Matchpoints!

[bluecalm]

[hv=pc=n&s=s732hq6daq42ck732&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1h2cppdp]133|200[/hv]

 

Matchpoints, love all.

If you need to know what are partner's preferences when it comes to reopening please comment on it but for the poll needs assume he is autoreopening with xx every time but needs some extras with xxx+. He sometimes double with 2-5-4-2 or even 2-5-5-1 if hand looks penaltish (like 3 aces or something)

If you wouldn't pass first round please comment but answer the poll anyway.

(in actual play natural 2NT wasn't an option but still I don't like it even if it was)

 

I have opinion on this problem which I am sure won't be popular on the other hand most people I asked consider this problem to be difficult and they try to come up with various ways to deal with it.

[wank]

hate any methods where i can't bid 2nt the first time - being able to differentiate between 20 types of heart raise isn't worth endplaying yourself on this entirely normal hand type. if i was lacking the 2nt option i'd double.

 

anyway i suppose now i'll just pot 3nt

[gnasher]

I'd have responded 2♦, even with a natural 2NT available.

 

As it's gone, I'd bid 3♣, followed by 3NT over any reply. That ought to express the right level of uncertainty.

[bluecalm]

I'd have responded 2♦, even with a natural 2NT available.

 

Damn, I forgot again :)

This is Poland. 2NT is GF with support and 2♦ is negative free bid. Even if it wasn't though, you still have to bid something over 2D - 2H, right ?

[rhm]

I would have bid 2♥ over 2♣ immediately. Now I vote for the nothing bid of 2♥.

Certainly pessimistic, but this is what winning matchpoint tactic is about.

Modern reopening doubles do not promise any extra strength.

There is no safety beyond 2♥.

On frequency grounds I believe any game to be an underdog, in particular 3NT from this side needs a parlay.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[gnasher]

Damn, I forgot again :)

This is Poland. 2NT is GF with support and 2♦ is negative free bid. Even if it wasn't though, you still have to bid something over 2D - 2H, right ?

No,

  1♥ 2♣ 2♦ pass

  2♥

isn't forcing.

 

If you play negative free bids, doesn't that make this a normal double of 2♣?

[Cyberyeti]

I would have bid 2♥ over 2♣ immediately. Now I vote for the nothing bid of 2♥.

Certainly pessimistic, but this is what winning matchpoint tactic is about.

Modern reopening doubles do not promise any extra strength.

There is no safety beyond 2♥.

On frequency grounds I believe any game to be an underdog, in particular 3NT from this side needs a parlay.

 

Rainer Herrmann

The danger is that the hand actually makes as many or more tricks in no trumps played by S than it does in hearts played by N as you may get a club trick on the lead you're not entitled to, and the extra control from the trump suit doesn't help in generating tricks. Visualise xxxx, AKJxx, Kx, xx or similar on the likely Q♣ lead, whoever has the A♣, you will score better in NT, particularly as the lead is through your K♣ in 2♥ (and after a doubleton club lead you could easily go off in 2♥ on a trump promotion where to beat 2N requires a spade lead from say AQx).

[Fluffy]

Nice poll, 5 votes, 5 different options, I vote for 2NT, but pass is very close to me. Obviously 2NT shows this values there is no point on playing 2NT to dodge suit contracts.

[rhm]

The danger is that the hand actually makes as many or more tricks in no trumps played by S than it does in hearts played by N as you may get a club trick on the lead you're not entitled to, and the extra control from the trump suit doesn't help in generating tricks. Visualise xxxx, AKJxx, Kx, xx or similar on the likely Q♣ lead, whoever has the A♣, you will score better in NT, particularly as the lead is through your K♣ in 2♥ (and after a doubleton club lead you could easily go off in 2♥ on a trump promotion where to beat 2N requires a spade lead from say AQx).

I am well aware that you might make 3NT, provided you have 8 fast tricks after the likely ♣ lead.

I bet against it, particularly at matchpoints. Matchpoints is a game of frequency, not where you make the bid with the highest return if right.

A minus score in 3NT will be much more common.

