would you avoid this bottom?

[Fluffy]

We collected -300 on Match point tournament with these hands:

 

[hv=pc=n&w=sa9h6dat732caq753&e=sj62haq85dk65ckt9&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1dp1hp2cp2sp3cp3dp3sp3np4cp4hp4sp5cp6dppp]266|200[/hv]

 

Not the worst contract ever, but LHO had ♠KQ10 to lead (also against 3NT), ♥K offside, diamonds and clubs 4-1.... -300, but 5♦ might have made.

[Vampyr]

I give the blame to West. His 3♠ over 3♦ was perhaps slightly pushy, but in a way having done that leaves him better placed; he can now pass 3NT confident that nothing has been missed.

[gnasher]

It looks like the usual problem after FSF, that neither player has managed to limit his hand. West is an ace better than a minimum, so going past 3NT is only slightly pushy. I don't agree with his 6♦ though. The argument that because it's matchpoints we can't play 5m doesn't apply here: there's no reason to think that there are ten tricks available in notrumps.

 

What do we think 3♠ means? To me it sounds like more FSF - eg xx x A10xxx AQxxx.

[lamford]

West is an ace better than a minimum, so going past 3NT is only slightly pushy.

Yes, but only about a queen better than an average for the auction to date. And passing 3NT has the considerable merit that 20 viewers (at this time) would not have had to scroll up and down because the auction would fit in the box that is designed for it. And it is match-points.

 

I agree with you that 3S does not show extras, but it is just fourth (or fifth) suit forcing.

[andy_h]

West does have a decent hand but not decent enough for my liking to have explored further. I would have ended the auction by bidding 3NT over 3D. On that note, if West's 3S said spade values I would have passed 3NT since East didn't feel like exploring so I don't want to overrule that decision as East could have more heart/spade values.

[Fluffy]

I expected to be critizied for 6♦ but not for going past 3NT really. Do you all see that partner can have ♠K, ♥K, ♦Q or even a 4th diamond instead of ♠J♥Q don't you?

[hotShot]

It looks like the usual problem after FSF, that neither player has managed to limit his hand.

Doesn't the bidding 1♦...2♣...3♣ limit West as to weak to reverse? If that were the case, wouldn't Easts 3NT deny slam interest?

[bluecalm]

Imo this is very simple hand and W overbid his hand after 3NT. Looks really wtf to me so I am awaiting replies which gives any justification for bidding after 3NT.

[gnasher]

Doesn't the bidding 1♦...2♣...3♣ limit West as to weak to reverse? If that were the case, wouldn't Easts 3NT deny slam interest?

 

1♦-1♥;3♣ would have been game-forcing, so West has probably denied as much as a 5-5 18-count. I don't think 1♦-1♥;2♣-2♠;3♣ is any more limited than the 2♣ bid was.

 

East's 3NT bid says that he wants to play there opposite a minimum. However, West's range is approximately 10-17 in high cards, so 3NT can't deny slam interest opposite the entire range of possible West hands.

 

West's point-count is above the middle of his range, he has three aces, and East's 3♦ is vaguely encouraging. That might be enough reason to move, even at matchpoints.

 

This and my earlier comment assume that the partnership's style is the same as mine, which is that all 5-5 10-counts would be opened. If the minimum needed to open is more than that, it might be more obvious to pass 3NT (or just bid 3NT over 3♦).

[wank]

Doesn't the bidding 1♦...2♣...3♣ limit West as to weak to reverse?

 

no....it limits him as being too weak to GF.

[bluecalm]

West's point-count is above the middle of his range, he has three aces, and East's 3♦ is vaguely encouraging. That might be enough reason to move, even at matchpoints.

 

So what does E bids with a hand without S stopper, diamond fit and not "encouraging" ? (but still GF))

 

no....it limits him as being too weak to GF.

 

This is one of the many holes in Swiss cheese which standard is but that's exactly how it is :(

 

East's 3NT bid says that he wants to play there opposite a minimum.

 

I think 3NT says you want to play 3NT opposite average hand not minimum. This is one of the basic principles in bidding as taught in my country at least (that you make your normal (ie not focing/encouraging or sign off) bids assuming average hand .

Average is probably around 13hcp for this bidding so...

[cherdano]

I think 3NT says you want to play 3NT opposite average hand not minimum. This is one of the basic principles in bidding as taught in my country at least (that you make your normal (ie not focing/encouraging or sign off) bids assuming average hand .

Average is probably around 13hcp for this bidding so...

This seems mistaken. 3NT says you want to play there opposite the average hand that is going to pass 3NT. This is just basic bridge logic.

