Follow up after UCB

[jallerton]

Matchpoints, unfavourable vulnerability.[hv=pc=n&e=saq7hq654dk95ca43&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1d1sp2d(good%20raise)2hp(Stronger%20than%202S)3d]133|200[/hv]

 

Partner would bid 2S on a complete minimum, so pass shows at least some interest in higher things. What is your call on the 2nd round?

[MrAce]

I voted for DBL simply because i saw the vulnerability totally opposite of what it is.

 

 

[Zelandakh]

This is surely a straight choice between 3♥ and 3NT depending on what we are defining as a minimum.

[jallerton]

I voted for DBL simply because i saw the vulnerability totally opposite of what it is.

 

So what would you do at the stated vulnerability?

[rhm]

3NT looks attractive if partner accepts it.

My guess is that 3NT has better chances than even 3♠. South is more likely to have the ♦A than North

North has shown a weak hand with a long suit and must be very short in hearts, probably void.

I do not relish heart ruffs in a spade contract nor do I see what 3♥ is supposed to accomplish.

Somebody has to bid 3NT at some stage if you want to play there.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[ahydra]

3NT looks good with the scattered values and flat shape, though I wouldn't be surprised to get 4S back from pard.

 

ahydra

[gszes]

i echo 3n p heard our original limit+ raise and they must realize we have good

reason to now avoid the obvious spade contract. P may still overrule depending

on hand type JTxxxx ATx x KQJ

[MrAce]

So what would you do at the stated vulnerability?

 

I would suggest to play game in 3NT or 4♠ by bidding 3NT now.

[jallerton]

3NT looks attractive if partner accepts it.

My guess is that 3NT has better chances than even 3♠. South is more likely to have the ♦A than North

North has shown a weak hand with a long suit and must be very short in hearts, probably void.

I do not relish heart ruffs in a spade contract nor do I see what 3♥ is supposed to accomplish.

Somebody has to bid 3NT at some stage if you want to play there.

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

I think you have misread the auction. South opened 1♦. However, I do agree with your observation that South is more likely than North to hold ♦A!

[jallerton]

Thanks for the replies.

 

I held this hand and bid 3NT, hoping to be able to run the spade suit and protect ♦K. My partner didn't agree with this bid, saying that I ought to have a double diamond stop.

 

He passed holding ♠J8xxx ♥AJ ♦x ♣QJ10xx. With Opener holding Kx in both black suits, I couldn't make 3NT on a diamond lead, whilst 4♠ was makeable.

[Fluffy]

I was thinking along those lines, with a diamond singleton opposite, protecting the lead is not so important, and if it is onside the pitch could be useful. And even if partner had ♠K, you would not have time to develop extra tricks on hearts or clubs and often you lose for 400 vs 420 or 430 vs 450

 

Your partner shouldn't pass 3NT with that hand unless 2♦ doesn't promise support.

[Codo]

If I show my spade fit and bid NT later, I give partner a choice, I do not make a statement. If I have a hand which wants to play NT at all means, I had bid NT before I support the spades. So with his shape, he should allways bid 4 ♠ over 3 NT.

 

And a second thought: If this is a non-minimum hand for a vul. overcall for you, this judgment surely was based on the fine shape for spades not on the high point count. Another reason to insist on spades.

[PhilKing]

 

He passed holding ♠J8xxx ♥AJ ♦x ♣QJ10xx. With Opener holding Kx in both black suits, I couldn't make 3NT on a diamond lead, whilst 4♠ was makeable.

 

His pass was not ridiculous. 3NT would have been right if your ♠Q was the diamond queen, where 4♠ has 4 losers and 3NT 9 winners. It seems likely that you are 14-16 with 3433 and 2 diamond stops and his honour structure makes it likely 3NT is pretty good.

 

I would have bid 3♣ on his hand though. I mean, the hand is not that great (it was terrible before a fit was found), but "five-five, come alive" can't be that wrong opposite a cue. Then you would just pot 4♠.