Granted even 2♥ is not 100% safe, but it is likely to go plus.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[gnasher]

Nice poll, 5 votes, 5 different options.

I only voted because that seemed to be required by the CoC.

[mike777]

No,

  1♥ 2♣ 2♦ pass

  2♥

isn't forcing.

 

If you play negative free bids, doesn't that make this a normal double of 2♣?

 

 

For starters not playing neg free bids agree 100% with gnasher's post of responding 2d, etc.

 

Playing neg free bids I dont really have a good bid, I dont hve 4s, dont have 3h, dont hve long suit, a bit weak for 2nt, a bit too weak to play 2c x, pass does not feel right at mp.

 

 

I guess I would try 2nt, nat and invite.

[Flameous]

Having played under similar methods, this seems easy pass and 2NT.

I admit that I'd probably prefer to be playing 2♥ on this deal like rhm suggests, but I haven't even nearly showed my values if I just bid 2H and partner could have some real extras even for balancing double.

 

If you play negative free bids, doesn't that make this a normal double of 2♣?

 

And regarding this, at least usually playing negative freebids don't interfere with negative double promising 4♠ unless GF.

However not playing 2NT as natural has couple of approaches, others just passing these natural 2NT bids and hoping we aren't missing anything if partner can't bid again. Other is to double with these hands and have the trouble with partner holding spade hands that can't just bid game now.

[bluecalm]

No,

1♥ 2♣ 2♦ pass

2♥

isn't forcing.

 

 

Interesting. Isn't it forcing in standard ? I mean, don't most experts who play 2D as forcing play 2H as forcing here too ?

Nobody in Poland plays 2D as forcing so I wasn't exposed to this method too much but I think I can recall some old book saying 2H is forcing here by Lawrence probably but I can't remember.

 

If you play negative free bids, doesn't that make this a normal double of 2♣?

 

No, double promises 4♠ if not GF. Or to be more specific "normal negative double or any GF without other bid". The later option rarely comes up fortunately, especially if you play jumps as natural and forcing (so with 6diamonds and GF you could bid 3D or even with good five).

[gnasher]

Oh well, I already knew I didn't understand Negative Free Bids.

[pooltuna]

the initial pass shows a hand too weak to make a forcing 2♦ or natural forcing 2NT call. Consequently when partner makes his TOX which as some have noted shows NO xtras and you now bid 2NT you certainly must have this type of invitational hand.

[bluecalm]

Consequently when partner makes his TOX which as some have noted shows NO xtras and you now bid 2NT you certainly must have this type of invitational hand.

 

Yeah, but playing in hearts will often yield more tricks than NT. Overcaller often has decent 6 and something on the side. They will knock your K♣ on first lead and then you either collect 7 more top tricks or you are in -50/-100 territory while +110/+140 was available.

[Cyberyeti]

I am well aware that you might make 3NT, provided you have 8 fast tricks after the likely ♣ lead.

I bet against it, particularly at matchpoints. Matchpoints is a game of frequency, not where you make the bid with the highest return if right.

A minus score in 3NT will be much more common.

Granted even 2♥ is not 100% safe, but it is likely to go plus.

 

Rainer Herrmann

That wasn't the point I was making, I was suggesting 2N might be a better contract than 2♥ making the same tricks or possibly an extra on the lead. Unsure of the methods being played as to how to get there.

[bluecalm]

Problem doesn't have real hand to present as it's hypothetical one I thought about with a friend.

I like 2♥ it beats NT contracts vast majority of the time and partner only rarely has 15-17hcp (about 13% according to my simulation), even if he does 3NT doesn't always make, as we either have 8 top tricks after taking K♣ or overcaller usually gets in and cash rest of clubs.

 

I think 2NT is bad and would be bad if it was available as natural. We are going down too often or taking less tricks that we do in hearts.

I am not sure if 2♥ round before is good idea, probably yes, especially if they like to compete.

Leaving the double is rarely profitable. It's struggle for +100 on hands where 110/140 is available.

Those are results of me manually going through hands dealt by the simulator so of course my perception might differ from other people who would do the same. I am reasonably sure that 2♥ is the call though.