A set from 4/6/11

[Phil]

IMPs, short matches

 

1. ♠T86 ♥9832 ♦64 ♣AQ73

 

(Pass) - pass - (1♦) - 1♠;

(Pass) - 2♠ - (pass) - 3N;

(pass} - ?

 

2. red/white

 

♠AKQ3 ♥KQ83 ♦A983 ♣4

 

1♣ - (1♠) - dbl - (pass)

2♥ - (3♦) - ?

 

3.

 

♠KJT3 ♥KJ4 ♦73 ♣7632

 

1♥ - (2♦) - 2♥ - {pass);

4♣ - (pass) - ?

[JLOGIC]

1) 4S obviously?

 

2) 3S

 

3) If 4C is a splinter, I would bid 4S! If it's a suit, I'd bid 4H!

[Phil]

1) 4S obviously?

 

2) 3S

 

3) If 4C is a splinter, I would bid 4S! If it's a suit, I'd bid 4H!

 

Our agreement is that 4♣ is a suit in comp, but a splinter with no comp.. IS this a competitive auction? I didn't think so and took it as a splinter.

[gnasher]

Our agreement is that 4♣ is a suit in comp, but a splinter with no comp.. IS this a competitive auction? I didn't think so and took it as a splinter.

There are arguments in favour of both meanings, and "in competition" may mean either "in an auction where they've competed" or "immediately over a competitive action".

 

Sorry, I know that's not very helpful.

[aguahombre]

Our agreement is that 4♣ is a suit in comp, but a splinter with no comp.. IS this a competitive auction? I didn't think so and took it as a splinter.

 

The way you worded your agreement is contradictory with your conclusion. There has been competition, so "splinter with no competition" has gone bye bye. I agree that this has turned into a non-competitive auction despite the overcall. If your partner's understanding was different from yours, then you need to use a term other than "no competition" to describe when splinters apply.

[Phil]

The way you worded your agreement is contradictory with your conclusion. There has been competition, so "splinter with no competition" has gone bye bye. I agree that this has turned into a non-competitive auction despite the overcall. If your partner's understanding was different from yours, then you need to use a term other than "no competition" to describe when splinters apply.

 

Its not particularly relevant to the hand, however there is no contradiction. It is a function of defining 'what does competition mean?', which is what I said previously.

 

I think Gnasher portrayed the issue accurately.

[quiddity]

1) 4S obviously?

 

I didn't find this one to be obvious, but I'm not sure what to expect from partner's hand (overcalls 1♠ only but then blasts to game opposite a simple raise). I was imagining a hand with spades which run opposite a fit and some quick tricks on the side.

[Finch]

1. Pass

2. Double. Particularly if partner might have only 3 hearts.

3. This isn't a bidding problem, it's a "what are my agreements" problem. I can't help you there.

[AlexJonson]

1. Pass - why not.

 

2. 4D - promising hand 3S seems to likely to create confusion.

 

3. 4H - splinter, fragment, whatever, I want to play in 4H.

[JLOGIC]

Frances, do you not play double of 3D in the 2nd one as a game try?

 

I am not sure I would double even if it was penalty as we have a fairly likely slam on r/w, and I would expect partner to pass it with a stiff which could be very bad, but tbh I didn't really consider it because I thought it was "standard" to play it as a game try, but maybe this is not a good assumption to make.

 

I don't understand passing on hand 1. We have a ruffing value in diamonds and our honors (few as they are) are concentrated.

[Vampyr]

Using hands from the future is a much more effective way to profit from the advice offered. I think it should be universal practice on BBO.

[ArtK78]

Using hands from the future is a much more effective way to profit from the advice offered. I think it should be universal practice on BBO.

 

I have to admit that I was doing some head scratching upon reading this, until I realized that in many parts of the world 4/6/11 means June 4, 2011, rather than April 6, 2011, as intended.

[Phil]

1. This person passed. Partner held AQxxx AQ AJxx xx. 4♠ seems better on balance. 3N could have been made but wasn't.

 

Edit: he just told me was AQxxx AQx AJx xx ;)

 

2. On the 1st the player that held these cards bulldozed it into 7 when pard showed ♥A + ♦K + ♣AK. However pard also held ATx (2335) of hearts and couldn't manage losing a diamond at the end. 3♦ goes for a zillion but I think it should be maximal as Justin says.

