S2000magic Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 Matchpoints, both vulnerable, LHO deals: (2♥) - P* - (P) - ? You hold: ♠ ---♥ K Q 8♦ A Q J 10 9 3♣ K J 10 3 * Noticeable pause, duly brought to your attention by RHO before you bid So, what's your bid? (And would it be different without the pause?) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkham Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 3NT But maybe we are barred from doing that after partner's pause (which might suggest spades, or at least a few points). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 The hitch suggests he wanted to take action but didn't. I'm guessing 6 spades and a 9 count for instance. 3♦ would be suggested by the pause, but I'm going with 3N. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S2000magic Posted August 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 I'm guessing 6 spades and a 9 count for instance.You're a physic: 6 spades to the KQJ and the ♥J: 7 HCP. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 The hesitation suggests bidding, but I was obviously doing that anyway. I don't think I can reach a conclusion that any particular bid is suggested though. So I can just bid normally, on this round at least. I choose 3♦. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 The hitch suggests he wanted to take action but didn't. I'm guessing 6 spades and a 9 count for instance. 3♦ would be suggested by the pause, but I'm going with 3N.If I thought 3NT was a L.A. to 3D, then obviously 3D gives us a chance to avoid him bidding 4S over 3NT; so, I would have to choose 3NT. Now, my CHO has shown what I could already guess would happen without the UI. I still bid 3D, and accept the ruling if TD thinks 3NT with a spade void was a L.A. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lycier Posted August 17, 2012 Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 HiWho is willing to accept additional suggestibility? Nothing to do that,but bid 3D,and don't worried about next auctions,it is very important to listen attentively to partner's bid since god know what the hand's distribution is,merely.Helgemo said guess is worse part of this game! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggwhiz Posted August 17, 2012 Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 If 3nt works the opps may well claim that you knew pard wasn't broke. I understand the attempt to put yourself at risk (pard bids 4♠) but your obligation is to bid as if partner had made a smooth pass. 3♦ does that opposite a pard who may be broke. Even though we know that's not the case it reverts to a normal as in no damage auction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S2000magic Posted August 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 The problem I see with 3♦ is that 3NT will often be right and partner will have no way to bid it. And it's not as if 3♦ will encourage him to bid 3♠ with some mediocre 4- or 5-card suit and, say, the ♦K or the ♣Q, allowing me to bid 3NT knowing that spades are stopped. I bid 3NT, fully aware that the opponents might complain to the director. My reasoning was that a) my void in spades strongly suggests that partner will have the suit stopped, b) this may be my last chance to show a heart stopper, c) if I show the heart stopper by bidding 2NT, partner likely won't raise to 3NT on most hands where 3NT is cold, d) I didn't think that partner's pause was all that significant over a weak 2♥, and e) whatever partner's pause, it might have been more a lack of judgment than a seriously borderline hand. I made 3NT (with a good guess in clubs, but unable to take the (winning) diamond finesse), and RHO said that he thought that 3NT was clear-cut on my hand. (After the auction I told him that he was welcome to call the director, but he deferred.) In any case, I thought that it was an interesting hand, all the more so because of the pause. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted August 17, 2012 Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 I would think that this hand is a bit heavy for 3♦ in balancing position. Doesn't the hitch make 3♦ less dangerous because partner has values and is likely to find a bid? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sailoranch Posted August 18, 2012 Report Share Posted August 18, 2012 I would think that this hand is a bit heavy for 3♦ in balancing position. Doesn't the hitch make 3♦ less dangerous because partner has values and is likely to find a bid? Perhaps, but 3♦ also becomes more dangerous because partner may play us for less than we've got and pass while 3NT makes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted August 18, 2012 Report Share Posted August 18, 2012 This is an obvious 3D bid, hesitation or no hesitation. That is my bid now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikestar13 Posted August 18, 2012 Report Share Posted August 18, 2012 This is an obvious 3D bid, hesitation or no hesitation. That is my bid now. Agree 100%. Partner can cue 3♥ over my 3♦ if he has good cards but no heart stopper. (His most likely holding on my hand plus the bidding, hitch or no). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted August 20, 2012 Report Share Posted August 20, 2012 3D, and I dont think 3NT is a clear cut bid. If you really want to read something in the pause, than that partner has values and spades, i.e. you have a spade stopper.Bidding 3NT is taking advantage of the UI, biddding 3D is not. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fromageGB Posted August 21, 2012 Report Share Posted August 21, 2012 3D, and I dont think 3NT is a clear cut bid.Bidding 3NT is taking advantage of the UI, biddding 3♦ is not.Agree absolutely. If any bid can be suggested by the hesitation, it would be spades, never diamonds. 3♦ is forcing, if partner bids spades, I am happy to rebid 3NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S2000magic Posted August 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2012 Agree absolutely. If any bid can be suggested by the hesitation, it would be spades, never diamonds. 