Bidding problem after 1NT

[TheoKole]

Matchpoints White versus Red

BBO tournament

 

Pickup partner who has shown good playing ability, but no real agreements other than sayc full.

 

You are on the last board, and are in contention to win the tournament. approx, 70% average.

 

Partner opens 1 NT in first seat, and second hand opponent passes,

 

you hold,

 

♠ 832

♥AQ42

♦ -

♣Q108652

 

What is your bid and what are you planning to rebid?

 

Thanks a lot,

 

Theo

[hanp]

If I was confident that partner would take 2C as Stayman then I would risk it.

[Free]

If I was confident that partner would take 2C as Stayman then I would risk it.

Scary!

[mcphee]

The issue here is basically if you are going to treat the and as GF or not. Some days hands like this even produce a slam in C or H. If we bid stayman we might get lucky hearing partner respond 2H and then you have to elect to bid game or invite, either of course can be a wrong choice.

 

Playing in a pairs event makes this even more of a problem for me. At imps you just push for game and hope for the best. Some folks might even try for a S contract at pairs should partner no be as co-operative with the stayman response as we hoped.

 

I feel you just have to guess here and hope you guess right. AFter all some days partner is going to hold some wasted D values (this usually happens to me) and anything you do can work out badly for you.

 

At pairs this hand is going to be all over the place. So my choice would be stayman and invite in H if that takes place, and pass 2S if that happens. If they respond 2D I will be most unhappy but will be forced to bid 2N invite.

[hanp]

I'd gameforce. It gives us the best chance of landing in the right strain, which could be clubs, hearts, spades or notrump. I think that if we have an good auction and get to the best game, we'll often make it.

 

Now, I don't usually play bridge on BBO with people that I don't know, so I cannot judge if it is possible to have a good auction with this partner. Frankly I don't find that part of the question very interesting.

 

McPhee, would you really consider inviting when partner responds with 2H? Wow. Maybe my forcing to game is too much, but I would definitely bid 4H if partner responds 2H and I don't think that it is close.

 

This would be a good hand to play transfers after Stayman, you could elect to play 3C if partner does not have hearts.

[TheoKole]

Thank you Bob,

 

A lot of what you said was the way I was thinking also,

 

The hand is also a bit psychological because I am trying to guess what others will do with the hand, (I am trying to make the same bidding as most of the field and to score above average on the hand); my plan was to bid Stayman, and pass an answer of 2 ♠, raise to 3 an answer of 2 ♥.

 

My real problem would be if my partner answered 2 ♦,

 

I either have to stretch the hand and force with 3 ♣ or invite 2 NT with a void, and of course I have to think about this before I make my first bid.

 

I still don't know what I would have done for sure, but I think I would have bid 3 ♣ with the intention of closing the bidding at 5 ♣.

 

I don't know about the rest of you but unless I have a method to tell partner of my void or shortness and have him bid NT as if to say no problem, I just can't do it.

 

At least 5 ♣ should have some play where 3 NT could be down right away.

 

Thanks for the suggestions,

 

Theo

[rhm]

 

I still don't know what I would have done for sure, but I think I would have bid 3 ♣ with the intention of closing the bidding at 5 ♣.

 

I don't know about the rest of you but unless I have a method to tell partner of my void or shortness and have him bid NT as if to say no problem, I just can't do it.

 

At least 5 ♣ should have some play where 3 NT could be down right away.

 

Thanks for the suggestions,

 

Theo

If the bidding starts

 

1NT--2♣

2♦ -- 3♣

 

The auction is game forcing.

 

Why can't opener now not bid 3♦, with length and strength there?

Opener has the inference that responder likely got a 4 card major and at least a 5 card ♣ suit.

Also it is significant that 2♦ did not get doubled.

 

If opener bids 3♦ over 3♣ it is long odds that 5♣ is better than 3NT (though not impossible)

If opener bids 3NT over 3♣ I would pass, but if he bids a major over 3♣ I would bypass 3NT

 

Rainer Herrmann

[Cyberyeti]

 

I still don't know what I would have done for sure, but I think I would have bid 3 ♣ with the intention of closing the bidding at 5 ♣.

 

I don't know about the rest of you but unless I have a method to tell partner of my void or shortness and have him bid NT as if to say no problem, I just can't do it.

 

At least 5 ♣ should have some play where 3 NT could be down right away.

 

Thanks for the suggestions,

 

Theo

If the bidding starts

 

1NT--2♣

2♦ -- 3♣

 

The auction is game forcing.

 

Why can't opener now not bid 3♦, with length and strength there?

Opener has the inference that responder likely got a 4 card major and at least a 5 card ♣ suit.

Also it is significant that 2♦ did not get doubled.

 

If opener bids 3♦ over 3♣ it is long odds that 5♣ is better than 3NT (though not impossible)

If opener bids 3NT over 3♣ I would pass, but if he bids a major over 3♣ I would bypass 3NT

 

Rainer Herrmann

It may be GF for you, but certainly here, the old fashioned meaning would be a 4-6 bad hand to play.

 

Many have moved away from it, but I still play it the old way.

[mcphee]

In a PAIRS event things are considerably different than playing imps. How to handle this hand at imps was not the question. Imps you bid game and hope to make it or your opps mis-defend, find a bad lead etc. One game you are aggressive the other you are conservative.

 

So no matter what you want to do with this particular hand is a complete guess as to the outcome. For example, it is possible that you might even make a slam on these cards, partner has spade A, AJx in C and the K of H, H split 3-2 and on a D lead you scoop 13 tricks. So how come you are not bidding the slam I ask you?

 

On other days pard holds 4S jack you bang into 4 H because he responds H they take the first 3S tricks the H hook loses and they still score the K of C which is off side. Making 2 which of course leaves you delighted your at least stayed out of SLAM :blink:

[Fluffy]

you can also transfer to clubs to show diamond shortness, something like

 

1NT-2♠

3♣-3♦!

3♥-4♥

 

is not unthinkable.

 

Anyway no need to risk that much, just use stayman and bid 4♥ or 3♣ accordingly, passing 2♠ is a mistake IMO.

[2Macchiato]

Stayman works if you hear 2 ♥ and to a lesser extent 2 ♠ - but is horrible over 2 ♦

 

Best decide where you think the hand belongs - Clubs IMO - and transfer accordingly.

[hrothgar]

Meta Comment

 

The primary goal is not to chose the best set of bids to describe your hand to partner. Your over riding consideration is chosing a bidding sequence that partner probably won't ^$(*# up that has a reasonable chance of landing you into a decent contract.

 

Comment 1

 

Standard American Yellow Card uses a 2♠ response as a puppet to 3♣

 

The auction

 

1N - 2♠

3♣ - 3♦

 

is a drop dead in Diamonds, so that's right out...

 

(More importantly, the fact that no one actually knows what a 2♠ response to a 1NT opening shows means that you don't ever bid 2♠ with a pickup partner)

 

Comment 2:

 

The following auction is impossible

 

1N - 2♣

2♦ 3♣

 

the risk of partner passing 3♣ precludes this sequence from the realm of the plausible.

 

Comment 3

 

The safest approach would seem to be starting with Stayman and then

 

bidding 3N over 2♦

bidding 4♥ over 2♥

bidding 3N over 2♠ (though 4♠ has a twisted appeal)

 

The glory of this approach is that partner only needs to know one bid (what does a 2♣ response to a 1NT opening show) rather than two - or worse yet three - bids.

[whereagles]

The hand has 6 losers, opposite a cover-card expectancy of 4. So it seems like you should gameforce, which makes it an easy Stayman + 3♣, wtp?

[jonottawa]

Bid stayman and then you have a problem over the 2♠ and 2♦ rebids.

 

Not raising 2♥ to 4 would be criminal.

 

I would pass 2♠ and bid 2N over 2♦ but bidding 3♣ over either would work better on a good day.

[mikeh]

Hmmmm let's imagine partner has AKQ Kxx xxx AJxx and the auction proceeds 1N 2C 2D 3N, or 1N 2C 2D 2N 3N, etc.

 

The opps lead, surprisingly, a diamond and to make our luck even worse, the suit doesn't block.

 

partner thanks us for our 2nd place finish and later posts the hand and auction on BBF with the ATB question.

 

How do we vote?

 

Anytime our suggested auction, in a thread such as this one, will expose us to near universal ridicule when it doesn't work out, we should seriously consider another course of action.

 

For me that would be stayman, followed by raising 2H to game, and bidding 3C over either 2S or 2D.

 

If partner bids 3N over 3C, at least he has shown himself to be a competent player and we rate to salvage some mps even if we fail...and we know he has diamonds stopped.

 

Passing 2S might be right, but I don't like my hand for a moysian: I'd far rather have topless clubs and Qxx in trump.

 

BTW, this is an odd hand in that with a pickup partner I suspect that we might have to worry that he will either think 3C is nf himself, or worry that we think it is, and so pass.....and we probably don't really care......in fact, if he has a minimum, we may end up delighted that he passed.

 

Put another way: when leading or near-leading an event with a big score, don't take an action that has a real chance of generating a zero unless there are no attractive alterntives....committing the hand to 3N without even finding out if partner has a diamond stopper is precisely that type of action.

[W Kovacs]

I was going to suggest 1NT-2♠; 3♣-3♥ as a possible auction, but I noticed two things.

 

1) In my system notes, this auction shows 6+ clubs, a singleton or void in hearts and slam interest. Not good on this hand.

 

2) Partner is pickup, and likely won't know what the hell to do with a 2S bid.

 

So I will bid 2C, and bid clubs over a diamond or spade response.

[TheoKole]

Thanks for the responses everyone.

 

My first thought when I was dealt this problem hand was NOT NOW!!!

 

Last hand, in a matchpoint tournament that you are leading is not the time for a problem hand with a pickup partner.

 

Like you guys suggested this hand can be bid in several different ways, but only with a regular partner that you have discussed various sequences with.

 

I also had to remember that the bidding would probably be all over the place on this hand, (who really knows what can make on this hand opposite a 1NT bidder?), so my main concern was to land in a decent contract, not necessarily a game contract.

 

If my partner was strong in the majors with a 4 card ♥ fit, 4 ♥ is probably a shoe in.

 

If he was strong in the minors 3 NT or 5 ♣ is better. That was why I was going to bid 3 ♣ over a 2 ♦ response, basically a "where you live" bid. As someone suggested, of partner can bid 3 ♦, over 3 ♣, I could make a 3 NT bid to give my partner a choice of contracts.

 

Over 2 ♥ or 2 ♠ response, I really need no or very little ♦ high cards in partners hand to make game. I was planning to be a bit conservative in the bidding due to the fact that I was leading, I would probably be aggressive in the bidding if I was trailing, and these where overriding considerations.

 

Anyways obviously anything I do could be right or wrong on a given day,

 

Thanks again for the responses,

 

Theo