3S - 3N

[phil_20686]

Mr Ace, we can play this construction game all day long:

 

KQxxxxx

x

xx

Axx

 

Is in a very happy spot in 3N.

 

AQxxxxx

x

 

Jx

Jxx

 

is a very good spot.

 

KJTxxxx

xx

xx

Kx

 

probably just needs not a club lead.

 

KQxxxxx

x

xx

Kxx

 

just needs the ace of clubs with the person on lead.

 

Since you were recommending bidding 3N on Kx Axxx Axxx xxx, you were clearly on board with the idea that sometimes the opposition make the wrong lead.

 

Most of your example hands give partner a stiff diamond, they are also very pure.

 

 

If it makes you happier change the 3N bid, add the ace of clubs - it still carries my point that the most likely way to go off in 4S is with too many spade losers, thus it follows that you should pull to 4S when that is impossible. I would pull with any spade suit that would reliably play for six tricks opposite a singleton: KQJT9xx AQJTxxx etc. Even hands like QJT-8th and QJ-8th should pull, on account of the extra spade, especially if they have no outside entry.

 

[phil_20686]

PS: I might have made my 3N bid too weak. I am pretty sure that isnt really the point though.

[mycroft]

Your general point is good, but I think it's an overbid calling these bids "psyches". A psyche is a GROSS deviation from agreements, while the examples of poor 3♠ bids have just been small deviations in suit quality.

The one I'm arguing with Nigel on isn't. KQJTxxx and out is arguable, and I have sympathy for pulling that one (but partner with SAx and soft stoppers isn't going to be too happy, even though he'll admit you were probably right in general).

 

But anyone who says that QJxxxxx xx -- Jxxx is "a fairly constructive vul 3♠ opening", or anywhere near it, I'm happy to play EHAA with (because it's harder to weasel-word "<6 HCP, and 5-6/6-7 AKQ losers (unfavourable/both VUL) than "fairly constructive", and he seems to want to play these aggressive things); just not the "current" system.

[MrAce]

Mr Ace, we can play this construction game all day long:

 

KQxxxxx

x

xx

Axx

 

 

Of course u can make if they lead ♣ under K, but if RHO has K u are dead, he plays 2nd ♣. Lets say they led ♥ and took A and shift to ♣ ? The outcome of 4♠ or 3NT will be dependent to what they hold and lead. And this is even if you believe this hand opens 3♠.

 

 

KJTxxxx

xx

xx

Kx

 

probably just needs not a club lead.

 

 

Excuse me ?

 

Counting is required, if you are into "hand constructing" games.

 

-♦ lead, are u making it ?

-♠ lead and u played J, which worked too ! RHO took with A and played ♦ or ♣, are u making it ?

-♥ lead, and u won in hand with T, are u making it ? Not even close !!

 

KQxxxxx

x

xx

Kxx

 

just needs the ace of clubs with the person on lead.

 

 

Really ?

 

Ok the guy on lead has ♣A, are you sure thats only thing u need ?

 

-He has AJxxx ♣ and led, u won an extra trick from the lead, are u making it without needing anything else ?

 

-He has ♣ A and led a ♦, are u making it ?

 

-He has ♣A and led small ♥ his pd took A and played ♣ to kill dummy's entry b4 ♠ established, are u making it ?

 

You should be able to say confidently that "yes i am making" since i granted your wish to make 3NT. Unfortuntely u are not even close to be making AFTER your wish was granted.

 

I would not mind playing hand constructions eventhough that really wasnt my intention but if you think so please make sure the hands u construct actually supports your comments under them. After all they are PICKED hands, picked by you, if those hands dont support your comments which hand will ?

[phil_20686]

KQxxxxx

x

xx

Axx

 

a club away from the K is obviously fatal, a club to the K and a club is still likely to succeed - I cash 6 diamonds pitching four spades and play a spade, the defense has to open hearts and there are all kinds of layouts where I can make two heart tricks since they must open the suit or in practice often they will not be able to avoid giving me access to dummy.

 

The hand with the club K in dummy is just the same, after a club away from the ace I can cash 6 diamonds and play a spade up. Its possible this might lose to incredibly alert defenders, but in practice this line will suceed against almost all denders who will return a heart through dummy. It also works automatically if south has the spade ace.

 

KJTxxxx

xx

xx

Kx

 

was a poor construction. I withdraw that one.

Nevertheless, the primary point remains that most of the time you bid 3N opposite a preempt, it is because you are either super strong balanced, or because you have a trick source of your own. In either of those cases it is right to pull with solid or semi solid spades that will play well opposite a singleton or void.

[Free]

I play 3♠-3NT as a forcing relay in one of my partnerships. :huh: If 3♠ requires a decent 7 card suit, then 3NT signoff will hardly come up, and might even be inferior to 4M. Having a relay available comes up much more often I think, and can be very helpful for distributional slams.

[barmar]

IIf 3♠ requires a decent 7 card suit, then 3NT signoff will hardly come up, and might even be inferior to 4M.

That's a good point. Converting a 3-level preempt to 3NT is much more beneficial when it's 3♣ or 3♦, as 5 of the minor might not have any play.

[MrAce]

KQxxxxx

x

xx

Axx

 

a club away from the K is obviously fatal, a club to the K and a club is still likely to succeed - I cash 6 diamonds pitching four spades and play a spade, the defense has to open hearts and there are all kinds of layouts where I can make two heart tricks since they must open the suit or in practice often they will not be able to avoid giving me access to dummy.

 

The hand with the club K in dummy is just the same, after a club away from the ace I can cash 6 diamonds and play a spade up. Its possible this might lose to incredibly alert defenders, but in practice this line will suceed against almost all denders who will return a heart through dummy. It also works automatically if south has the spade ace.

KJTxxxx

xx

xx

Kx

 

was a poor construction. I withdraw that one.

Nevertheless, the primary point remains that most of the time you bid 3N opposite a preempt, it is because you are either super strong balanced, or because you have a trick source of your own. In either of those cases it is right to pull with solid or semi solid spades that will play well opposite a singleton or void.

 

No it doesnt work automatically, not even close, but i will continue this with u via pm.

[xxhong]

For a typical hand like 7-3-2-1, 7-2-2-2, 7-3-3-0, I think one should usually pass 3NT. However, for a very distributional hand like QJTxxxx x QJTxx -, I don't really think pass is correct over 3NT (here I would bid 4D). Of course many may not open 3S with this hand, which I think is a major mistake.

Hi Guys,

 

Playing a fairly constructive vul 3♠ opening, should you, or are you allowed to remove partner's 3NT with certain ♠ holdings?

[wank]

some rubbish written here. if your hand has weaker spades (often weak but very long) you can remove. if you have a long side suit you can remove.

 

this stuff about captaincy assumes you've described your hand accurately. for a vul pre-empt, partner will expect the suit to run opposite Ax or Kx. If your suit won't run opposite that, it's silly to risk 3NT as you'll often go -5 or some such.

 

if you don't open QJTxxxxx for example, you aren't playing bridge.