Phil Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 w/r, swiss matches Q7xxx x KQxx QTx p - 1♣ - p - 1♥1♠ - x - 2♠ - 3♥p - 4♥ - p - p x is 3 hearts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 I am not taking the last guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 No, definitely not. We have only an 8-card fit, my spades are weak, I have plenty of defence, partner may have heart values or length, and even if 4♠ is a save it won't be especially cheap. Imagine partner with Kxx Kxxx xxx Jxx. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulg Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 This is so far from being a close decision, with pass clearly marked, that I can only think that partner hesitated over four hearts and this hand bid on for a successful save. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gszes Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 P* rates to have around 7 hcp and 3 spades (no 3s bid) (no xx)We have little in the way of defense and a singleton in opps suit idealconditions to consider a sacrifice.*Within that range the most common result seems to be where we go down 3. Down 2 is pretty scarce and there are many more hands where (see gnasher) down 4 (5?) is quite achievable. The probable rewardof +(120-150) just isn't sufficient to make up for the possible -(180-480)that 4s will get us in. This is a much closer question at MP where we onlyneed the down 2 or 3 to outnumber the -4/5 to probably come out ahead. A small amount of hands p will have bid 2s with 2 aces and a flat hand. We could actually set 4h making the IMP 4s bid much worse and takingaway from any possible MP advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Do we have an unusually offensive hand for our 1♠ overcall? No. Do we have more defence than we might have? Yes. Do we have a partner who saw us bid 1♠? Yes. Do we have a partner who has an unusual O/D ratio for his modest 2♠ call? Well, probably not and, if he does, then he's the one who has caused us to miss a good save. I am not bidding on the assumption that either he misbid or we have a lucky combination of cards such that a superficially silly save works out. I agree with paul, to the effect that I just don't see why this would be viewed as a problem by most players. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Agree with the choir. This is not a close decision. Pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilKing Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 I would retain the deposit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 I would retain the deposit.Aha. A reason for the question :P I think Hargreaves is already deciding how the org can spend the money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted January 28, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 I think bidding is ludicrous. However, as PhilK surmised, partner tanked over 4♥ and this hand saved for a slight pickup of 500 v 650. Partner held AJx Kxx Jxx xxxx. And no idea what this tank was all about. I chose not to adjust, because I'm not clear what the tank suggests opposite the OP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 Aha. A reason for the question :P I think Hargreaves is already deciding how the org can spend the money.What makes you think that I wouldn't simply keep the money myself B-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilKing Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 I chose not to adjust, because I'm not clear what the tank suggests opposite the OP. It's true that a tank (when we are looking at a stiff trump) is as likely to be a hand that was thinking of doubling, but the player concerned probably bid on for, er, illicit reasons. :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.