight losers, so you can't possibly open it.

[helene_t]

LOL, you need to read Arend's signature, Andy.

[ggwhiz]

I once opened 1♣ in first chair with a 2-count cause I was counting my cards instead of my points.

 

This looks like a reverse style of brain cramp. My pard once opened 1nt on a 23-count by accident and when I bid game, she bid slam.

[JLOGIC]

Yes, that first one is eight losers, so you can't possibly open it.

Even if you didn't open it why would you balance with 3N? Especially with the 2nd hand. Those just seem like retarded 3N bids.

[JLOGIC]

Maybe the 2-suited interpretation with clubs and some (or any) major is good and logical, but absent partnership discussion I (or "we" rather) don't invent such things at the table. Never. By default 3N is natural if it is at all possible.

I don't think its inventing that if you bid NT as a passed hand it's takeout not natural. I would expect every expert partner to know p 2H p p 2N is minors, and I would think that p 3H p p 3N as minors also is a pretty logical extension.