Wrong Explanation

[Adobe BC]

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=s53hk7dqj9842ck52]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

Your partner opens 1N (15-17), and East bids 2♦, showing 1. the majors, or 2. hearts and a minor. (The bid was alerted and explained.) Of course, one option was explained, while East had the other. Are you more likely to bid 3N in one case than the other?

[hrothgar]

We rate to have enough points to make 3N so long as they can't cash 5 tricks before we take 9.

 

If RHO has Hearts and a minor then

 

1. I have a Heart stop

2. I have clubs stopped

3. I have Diamonds VERY well stopped

 

3N seems reasonable

 

If RHO has both majors, then I need partner to have a spade stopper. I'd still try for 3N, however, in this case I'd ask for a Spade stopper, planning to retreat into Diamonds if worst comes to worst

[PrinceNep]

We rate to have enough points to make 3N so long as they can't cash 5 tricks before we take 9.

 

If RHO has Hearts and a minor then

 

1.  I have a Heart stop

2.  I have clubs stopped

3.  I have Diamonds VERY well stopped

 

3N seems reasonable

 

If RHO has both majors, then I need partner to have a spade stopper.  I'd still try for 3N, however, in this case I'd ask for a Spade stopper, planning to retreat into Diamonds if worst comes to worst

I totally agree with you hroth.

 

I don't see why someone would choose "No Difference". To bid 3NT no matter what RHO is showing is not playing partnership bridge. Even though it is MPs and Non Vuln, RHO is still aloud to have AKQJx in Spades.

 

One hopes that you have agreements in place to handle these types of hands to determine if you belong in 3NT vs a minor suit.

 

If RHO has the majors, I'm going to bid to show a heart stopper and let partner make an intelligent decision

If RHO has hearts and a minor, I'm going to show a GF with diamonds on the way to 3NT.

 

You can decide that the hand is a GF, but I can't see how you can determine you are going to 3NT regardless of what RHO has.

[Coelacanth]

My Lebensohl agreement after an overcall of 1NT is that

 

2NT followed by 3NT after partner's 3♣ shows a raise to 3NT with the suits shown by the opponents stopped

 

3NT directly after the overcall shows a raise to 3NT lacking a stopper

 

Thus, if 2♦ shows both majors, I bid 3NT directly. If it shows hearts and a minor, I bid 2NT, planning to bid 3NT unless something unexpected happens.

 

I am bidding game, either 3NT or 5♦, regardless of the meaning of the 2♦ bid.

[PrinceNep]

My Lebensohl agreement after an overcall of 1NT is that

 

2NT followed by 3NT after partner's 3♣ shows a raise to 3NT with the suits shown by the opponents stopped

 

3NT directly after the overcall shows a raise to 3NT lacking a stopper

 

Thus, if 2♦ shows both majors, I bid 3NT directly. If it shows hearts and a minor, I bid 2NT, planning to bid 3NT unless something unexpected happens.

 

I am bidding game, either 3NT or 5♦, regardless of the meaning of the 2♦ bid.

How does partner know that you have a Heart Stopper on this hand if 2D showed the majors?

[Coelacanth]

My Lebensohl agreement after an overcall of 1NT is that

 

2NT followed by 3NT after partner's 3♣ shows a raise to 3NT with the suits shown by the opponents stopped

 

3NT directly after the overcall shows a raise to 3NT lacking a stopper

 

Thus, if 2♦ shows both majors, I bid 3NT directly. If it shows hearts and a minor, I bid 2NT, planning to bid 3NT unless something unexpected happens.

 

I am bidding game, either 3NT or 5♦, regardless of the meaning of the 2♦ bid.

How does partner know that you have a Heart Stopper on this hand if 2D showed the majors?

He doesn't; he just knows I don't have stoppers in both ♥ and ♠.

 

I'm not suggesting this is the best set of agreements; we just haven't discussed ways to ask- or show- stoppers over these two-suited overcalls. There are probably some meta-treatments that apply, but by bidding a direct 3NT I'm telling partner he needs cards in both majors. That's not so far from the truth; Kx is not a tremendous stopper if we need to give up the lead to set up the diamonds.

[PrinceNep]

With that logic, Kx Kx in the majors wouldn't be enough to get to 3NT either.

 

I can't say this hand is an overwhelmingly "you must get to 3NT", but I just don't understand driving there no matter what RHO is showing. That is all I'm saying.

 

If you don't have methods to show stoppers in this auction (understandably), then perhaps you should just show your diamonds as naturally as possible and leave it at that. If partner can bid 3NT by himself over that, all the better.

[CamHenry]

I've got enough values to force to game; if 2♦ showed hearts and a minor, I'm going for 3NT. If it shows both majors, I'm bidding 2♠, which should be(!) "do you have spades guarded?".

 

(Of course, I'm going through whatever Lebensohl sequence we've discussed).

[Coelacanth]

I can't say this hand is an overwhelmingly "you must get to 3NT", but I just don't understand driving there no matter what RHO is showing. That is all I'm saying.

Specific methods aside, all I'm saying is that as purely a hand-evaluation exercise, I have enough to drive to game. Whether that game is 3NT or 5♦ depends on partner's hand and what bidding tools we choose to use.

 

The point is simply that with this hand, and a two-suiter including hearts on my right, I have a game force regardless of what RHO's other suit is.

[Adobe BC]

My poll appears to have been a bust. I did not make the ruling in this case, but I agreed with it. East had the majors, which was apparently the agreement, but the explanation was "hearts and a minor". South claimed that he would have signed off in 3 diamonds, given the correct explanation. I find it hard to believe that the correct explanation changes a game-forcing hand into a signoff. NS play Lebensohl, but there was no agreement on what a direct 3N shows when the overcall shows two suits. North had a spade stopper, but the hearts were run, and then the AK of diamonds were cashed (North had cheated on his notrump), for down 3. The director made no adjustment.

 

So, given this information, would you adjust the score?

 

As an aside, given the correct information, I would think the proper strategy would be to bid 3 diamonds (forcing, I presume). North would bid 3 spades, showing the stopper he had, and South would bid 3N.

[wank]

i'd be more likely to bid 3nt if it showed hearts and a minor. however, if i had no way to enquire if partner had a spade stop over a call showing the majors i'd bid 3nt anyway, and even if i did have such a call available i presume the bidding would end up above 3D (4d?).

[Vampyr]

I've got enough values to force to game; if 2♦ showed hearts and a minor, I'm going for 3NT. If it shows both majors, I'm bidding 2♠, which should be(!) "do you have spades guarded?".

 

(Of course, I'm going through whatever Lebensohl sequence we've discussed).

I should have thought that the more common agreement, when the opponents have shown two suits, is to bid the one you have a stopper in, not the other way round.

[mrdct]

Playing lebensohl, I bid 3NT directly if it's majors and 3NT via 2NT if it's ♥ and a minor.

 

If I'm not playing lebensohl, I think I'll bid 3NT immediately as in both cases as I don't really want to be in 5♦ at matchpoints and I don't want to give the opps any clues as to what to lead.

[ggwhiz]

(North had cheated on his notrump)

 

Oops, I mis-read the correct vs incorrect explanation.

 

No adjustment though. It seems like a double shot to claim you would have stopped in a partscore with these cards after knowing the layout. Cheap and cheesy after fudging the opening bid.

 

The rest of the thread is a discussion of bidding methods which many or most have to decide between games. Not to bail in 3♦ after the hand has been played.