Decent hand after p pre empts

[sasioc]

[hv=pc=n&e=sakj6hq4dk53ct972&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1c2hpp3cpp]133|200[/hv]

 

What now? Do you agree with initial pass?

 

Edit: you are playing pairs

[Cthulhu D]

What's the form of scoring? It surely makes a difference if it's IMPs or Matchpoints here, though I'm not sure if 3NT or 4H has any chances at all.

 

I'm not sure what I'd do at the table.

[gszes]

[hv=pc=n&e=sakj6hq4dk53ct972&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1c2hpp3cpp]133|200[/hv]

 

What now? Do you agree with initial pass?

 

3h both imps and mp

 

at mp I agree with original pass

 

at IMPS where game is a favorite if

p has as little as Qx AJTxx xxx xx

we have pretty good play for 4h

I would use whatever device you use

to invite game and let p decide

[Fluffy]

Being consistent with my previous pass, I won't obviously try for game now. At IMPs I would pass, we have great chances of 5 tricks on defence opposite a vulnerable overcall, and in 3♥ clubs might promote tricks for the defence. MPs is very different and double and 3♥ can be the winners. I would try double.

[MrAce]

3h both imps and mp

 

at mp I agree with original pass

 

at IMPS where game is a favorite if

p has as little as Qx AJTxx xxx xx

we have pretty good play for 4h

I would use whatever device you use

to invite game and let p decide

 

The hand you constructed had 12 cards so i assume it is AJTxxx ♥. But it has no good play in 4♥, not even in 3♥ and thats assuming your ♥ finesse works. All i see is you lose 3♦+2♣ tricks insta with plenty of entries for defense in ♣ suit. If your ♥ finesse works u make 8 tricks for -100 in 3♥ instead of +100 in 3♣.

 

I agree with first pass % 100. And i would pass now too. It is about bidding 3 over 3 or not and LOTT is a guide that i occasinally apply when in doubt. We have 8 trumps and so do they (at most). Vulnerable both side, i would pass.

[gnasher]

It depends on what you expect partner to have for 2♥. but I'd pass.

 

It's not clear where nine tricks are coming from in 3♥ - even if we have six heart tricks, we'll still need to make another trick out of the spades and diamonds.

 

If partner has the ace of his suit and a jack somewhere we'll have reasonable chances against 3♣, but I think Fluffy's matchpoint double is a bit greedy. Partner might have defence, but he doesn't promise it. xx KJ10xxxx xxx x is a 2♥ bid (or more) by anyone's standards.

[whereagles]

I would pass. Bidding on seems iffy.. (if pard has AKxxxx and if he has a side Q and if he has no club doubleton... bla bla too many iffs)

[Zelandakh]

My experiences suggest that when holding a weak NT with shortage in partner's suit opposite a weak 2 or WJO it is often right to pass. I cannot see anything in this hand which suggests it would be an exception.

[Phil]

I think this is a good problem and the success of 3♣ might depend on the diamond layout.

 

At IMPs, this looks like an easy pass. We have five probable tricks against 3♣.

 

At MPs, this is much closer, and I would probably bid 3♥, but double might be right.

[sasioc]

I always manage to forget to include form of scoring....sorry, this was pairs (although I am also interested in people's thoughts at teams).

 

Gnasher: your partner is likely to be sound at these conditions with a 6 card suit but could be fairly weak if she has 7 hearts. Your agreed style is to overcall pretty light at the one level.

[JLOGIC]

Obv depends on your style, I would have tried for game over 2H and I would now bid 3H. Could easily be a double make opposite something like xx KJTxxxx Qxx x or the like.

[bigbenvic]

I think I bid 3♥ straight away, I want to make it difficult for them to judge the hand, can I enduce an overbid from them? Maybe they'll try 3nt or 4♣ maybe I get to X them!

 

If i pass the first time I'm passing again, it's offering your head to them if/when they are right to take it and good opponents don't need much room. If you pass and then bid 3♥ you should IMO bid it the first time, it will save you in the long run.

[JLOGIC]

It's not offering your head when you have a good hand with a doubleton heart, it's that you have a reasonable chance of buying it in 2 and you know they don't make game so you're not worried if you get pushed to 3. It is completely wrong that you cannot pass and then bid 3 ever.

[sasioc]

I was the 2♥ bidder and held

 

xxx

AKJTxx

Jxx

x

 

which I regarded as top of a narrow-ish range for my bid given that I only had a six card heart suit (as mentioned, I could be pretty weak if I had 7 hearts, something like xx KJT9xxx xx xx probably a minimum). Do people think that this is a sensible agreed style?

 

We can make 10 tricks in hearts due to a favourable diamond layout and 3c is one off. Every other table played in a heart partscore making 9 or 10 tricks; doubling or getting to game would have been worth full marks and passing is a bottom. I'm certain I wouldn't have been confident making a decision on my partner's hand so thanks for your input, everyone :)

[MrAce]

 

 

We can make 10 tricks in hearts due to a favourable diamond layout and 3c is one off.

 

I think u need a little more than just favourable ♦ layout such as trump finesse on and not 4-1 and not losing a ♠ trick. But if the weak hand in defense had long ♦ then yea, defense seems hopeless.

[bigbenvic]

That's a definately a maximum, maybe just a fraction too strong? Not sure.

 

At that vul I can't fault 2♥ but I'd be tempted to overcall 1♥. change my shape to a 6322 and I will jump to 2 for sure.

 

I hear what you a saying JLOGIC, re buying it in 2♥ but I rarely see auctions like this go swish. So my expectation of buying 2♥ is low, yes being X and going a number in 3 is unlikely but when the conditions are right for them (getting club ruffs and having AQ over the K of ♦ etc) going slow gives them a better chance to wield the axe.

 

Passing has benefits, they might try a 4-3 spade fit, yes please! You might buy it in 2 or the might do other crazy things (like X for penalties!)

I just like the style of jamming the auctions and applying pressure on the opponents every chance I get. This is one of those auctions I like to take away their room on with a range of hands from long trumps weak values to near invitational and as little as 2 trumps.

[JLOGIC]

When you have ~half the deck, maybe more, and an 8 card fit, it can easily go all pass imo, especially when you have 4 spades. It's not a question of how often it goes all pass, it's a question of how often it goes all pass when you hold a hand of this nature, and how often you will gain from raising directly. I guess based on the other thread that people double with 4441 12 counts on 1x 2Y p 3Y and against them it's probably good to raise directly, but against normal people I doubt it.

 

You can easily catch RHO with short hearts and not enough to bid, and LHO with length and cannot reopen, or simply LHO with a doubleton heart and a hand that can't reopen, etc.

[gnasher]

It's difficult when 2♥ has such a wide range in defensive strength. The actual hand might be worth two defensive tricks, but with ♥KJxxxxx instead it would be useless defensively.

 

This might be madness, but maybe the 2♥ bidder should make a takeout double of 3♣? You have the right shape, more than typical defensive values, and a self-supporting suit. You can expect to find some values opposite - LHO's pass wasn't because he has a penalty double, so he's probably not that strong; RHO didn't double, which places an upper limit on his strength.

[gszes]

The hand you constructed had 12 cards so i assume it is AJTxxx ♥. But it has no good play in 4♥, not even in 3♥ and thats assuming your ♥ finesse works. All i see is you lose 3♦+2♣ tricks insta with plenty of entries for defense in ♣ suit. If your ♥ finesse works u make 8 tricks for -100 in 3♥ instead of +100 in 3♣.

 

I agree with first pass % 100. And i would pass now too. It is about bidding 3 over 3 or not and LOTT is a guide that i occasinally apply when in doubt. We have 8 trumps and so do they (at most). Vulnerable both side, i would pass.

you are right about the AJTxxx but lho has around one (opening lead)

opportunity to find a killing lead (if there is one) after this bidding

a club lead is by far the most common and has a high degree of probabilty

of eliminating any entry into lho hand (unless it is dia ace). If this is

indeed the case 4s does have play at IMPS--I would not try this at MP

since game rates to be somewhere overall in the upper 30% range but vs

my specific example hand I rate game as closer to 50% with a normal club

lead

[MrAce]

you are right about the AJTxxx but lho has around one (opening lead)

opportunity to find a killing lead (if there is one) after this bidding

a club lead is by far the most common and has a high degree of probabilty

of eliminating any entry into lho hand (unless it is dia ace). If this is

indeed the case 4s does have play at IMPS--I would not try this at MP

since game rates to be somewhere overall in the upper 30% range but vs

my specific example hand I rate game as closer to 50% with a normal club

lead

 

You are VERY wrong about game being to close to % 50 with your specific example. In fact i will prove you game has no chance at all whatsoever with the hand you constructed.