 

3 This hand bid 4♠. I think the 4♣ bidder should slow it down with Ax AQxxxxx Axx x, but the poor slam was bid and was down.

[gnasher]

3 This hand bid 4♠. I think the 4♣ bidder should slow it down with Ax AQxxxxx Axx x, but the poor slam was bid and was down.

 

I don't think opener should splinter. He needs something very specific like ♥K and ♦KQJx (or the same in spades). The splinter won't tell him whether he's opposite that hand. What it will do is to get him to six opposite many hands where slam is awful, eg Kxxx Kxx Kxx xxx

[whereagles]

1. When in doubt... bid the major. Besides, there isn't even that much of a doubt: we got ruffs and if pard has the club king we may even have a discard.

 

2. 4NT. Keep it simple. Won't try for 7, though. There will probably be a diamond or club loser.

 

3. 4♥. More on feeling than on reason.

[JLOGIC]

Bump? Interested in more discussion if anyone else is.

[gnasher]

Bump? Interested in more discussion if anyone else is.

About which one?

[JLOGIC]

About which one?

 

The first

[cherdano]

I would neither bid 3N with opener's hand nor pass 3N with responder's hand. Not sure that's a good starting point to contribute to an interesting discussion...

[AlexJonson]

On hand one I guess we are not expecting to make anything, holding pretty much the low end of a raise when partner turns out to be strong. A trump lead is a fair possibility though we do probably get one ruff.

 

Are we bidding 4S expecting it to cost less than 3NT typically?

[Flameous]

I wonder what 3NT bid from overcaller really is. In some constructive auctions it shows solid suit and something little on the side. I wonder if that would make any sense here. Some AKQxxxx Qx Kx xx or similar. If it was something like that, passing 3NT wouldn't even be so terrible. Of course there's a fine line when I have already bid 4♠ with that type of hand.

If it's more like natural call, question is again when we start doubling first. 18, 19, 20bal ? Maybe there is some 18-19 balancedish hand that wants to blast game and possibly play in NT. With the hand in question, it's definitely invite, suggesting NT if possible.

[gnasher]

I wouldn't bid 3NT on the overcaller's hand either. It seems likely that I'll be able to ruff at least one of my small diamonds in dummy, so 4♠ will make at least one more trick than 3NT.

 

What would I bid 3NT with? One possibility is a hand with eight fast tricks, hoping for a ninth in dummy, something like AKQxxx xxx AQ xx or AKQxx xxx AQJ xx. Another is a scattered 17-count with a double diamond stop, say AQxxx KJx KQx Kx. Those hands argue for a pass.

 

When is 4♠ better? I don't think he should bid 3NT with a diamond holding that includes two small cards - Axx, Kxx, AQxx, etc. We might belong in 4♠ if he has a single slow diamond stop and an ace to knock out, eg KQJxx AQx QJx Kx.

 

One answer is that 2NT should be forcing. Then partner can bid 3NT when he just wants to play there, and 2NT followed by 3NT to offer a choice. I might just assume this without discussion - it will almost never be right to play in 2NT when we have an eight-card major-suit fit.

 

Are we bidding 4S expecting it to cost less than 3NT typically?

No. Partner has said he thinks he can make game opposite a normal minimum. We have a normal minimum (or, if anything, a bit more than a minimum).

[Finch]

I agree with gnasher on the first one. I wouldn't bid 3NT with overcaller's hand; I think it shows something like a solid spade suit and soft stuff outside. I passed because I was worried about four top losers. On the actual hand I would have expected overcaller to go more slowly.

 

But it's hardly unusual to be given one hand, say I'll do X, discover that Y would be successful and say well I wouldn't have bid that way with partner's hand!

 

On the second I'm still gloating about the fact opener had only three hearts.... anyway, I only play 'maximal' (or game try) doubles after the opponents have bid and raised. So for me this is a penalty double. I thought it was quite an interesting question whether a penalty double is the right call or not, as you mention. If I'm the only poster who can double for penalties it becomes less interesting.