2 session pairs, double or slam

[Mbodell]

My reward for getting clocked by the Diamond team in the spingold was a 2-session pairs today in Philadelphia. Of the 52 hands, 11 were either doubled or in slam. Here was the first hand out of the box for a cold 0 for us. How would you ATB for this auction?

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sqj3h963dq753caq7&w=sa874hq5dk86ckj43&n=skt652hkjdajt42ct&e=s9hat8742d9c98652&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=p1c1s2c2spp3hdppp&p=sqsas6s9hqhkhah3c2c7cjcth5hjh2h6skd9s3s4s2h4sjs7c5cac3d2cqckd4c6s8sth7]399|300[/hv]

[mike777]

my two cents worth

 

this seems like a common issue: you pass thinking you have a lousy hand then try and catch up later in the bidding, this time at the 3 level to show a maximum hand.

 

in the mean time the opp have shown a double fit,here in clubs and hearts.

[blackshoe]

I think I would have bid 3♣ on the second round, rather than 2♠.

[mike777]

I think I would have bid 3♣ on the second round, rather than 2♠.

 

First off Wow how exciting to play in the Spingold against the very best. Mbodell I admire your effort.

 

 

with only 3s, 8.5 loser hand and clubs bid on your left and pard made a nv 1s overcall?

 

again this seems to be the common theme of trying to catch up for passing with this hand.

 

my only point is it seems better to bid first then show a minimum hand rather than trying to show a max passed hand in the middle of a comp auction at the three level.

 

That means if you think this is a stinky hand and pass then continue to think it is a stinky hand or open the hand and then show a stinky hand. :)

[rmnka447]

I don't have any problem with the initial pass. Altough it's not perfect, you have about the value of a limit raise.

After the 2 ♣ raise, how about bidding 3 ♣ to show that value.

 

Partner will hardly go overboard because you've already passed and denied an opener. But partner with a 6 loser hand should make a move toward game with a 3 ♦ bid. With all your cards working except the ♣ Q, you certainly might accept.

[mike777]

I don't have any problem with the initial pass. Altough it's not perfect, you have about the value of a limit raise.

After the 2 ♣ raise, how about bidding 3 ♣ to show that value.

 

Partner will hardly go overboard because you've already passed and denied an opener. But partner with a 6 loser hand should make a move toward game with a 3 ♦ bid. With all your cards working except the ♣ Q, you certainly might accept.

 

 

but the issue is you dont have an 8 loser 4 card limit raise across from a nv overcall 1s

 

if a limit raise is 3 spades and 8.5 loser hand with perhaps a worthless QC ok.

--

 

 

To make a game try after alimit raise is easy...the hard part is making a limit raise.

[Zelandakh]

What would 2NT over 2♣ have meant for you?

[quiddity]

2♠ looks ok to me; I definitely hate any limit bid which forces to the three level. South might have considered a responsive double to show values, followed by a correction of any red-suit to 2♠.

 

South's double of 3♥ looks kind of insane with one defensive trick opposite an overcall.

[billw55]

South's double of 3♥ looks kind of insane with one defensive trick opposite an overcall.

I thought that too, and eventually decided that as penalty, it is so bad that it cannot have been intended that way. I suppose it was meant as a maximal double or something like that. If north gets this message he will surely bid on. So I would call this a miscommunication rather than a blame situation.

[ahydra]

2♠ looks ok to me; I definitely hate any limit bid which forces to the three level. South might have considered a responsive double to show values, followed by a correction of any red-suit to 2♠.

 

South's double of 3♥ looks kind of insane with one defensive trick opposite an overcall.

 

Pretty much my thoughts exactly. However if I try any sort of X-then-correct-to-spades shenanigans with my regular partner, it's likely to end in disaster like the last time I used a responsive X... Pity, because as I've stated elsewhere, the X is an under-utilised tool in competitive bidding.

 

ahydra

[ggwhiz]

I would have bid 2nt instead of 2♠ but don't mind it. In my partnership our style is that the 2♠ bid would have worked out better.

 

For us the following double just shows a max and we would NEVER pass it with the shape in the North hand. I might remove to 3♠, game if I'm on a caffein high but my glass overflowing partner would bid game for sure.

[rmnka447]

but the issue is you dont have an 8 loser 4 card limit raise across from a nv overcall 1s

 

if a limit raise is 3 spades and 8.5 loser hand with perhaps a worthless QC ok.

--

 

 

To make a game try after alimit raise is easy...the hard part is making a limit raise.

I certainly would rather have 4 ♠s for the limit raise, but sometimes it's more important to show the value of your hand even though there are only 3 cards in support.

 

I could bid 2 ♠ with as little as a K, a Q, and 3 trump, so the hand just looks like too much for a 2 ♠ call. ♠ QJx are certainly

good cards opposite partner's overcall. The hand would be an easy 3 card jump raise in a forcing NT auction after a 1 ♠ opener by pard.

[quiddity]

There's no way this double can be anything but penalty. You already limited your hand and showed your fit, your partner chose not to make a game try, and your RHO just made a retarded bid. Doubles of retarded bids are for penalty!

[gszes]

2s bid by south was fine boring balanced 3 card raise club Q of dubious value

at best. IMO

 

N get 100% of the blame for failing to appreciate their hand better and issue a

game try (by whatever partnerhip methods you have) mine would be HSGT

3d.

 

after the 3d bid S has to realize their hand is golden side A and QQJ in partners

2 long suits make this an easy game accept over 3h.