 

Here is why you went wrong;

 

A-You dont count tricks of defense

B-You ignored the bidding.

 

Here is the hand you constructed

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sakj6hq4dk53ct972&n=sq7hajt652d862c83]133|200[/hv]

 

-I expect 3♣ bidder to hold at least 6♣ (i hope we all agree to this), which makes the guy on lead hold at most 1♣. (This you would know if you listened to bidding)

 

-Lets assume that the ♣ he led is not one of A-K-Q-J otherwise he will hold this trick and be able to find ♦ shift.

 

-Lets make them misdefend or lets make the deal very friendly for you. Lets say opener took 1st ♣, lets say he scrtached his head and cashed his 2nd ♣ and lets assume his pd failed to ruff it and play ♦. I will make the most beginner level defense to you. Then the guy scratched his head and cashed his ♦ A for you to comfort your ♦K !!! (Did you count how many tricks defense took already ? 3) And now seeing his pd discarded on 2nd round, he decided to play 3rd♣. I am also giving you ♥K onside. You need to ruff 3rd ♣ with either T or J which brings you down to Q4 vs AJxxx with 5 trumps out and no way to avoid AT LEAST 1 trump loser :)

 

No, the chances of making game with the specific hand you suggested is not even close to %50, if it has any chance at all :) Not even with the worst defense possible on the planet. (Well that maybe overstatement, you could have some decent chance if Me and my pd Haspel was on defense, thats another story :P)

[sasioc]

As it happens the 3♣ bidder had a ropey 5 card suit. He initially tried to bid 2♣ and was obviously told this was insufficient. My guess is that he wouldn't have bid at all if he'd realised he couldn't do so at the two level :P

[MrAce]

As it happens the 3♣ bidder had a ropey 5 card suit. He initially tried to bid 2♣ and was obviously told this was insufficient. My guess is that he wouldn't have bid at all if he'd realised he couldn't do so at the two level :P

 

They can defeat 4♥ with exactly the same noobish defense i suggested. Overcaller having only 5 ♣ wont change a thing. ( refering to gszes's construction )

[gszes]

You are VERY wrong about game being to close to % 50 with your specific example. In fact i will prove you game has no chance at all whatsoever with the hand you constructed.

 

Here is why you went wrong;

 

A-You dont count tricks of defense

B-You ignored the bidding.

 

Here is the hand you constructed

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sakj6hq4dk53ct972&n=sq7hajt652d862c83]133|200[/hv]

 

-I expect 3♣ bidder to hold at least 6♣ (i hope we all agree to this), which makes the guy on lead hold at most 1♣. (This you would know if you listened to bidding)

 

-Lets assume that the ♣ he led is not one of A-K-Q-J otherwise he will hold this trick and be able to find ♦ shift.

 

-Lets make them misdefend or lets make the deal very friendly for you. Lets say opener took 1st ♣, lets say he scrtached his head and cashed his 2nd ♣ and lets assume his pd failed to ruff it and play ♦. I will make the most beginner level defense to you. Then the guy scratched his head and cashed his ♦ A for you to comfort your ♦K !!! (Did you count how many tricks defense took already ? 3) And now seeing his pd discarded on 2nd round, he decided to play 3rd♣. I am also giving you ♥K onside. You need to ruff 3rd ♣ with either T or J which brings you down to Q4 vs AJxxx with 5 trumps out and no way to avoid AT LEAST 1 trump loser :)

 

No, the chances of making game with the specific hand you suggested is not even close to %50, if it has any chance at all :) Not even with the worst defense possible on the planet. (Well that maybe overstatement, you could have some decent chance if Me and my pd Haspel was on defense, thats another story :P)

 

There is roughly a TWO (ugh)% chance the opening leader has no clubs they must find the killing lead (if there is one at trick one

lets say you hold x Kx QJT AKQJxxx) so lets agree from the bidding the contract is not hopeless. 2% is NOT a good % to hang

ones hat on when deciding to bid can we do better? The example you gave your hand might have looked something like x Kx AJTx AKQJxx

