you be the judge

[yaohung]

[hv=pc=n&s=s7654h8654da6cak5&n=saqt932h7dk74c743&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1cp1sp2sp3cp3sppp]266|200|4♠ is a very good contract...[/hv]

• Shall North drive to game directly?
  
• If choose the invitational approach, what's the proper call?
  
• Should South reject the invitation? (whatever inviational call)
  

 

[hv=pc=n&s=saj64hak9djt97ca5&n=sk5hj853d5ckj9743&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1np2c2d2sp3cppp]266|200|4 ways xfer apply, 3♣ is an invitation but not forcing[/hv]

 

• What's the reasonable contract for this hand?
  
• Who should take the blame (percentage) if any error?
  
• Your suggestion? Thank you
  

[Hanoi5]

I'd blame North in the first hand. The hand is too good, a ten-card fit, the singleton, etc. I don't think an invitation is neccessary and I'm torn about which invitation should South accept or deny, A and AK, 4-card fit and a doubleton, maybe a heart try should not be accepted.

 

I think the 2nd hand is harder. South has a maximum, why didn't s/he accept? A six-card suit headed by KJ and another King in partner's suit is an invitation?

[mike777]

1) north has an easy 4s, not 3c

2) south has an easy 3nt

[ArtK78]

I agree with Mike, who (for once) I fully understand. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif

[Fluffy]

Hand 1, if 2♠ guarantees 4 card support I blame north, I estimate around 80% that south has doubleton diamond given opponent's silence. He migth have heart honors but they are not necessarily wasted. If 2♠ can be 3 cards its south who gets the blame.

 

 

Hand 2, 3♣ is simply forcing.

[mgoetze]

• Shall North drive to game directly?
  
• If choose the invitational approach, what's the proper call?
  
• Should South reject the invitation? (whatever inviational call)
  

1. Yes.

2. Uhm, I dunno, 3♠?

3. Yes.

 

• What's the reasonable contract for this hand?
  
• Who should take the blame (percentage) if any error?
  
• Your suggestion? Thank you
  

Regardless of whether you play 4-way transfers, 3♣ as merely invitational is highly unusual. Nevertheless, you can play whatever system you want, so in this context... South got invited, and he has a maximum and a diamond stopper. Why on earth would he not bid 3NT? (Which is a fine contract at first glance.)

[mfa1010]

North has a game force on 1.

North and south both have a game force on 2.

[aguahombre]

Regardless of whether you play 4-way transfers, 3♣ as merely invitational is highly unusual. Nevertheless, you can play whatever system you want, so in this context... South got invited, and he has a maximum and a diamond stopper. Why on earth would he not bid 3NT? (Which is a fine contract at first glance.)

A perfect analysis under the OP conditions. Would 4-suit transfer people actually use that with an invite range (North) and 4 hearts? I admit to having an ugly choice after Stayman, and the Diamond competition ---and would probably bid an ugly forcing 3C, ending in 3NT praying for luck in clubs after trying for the heart queen to drop from East's hand.

[RSClyde]

On 1, Whether or not North has a GF seems to depend on your opening bid/ raising style. Even if he only chooses a game try, can't south do a little more than 3♠? AK, A and a doubleton with 4 trump is worth a return try isn't it? Certainly in the context of a light style with 3 card raises a 3♦ return try could be no more than this. If your opening bid structure is more sound, then north should have already bid the game anyway.

[mfa1010]

On 1, Whether or not North has a GF seems to depend on your opening bid/ raising style. Even if he only chooses a game try, can't south do a little more than 3♠? AK, A and a doubleton with 4 trump is worth a return try isn't it? Certainly in the context of a light style with 3 card raises a 3♦ return try could be no more than this. If your opening bid structure is more sound, then north should have already bid the game anyway.

I think return tries such as the one you suggest should be reserved to hands, where the bid is descriptive. If the return try doesn't describe the hand, then I think it is better to make a decision oneself.

[johnu]

Both problems are so basic they should be in the Novice and Beginner forum

[RSClyde]

I think return tries such as the one you suggest should be reserved to hands, where the bid is descriptive. If the return try doesn't describe the hand, then I think it is better to make a decision oneself.

What is there to describe at this point? We're either bidding 4♠ or stopping in 3♠. Doing something other than bidding one or the other has to indicate uncertainty.

[barmar]

Both problems are so basic they should be in the Novice and Beginner forum

I split the difference and moved it to Int/Adv.

[rmnka447]

Hand #1

North should reevaluate the responding hand after the direct ♠ raise by South. If South's raise generally guarantees 4 trumps, then you're looking at least a 10 card fit. Adding value for either shortness (3 for the singleton ♥) or trump suit length (1 for the fifth, 2 for the 6th trump), the North hand is worth about 12 opposite partner's opening bid. Most folks will just blast to 4 ♠ on those kind of values.

 

If you decide to invite, the question is what are your tools over the raise to 2 ♠? If you play Help Suit game tries, then any new suit bid over 2 ♠ asks for help in cutting down losers in the suit bid. Here after a 3 ♦ Help Suit game try, South with ♦ Ax would carry on to 4 ♠ as that holding ensures no more than 1 ♦ loser. The other tool often used is a Short Suit game try. Instead of bidding a suit needing help, any new suit bid shows shortness (singleton or void). Normally, the ♠ raiser carries on to game if his/her values are primarily outside the short suit. Here, after a 3 ♥ Short Suit game try, South can see that there are no wasted values in his/her hand. So even though it's a very minimum hand, South should carry on to 4 ♠. Most partnerships will decide to use one of these tools

 

Using either of these methods, the partnership can decide to use either 2 NT or 3 ♠ as the traditional power game try (i.e. bid game with a maximum, subside in 3 ♠ with a minimum). North really doesn't have the type of hand to use a power game try in this hand. But if he did have such a hand, South would decline to bid game and place the hand in 3 ♠, if necessary.

 

 

Hand #2

 

I'm assuming you are playing 1 NT = 15-17.

 

The contract you want to be in is 3 NT.

 

If 3 ♣ is invitational, then South absolutely has to carry on to 3 NT. South's hand is a maximum -- 17 HCP -- and has some nice placed intermediate cards (i.e. 10s, 9s, 8s) in addition. All 3 side suits(♦,♥,♠) have sure stoppers in South's hand.

[RSClyde]

I Dealmastered the North hand opposite an 11 count with 4 trump, 4S was only 46%.

[aguahombre]

I Dealmastered the North hand opposite an 11 count with 4 trump, 4S was only 46%.

I don't think you can use that, here. South's decision to open the bidding means he doesn't have some random flat 11 count which your dealmaster would throw into the mix.

[RSClyde]

I don't think you can use that, here. South's decision to open the bidding means he doesn't have some random flat 11 count which your dealmaster would throw into the mix.

That seems to be rather a matter of style. I suppose when the problem is stated without any qualifications, I should assume that he opens "normally". But my result is easy enough to transfer: assuming that partner doesn't open on cheese, north is clearly in range to bid game.

[Hanoi5]

I Dealmastered the North hand opposite an 11 count with 4 trump, 4S was only 46%.

 

46% is good enough to bid a NV game. And 11 is not neccessarily normal, partner can have so much more...

[Fluffy]

not only is partner having better than a random 11 count, opponent's silence suggests good breaks all around as well as short diamond opposite.

 

On the other hand declarer is guessing stiff ♠K and ♠KJx onside double dummy.

[neilkaz]

Hand 1 with the 6 card suit seems good enough that game is likely 50/50 on the average hand that PD wouldn't accept an invite. By inviting you also give info to the defense who may just then find the best lead or quick shift. Also when you invite, your partner may not be able to properly evaluate whether to accept anyhow. Here I make a Woolsey Game Try...ie I bid game and try to make it!

 

Hand 2 with PD inviting game, you have to hope and accept since D is stopped. On some days, they'll start with 3 D tricks and then RHO gets back in when you play ♣ and cashed more ♦ to set you. But bridge is a game of percentages and I think 3NT is a favorite here.

[mikeh]

On 1: if the raise promises 4 card support, N just bids it. 10 card fits, when the 6 card holding is strong and has a side singleton, play very well: definitely better than say 6322.

 

On 2, this sort of sequence is rarely discussed. However, it is standard to play that, without interference, a 3m bid by the stayman responder is forcing. If that treatment is in use, and it is standard so should be in use, then logic suggests that S act as if that's what responder is doing. In turn that means bidding 3N.

 

If, as some inexperienced players do, the partnership uses stayman then minor as the way to get out in the minor, then N has misevaluated his hand and S has done nothing wrong. This is non-standard and I wouldn't assume it to be the scenario but I have seen it played that way.

[RSClyde]

On 1: if the raise promises 4 card support, N just bids it. 10 card fits, when the 6 card holding is strong and has a side singleton, play very well: definitely better than say 6322.

 

I'm not sure how strong I want the 6 card suit to be. Once we're in a 10 card fit, cards like the Q and J of trump are frequently wasted and the HCPs would be better were they located elsewhere.

[mcphee]

This is a slight shock to me that on hand #1 some feel the N hand is not game going, even facing 3 card support you want to be in game at imps. Here the opening hand is a bare bones minimum and game is very good.

 

The methods given for hand #2 are strange and for S to bid is difficult with only 2C, so I do not feel S took a poor action. N however should man up and treat the hand game going, 3N is not without chances, could easily go down with 4-1 C onside even.

[RSClyde]

This is a slight shock to me that on hand #1 some feel the N hand is not game going, even facing 3 card support you want to be in game at imps. Here the opening hand is a bare bones minimum and game is very good.

 

The methods given for hand #2 are strange and for S to bid is difficult with only 2C, so I do not feel S took a poor action. N however should man up and treat the hand game going, 3N is not without chances, could easily go down with 4-1 C onside even.

But AK, A and a ruffing value is great opposite a long suit. This is a particularly well fitting minimum. I agree that bidding game is fine. But within the context of light openers, 3 card raises and liberal use of return game tries, I think inviting is fine too and that it's still reachable thereafter.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=s7654h8654da6cak5&n=saqt932h7dk74c743&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1cp1sp2sp3cp3sppp]266|200|

 

4♠ is a very good contract...

• Shall North drive to game directly?
• If choose the invitational approach, what's the proper call?
• Should South reject the invitation? (whatever inviational call)[/hv][hv=pc=n&s=saj64hak9djt97ca5&n=sk5hj853d5ckj9743&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1np2c2d2sp3cppp]266|200|

4 ways xfer apply, 3♣ is an invitation but not forcing

 

• What's the reasonable contract for this hand?
• Who should take the blame (percentage) if any error?
• Your suggestion? Thank you[/hv]

IMO

1. South has a good minimum but North has the values for 4♠.
2. North is worth a try. With a supermax and a sure ♦ stop, South should bid 3N.
3. Why isn't this in the world-class forum? :)