A big, bad, ugly monster

[mtvesuvius]

[hv=pc=n&s=shak95daqt53cakj7&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1dp1s2h]133|200[/hv]

 

2/1, 14-16 NT, what now?

[MrAce]

3♣.

[rduran1216]

ugh.

 

6C

[MrAce]

ugh.

 

6C

 

Wow, u must be seeing something i can not. Is it 1♠ response from pd or 2♥ overcall made u so ambitious ?

[rduran1216]

Wow, u must be seeing something i can not. Is it 1♠ response from pd or 2♥ overcall made u so ambitious ?

 

if partner has KQxxxx of spades and out then we got worked by not opening 2C. The overcall by rho has made my hand extremely powerful. KJ diamonds, Q clubs, QJ10xxx and perhaps a spade card are to my right. anything else is in partners hand and with qxxx of clubs from p, 6C will roll.

[andy_h]

3H

[Fluffy]

I would bid 3NT, not sure if I play 2NT gf on this auction I think not.

[gnasher]

I'd bid 3♣ on a 5-5 12-count, so it would be stretching things to bid it on this. I suppose I'd bid 3NT, but it's horrible.

 

Another good hand for transfers.

[phil_20686]

No one tempted by Pass? surely partner will not let the auction die here, and frankly, it could easily be 1400 on offer here.

[Hanoi5]

3♣, it should be fifth but X would lead to more trouble.

[Poky]

I'm not sure if 3♣ should be forcing, but even then, this bid should promise 5 cards.

[whereagles]

Trap pass this. They're gonna be sorry they bid eehheheheh *salivates*

[Hanoi5]

3♣ ought to be forcing. Unless partner isn't allowed to jump to 4♠ after our 'support' double. We should be passing minimum hands, so 12 with 5-5 could be passed expecting partner to reopen.

[wank]

lol and lol.

 

3nt obviously

[rduran1216]

3nt is safer, mss is just too likely, Adam what happened at the table?

[JLOGIC]

3C is so funny.

[mtvesuvius]

I chose 3N which made with a couple overtricks after a bit of a friendly defense. Partner's hand was:

 

[hv=pc=n&n=sat752h72dj98ct62]133|100[/hv]

[MrAce]

I think it is interesting to think that i can not reverse after they overcall, especially when my hands are tied with supp DBL. I am well aware that 3♣ shows 5-5 minors, it is a matter of whether it is forcing or not in std methods. And std methods doesnt mean what majority of good players play it as.

 

Asked couple guys if they think thats forcing or not;

 

N. Bocchi says it is definetely NF ( but plays strong !C) Steve Robinson says it is forcing in std , TEZ says it is forcing in std and he bids 3♣. Iceking says it is non forcing for him. Some others play it also NF but they also do not play supp dbls.

 

There is no way of bidding this hand without lieing somewhere after 2♥ overcall.

 

-Pass = I just cant believe some people think this pass is more forcing than 3♣.

-DBL = supp dbl for me so outa question

-2NT = lieing about shape and about strength

-3♣ = fits the best IF it is f1. Shows 10 cards when only have 9.

-3♥ = perfect way to miss/pass 3NT

-3NT = Makes sure we dont miss game, but wastes a lot of space with 21 hcp. Pd is likely to have xx or x ♥, if we have a fit, i wont be surprised that we missed a slam if he has about 8-10 hcps.

 

If 3♣ is nf, then of course i could go with 3 NT to insure we dont miss game. However producing 9 tricks with hands that pd passes 3♣ aint gonna be a picnik walk either.

 

What are the hands by the way pd can pass 3♣ ? The hands where he has longer ♣ than ♦. And his ♥ holding will be x or xx in average because since we have AK♥ i expect overcaller to have 6 ♥ at least. And hands where he cant rebid his ♠

 

So, 5134 6223 ??? or what ? And as most of u guys stated, he thinks we have at least 5♣. Even if we agreed with pd that 3♣ can be as minimum as 11 hcps and 5-5, we will still bid it with some better hands. The hand types that pd can pass comfortably is very small imo, like 6223 and his ♠ are not rebiddable.

 

Bottom line is, if 3♣ is forcing it fits perfect in this hand. And i can still bid 3 NT later in most cases. If it is NF, i believe it still is the least dangerous bid, if we all agree that any bid here has some flaws to it.

[Phil]

We've discussed this auction and I can't believe that anyone would play 3♣ as forcing. I would rather bid 6♣ than 3♣ lol. I'm not a fan of 3N either - the hand has too much potential.Don't get me started about a pass.

 

Now, since 3♣ is NF 4♣ shows a pretty good hand. Certainly that's a choice. Or 3♥.

[cherdano]

I agree with everything in Phil's post.

[MrAce]

 

 

Now, since 3♣ is NF 4♣ shows a pretty good hand. Certainly that's a choice. Or 3♥.

 

If showing your hand was the GOAL at bridge, instead of being a tool to determine where we can play, i could agree with you.

 

Your alternatives to 3♣ bid, such as 4♣, 3♥ has much more flaws and incorrect msgs to pd. I wont even mention 6♣ bid. You can not construct enough number of hands, where pd can pass 3♣ and we miss a game compared to the hands where u already missed 3 NT with your 4♣ or 3♥ and 6♣ bids. ( I explained in previous post the hand types that he can pass 3♣, feel free to add if you will, i can be easily convinced if i am missing something)

 

Among those who believed 3♣ was NF, Drew Casen , John Stewart chosed to bid 3♣ with this. I already mentioned those who believes with std agreements it is forcing, whether u agree or disagree with them.