 

If p leads a non descript club (around 60% of the time) how do you know to cash a second club trick?? Is it because declarer

is more likely than partner to hold a singleton??? NOPE thats not it because p is a 2/1 favorite to hold 2 clubs (after trick

one). If you stop to think about that you have to consider other ways to set the contract. Is a spade switch necessary in case

declarer was 2641 that might work but is a disaster if declarer was 3622 Is a dia switch needed to try for 2d 1c and hope p

has the heart T well thats a disaster in many other circumstances. If you continue a club and declarer ruffs declarer will make

their contract an enormous amount of the time.

 

While indeed my example hand with all cards exposed has no prayer ----- under normal circumstances anyone that thinks about the

defense will probably switch at trick 2 and it will be wrong around around 80% of the time. I dont see 50% as being a poor

overall estimate of the chances of 4h with the hand I gave. It has 50% not because of poor defense (it would not be poor

defense to switch just defense that didnt work that particular hand) but the backs of the cards make defending a ton

more difficult.

[dake50]

With my style, after 2H, I double 3C to show

HAK as defensive tricks. Partner is now well placed.

[MrAce]

There is roughly a TWO (ugh)% chance the opening leader has no clubs they must find the killing lead (if there is one at trick one

lets say you hold x Kx QJT AKQJxxx) so lets agree from the bidding the contract is not hopeless. 2% is NOT a good % to hang

ones hat on when deciding to bid can we do better? The example you gave your hand might have looked something like x Kx AJTx AKQJxx

 

If p leads a non descript club (around 60% of the time) how do you know to cash a second club trick?? Is it because declarer

is more likely than partner to hold a singleton??? NOPE thats not it because p is a 2/1 favorite to hold 2 clubs (after trick

one). If you stop to think about that you have to consider other ways to set the contract. Is a spade switch necessary in case

declarer was 2641 that might work but is a disaster if declarer was 3622 Is a dia switch needed to try for 2d 1c and hope p

has the heart T well thats a disaster in many other circumstances. If you continue a club and declarer ruffs declarer will make

their contract an enormous amount of the time.

 

While indeed my example hand with all cards exposed has no prayer ----- under normal circumstances anyone that thinks about the

defense will probably switch at trick 2 and it will be wrong around around 80% of the time. I dont see 50% as being a poor

overall estimate of the chances of 4h with the hand I gave. It has 50% not because of poor defense (it would not be poor

defense to switch just defense that didnt work that particular hand) but the backs of the cards make defending a ton

more difficult.

 

You handpicked and constructed a hand for North to support your bidding and you claimed that the game was close to % 50 due to non double dummy defense.

 

And i said you are dreaming.

 

-You asked for 3-2 ♥ break, granted !

 

-You asked for non ♦ lead, granted !

 

-You asked the guy on lead dont have any of A-K-Q-J of ♣ so he can not shift to ♦, granted !

 

- Now after you handpicked your pd's hand, you are handpicking the opponent hands too, fine, granted too ! :)

 

Here is everything u asked and everything granted for you in the diagram.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sakj6hq4dk53ct972&w=s2hk2dajt2cakqj43&n=sq3hajt753d864c65&e=st98754h986dq97c8]399|300[/hv]

 

You are telling me that after ♣ lead, it is not obvious for West to cash 2nd ♣, and you are telling me he may choose to shift ♠ or ♦. Bro...are you aware that west sees south hand as dummy ? Why on earth west wanna play a ♠ towards dummy's AKJx ? If he cashes his 2nd ♣ and lets say declarer had stiff ♣ and ruffed, he will have to play ♠ himself to dummy in order to take ♥ finesse !!! LOL. And ♦ shift ??? What does ♦ shift wins for ? Seriously !!

 

Look, this is A/E forum. I understand when it comes to bidding, people can get away with all the jambo mambos they want. But when you start to debate the card play, u better be careful about your claims. Because once you step out of your comfort zone of bidding and step into the "card play" part of this game, there aint much room for jambo mambos, unfortunately.

 

You are using words like "Close to % 50" "Enormous amount of time" etc etc. Are you even aware that even after i grant your wishes, just alone Qx vs AJTxxx combination making 6 tricks percentage is %36 ?