 

You are probably also undervaluing this hand. This is not a 14 count! I would say it's about a queen better than your average 13 count with this shape.

 

Also, opposite many hands from partner 5m or 6m is just going to play better than 3NT. How do you think partner should bid with Jxx KQxx KQxx Jx? Yet 5♦ is a better contract than 3NT.

[cherdano]

What do we think 3♠ means? To me it sounds like more FSF - eg xx x A10xxx AQxxx.

I would call it "bidding out my shape", i.e. it shows 2155 or 3055. We may be concerned about stoppers in either major, and obviously knowing our shortness will be extremely helpful for partner in evaluating the chances of 5m or 6m, and still somewhat helpful for guessing whether 3NT is a viable contract.

[nigel_k]

The only call I really disagree with is 6♦. West had a difficult decision over 3NT and going on is reasonable. East has quite a poor hand for slam and might have just bid an immediate 4NT over 4♣, but choosing to cue bid is also reasonable.

 

It's tempting to reason that you have to bid slam at the end since the field will be in 3NT, but West should recognise this is the type of hand that may be held to eight or nine tricks in NT when slam doesn't make. East also knows it is matchpoints and can raise 5♦ to 6 with the right hand.

[lamford]

I expected to be critizied for 6♦ but not for going past 3NT really. Do you all see that partner can have ♠K, ♥K, ♦Q or even a 4th diamond instead of ♠J♥Q don't you?

We do, but did not Bob Hamman say something like "do not play me for perfect cards - I never have them". I could not find the quote in Google, but no doubt someone else can correct me.

[gnasher]

So what does E bids with a hand without S stopper, diamond fit and not "encouraging" ? (but still GF))

In my world, he bids 3♠, FSF again.

[mike777]

We collected -300 on Match point tournament with these hands:

 

[hv=pc=n&w=sa9h6dat732caq753&e=sj62haq85dk65ckt9&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1dp1hp2cp2sp3cp3dp3sp3np4cp4hp4sp5cp6dppp]266|200[/hv]

 

Not the worst contract ever, but LHO had ♠KQ10 to lead (also against 3NT), ♥K offside, diamonds and clubs 4-1.... -300, but 5♦ might have made.

 

 

prefer 3d (inv) by E not 2s.

 

west could very well have the same shape minus AS.

[MrAce]

West's point-count is above the middle of his range, he has three aces, and East's 3♦ is vaguely encouraging. That might be enough reason to move, even at matchpoints.

 

This and my earlier comment assume that the partnership's style is the same as mine, which is that all 5-5 10-counts would be opened. If the minimum needed to open is more than that, it might be more obvious to pass 3NT (or just bid 3NT over 3♦).

 

I have no problem with west making a move over 3 NT, but he didnt make just another move if u look at bidding. He made too many moves followed by bidding slam by himself :)

[JLOGIC]

3S is a normal bid with 2155 and no spade stopper and a minimum hand. It does not show extras. West should usually bid 3N with A9 of spades unless he has a strong hand willing to drive past 3N (which is what he evaluated it as obviously).

 

The bigger point of this hand is that 6D is a completely hopeless bid. It is just so bad it's amazing. What extras does west have? He has already gone past 3N himself. He has already shown his shape. He has cuebid his side cards. He has a minimum hand and awful trumps. If this was what east needed, he could have just keycarded himself by now.

[TylerE]

Call me a simple soul, but I just bid 3N with the E hand over 2♣. At MP people tend to bid spades when they have them, and I think FSF is better reserved for harder problem hands than this.

[Fluffy]

Call me a simple soul, but I just bid 3N with the E hand over 2♣. At MP people tend to bid spades when they have them, and I think FSF is better reserved for harder problem hands than this.

Jxx is a bad holding for declare, this is a good example of why.

[gnasher]

I have no problem with west making a move over 3 NT, but he didnt make just another move if u look at bidding. He made too many moves followed by bidding slam by himself :)

 

I did look at the bidding, and I didn't say that West only made a move. Was there something unclear about this:

 

West is an ace better than a minimum, so going past 3NT is only slightly pushy. I don't agree with his 6♦ though

[Siegmund]

A lot seems to depend on the meaning of 3S.

 

In my view, we had an FSF exchange in which both partners refused to bid notrump and diamonds were agreed; I think that means 3S (or any bid other than 3N or 5D by West) is a move toward slam. In that context, perhaps East can cue his CK now, or perhaps East has to go to 4H now in their style and West should subside; but even if we accept the auction as far as 4H, West bidding spades twice is pretty much going to guarantee that East thinks there is no spade loser. If I had to point to one bid that guaranteed reaching a failing slam I would point to West's 4S.