 

Basically, if your alternative is NOT 3 NT, the flaws of bids u come up with is way more than a NF 3♣ bid (which seems forcing to some)

 

All of them agree on 1 thing though, even when 3♣ is agreed to be NF, that doesnt mean opener is saying " I wanna play either !D or !C and i wanna play only at 3 level" :) They agree that responder's action will be stretched.

[the hog]

I would bid 3NT. 3C would not be forcing for me. I think the 6C bid was made as a joke. I can't really believe someone would seriously bid that.

[Phil]

If showing your hand was the GOAL at bridge, instead of being a tool to determine where we can play, i could agree with you.

 

Your alternatives to 3♣ bid, such as 4♣, 3♥ has much more flaws and incorrect msgs to pd. I wont even mention 6♣ bid. You can not construct enough number of hands, where pd can pass 3♣ and we miss a game compared to the hands where u already missed 3 NT with your 4♣ or 3♥ and 6♣ bids. ( I explained in previous post the hand types that he can pass 3♣, feel free to add if you will, i can be easily convinced if i am missing something)

 

Among those who believed 3♣ was NF, Drew Casen , John Stewart chosed to bid 3♣ with this. I already mentioned those who believes with std agreements it is forcing, whether u agree or disagree with them.

 

Basically, if your alternative is NOT 3 NT, the flaws of bids u come up with is way more than a NF 3♣ bid (which seems forcing to some)

 

All of them agree on 1 thing though, even when 3♣ is agreed to be NF, that doesnt mean opener is saying " I wanna play either !D or !C and i wanna play only at 3 level" :) They agree that responder's action will be stretched.

 

Wow John Stewart? Rolled out the "A" team didn't you :P PS finding a group of good players (ok Drew counts) that agree with you isn't really a good way to influence people around here and is simply an appeal to authority without basis.

 

I don't quite understand your arguments Timo. You say 3♥ and 4♣ are flawed but give zero reasons supporting this. 3♥ can be many strong types of hands. It includes hands with no clear direction, hands with spade support, hands with diamonds short of a 2♣ opener (there are many) and monsters with ♦/♣ (guess what we have). So I am at a loss how 3♥ is misdescriptive since it includes this hand type. And if you want some more descriptive call choose 4♣.

And what does it mean that 3♣ is NF but it doesn't mean that "I want to play 3♣". We hold a 21 count! Do you really think pard is moving with xxxxx xx Kx Qxxx? 190 is such a lousy number on your card.

[MrAce]

Wow John Stewart? Rolled out the "A" team didn't you :P PS finding a group of good players (ok Drew counts) that agree with you isn't really a good way to influence people around here and is simply an appeal to authority without basis.

 

I don't quite understand your arguments Timo. You say 3♥ and 4♣ are flawed but give zero reasons supporting this. 3♥ can be many strong types of hands. It includes hands with no clear direction, hands with spade support, hands with diamonds short of a 2♣ opener (there are many) and monsters with ♦/♣ (guess what we have). So I am at a loss how 3♣ is misdescriptive since it includes this hand type. And if you want some more descriptive call choose 4♣.

And what does it mean that 3♣ is NF but it doesn't mean that "I want to play 3♣". We hold a 21 count! Do you really think pard is moving with xxxxx xx Kx Qxxx? 190 is such a lousy number on your card.

 

Among those names, i have given N.Bocchi which supports your view, and if my goal was to influence people here i would not do that now, wld i ? ;)

 

You may not like some of the names who bid 3♣, u may not agree with their view, but it was not me who made a comment taller than myself by saying things like " No one would play 3♣ forcing" And when u make comments taller than yourself, of course u shd not be so sensitive when someone shows u that what u said is not true. I just can not prove u by saying "I asked John Doe, and he thinks forcing" I just can not prove u that what u find so funny is actually an option for some people who actually has world champ title, if i told u "John Doe" bids 3♣, you would not give enuf credit.

 

And please dont manuplate pd's hand with giving me examples like xxxxx vs your void, xx and fill all your holes in ur 5-5 suits but make it look like a bad hand. Since when u started to be a bean counter ? :P

 

If u are passing 3♣ with xxxxx xx Kx Qxxx then u wld probably be proud of ur scoresheet too when pd has x x Axxxxx AKxxx :) If u wanna manuplate hands for your argument, trust me i can do it much better than you. I would never pass with the hand u posted, knowing we have 9 card fit and i have 2 working cards for pd, opponents not competing tells my pd's short is ♠. And eventhough 3♣ can be made on as low as 11-12 hcp, doesnt mean u have to bid it at 3 level with suits like x Ax Qxxxx AJxxx.

 

Back to 3♥ and 4♣ bids; i can actually be convinced that 3♥ is not as bad as i thought it was, since partner rates to bid 3♠ which allows me to bid 3 NT, and if he bids 4 minor, i will be happy. You have a good point on that.

 

4♣ however, is a plain bad bid. Since u decided not to open this hand 2♣, your hand did not improve at all by pd's 1♠ bid, and i think it actually lost some value when righty bid 2♥. I just cant believe u are actually leaving 3 NT heaven behind, when most likely game seems to be it. And why ? Ohhhh i forgot, your pd bid 1♠, which was the sign u were waiting for to pull the trigga !

[MrAce]

Lemme influence some more, since u take it this way.

 

Ira Chorush : 4♣

 

Dano De Falco : 3♣

 

M. Seamon :3♣

 

S. Weinstein : 3♥