3♦ is forcing, if partner bids spades, I am happy to rebid 3NT.Why is 3♦ forcing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fromageGB Posted August 21, 2012 Report Share Posted August 21, 2012 Why is 3♦ forcing?OK, maybe it isn't for you and (I am sure) others. I don't play 2NT as natural, but Lebensohl. Forces 3♣. Using this, (2♥) p p 2NT p 3♣ p 3♦ is to play, while (2♥) p p 3♦ is forcing. I reckon the hand is too good to insist on playing just in 3♦. Out of curiosity, if you do play natural 2NT here, do you play 2NT response to partner's takeout double as Lebensohl ? (I think many do.) Why one and not the other? I would think the case for natural 2NT is stronger when partner has shown some strength and implied the other suits with a takeout double, than it is in this position where you would have to have a lot lot more. I think the strength distinctions given by Lebensohl are more important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted August 21, 2012 Report Share Posted August 21, 2012 I would be very surprised if anyone (unless they are confused) plays a 2N balance after: (2M) p (P) as Good/Bad and/or calls it Lebensohl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S2000magic Posted August 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2012 Out of curiosity, if you do play natural 2NT here, do you play 2NT response to partner's takeout double as Lebensohl ? (I think many do.) Why one and not the other? I would think the case for natural 2NT is stronger when partner has shown some strength and implied the other suits with a takeout double, than it is in this position where you would have to have a lot lot more. I think the strength distinctions given by Lebensohl are more important.My partner (in this game), while good (and getting better), has an aversion to learning "too many conventions". (He plays with three other partners at various stages of beginner / intermediate and finds it difficult to play vastly different systems with different partners.) So, we don't play Lebensohl (in any form, under any circumstances), and without explicit discussion I wouldn't use 2NT as anything but natural here. And I might not even with explicit discussion (lest he forget and we end up in a silly contract). I agree with your assessment that we should be playing Lebensohl in many cases; alas, it won't happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quiddity Posted August 21, 2012 Report Share Posted August 21, 2012 Out of curiosity, if you do play natural 2NT here, do you play 2NT response to partner's takeout double as Lebensohl ? (I think many do.) Why one and not the other? Because ditching the 2NT bid makes more sense when partner's hand is better defined with known values. What do you do with 16 balanced, jump to 3nt? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fromageGB Posted August 21, 2012 Report Share Posted August 21, 2012 I would be very surprised if anyone (unless they are confused) plays a 2N balance after:(2M) p (P) as Good/Bad and/or calls it Lebensohl. Because ditching the 2NT bid makes more sense when partner's hand is better defined with known values. What do you do with 16 balanced, jump to 3nt?Call it what you like, I do get confused over terminology. I don't see where the "Good" comes into "Good/Bad" and I still don't know what is meant by "mixed" raise. However, I explained the use. As to whether you think this is a good or bad idea, it's a question of preference. With a strong hand I might like to make a bid showing strength, inviting game if not absolutely forcing, and with a weaker hand I like to bid to play. I get more mileage out of that than I would a natural 2NT, I think. If you have a good minor suit and a strong hand, it is a bit unilateral to X, then rebid 4 of the minor. An immediate bid of 3m gives more options. With a balanced 16 over hearts, I think I would probably X and pass a simple minor or bid 2NT over spades, but over spades I would wish I was playing natural 2NT, then pass or X. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted August 21, 2012 Report Share Posted August 21, 2012 Just for information, the term "good/bad" simply means one route shows a good hand, and the other route shows a bad (merely competitive) hand. Depending on agreement in your partnership 2nt can be the relay to show the good one, or can be the relay to show the bad one (more common). It is a cousin of ---and often confused with ---lebensohl, because direct bids beyond 2NT are stronger in Leben and weaker hands slow things down with 2NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted September 5, 2012 Report Share Posted September 5, 2012 your obligation is to bid as if partner had made a smooth pass.This common misunderstanding is not quite correct. Your obligation is to assess which logical alternatives you have (bids that a certain percentage of your peers would consider plus anything else you want to throw into the mix) and then to remove from the list any that are suggested by the unauthorised information that you have. Then you select your call from the remaining options. It is sometimes the case that the call you would have made without the UI is also suggested by it and therefore you must choose an alternative LA, should one exist. Call it what you like, I do get confused over terminology. I don't see where the "Good" comes into "Good/Bad" and I still don't know what is meant by "mixed" raise. Agua has explained Good/Bad so I will have a go at the mixed raise. A mixed raise is a hand that wants to raise to the 3 level but is too strong to be preemptive and too weak to be a limit raise. An example over an opening 1M bid might be 4 card trump support with ~7-9 support points. Obviously the exact definitons depend on what you require for your limit and preemptive raises, and what partner has shown from the previous bidding. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted September 5, 2012 Report Share Posted September 5, 2012 The hitch suggests he wanted to take action but didn't. I'm guessing 6 spades and a 9 count for instance. 3♦ would be suggested by the pause, but I'm going with 3N. Hmmm My thought is that the pause suggests bidding either double or 3N. Partner has something but can't find a bid.This suggests that he holds values in Spades. This makes both 3NT and a balancing double more attractive. I'da thunk that 3♦ is the bid not suggested by a tank... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted September 5, 2012 Report Share Posted September 5, 2012 delete duplicate post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts