ATB

[eagles123]

[hv=pc=n&s=saqt94ha843dt6cqj&n=sk63hqj97d874c642&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1sp1n2d2h3d3sppdppp]266|200[/hv]

 

somewhat of an MP disaster going for 500 in -2

 

South thought North had a minimum hand for 1NT and should've passed rather than bidding 3S

 

North thought that there was a known double fit in Hearts and Spades, and with 3 diamonds partner was likely to have D shortage. Also commented that S was showing a stronger hand than they had for 2H bid.

 

 

Thanks,

 

Eagles

[billw55]

Equal blame. Both players overbid a little. Red on white is not the time to get aggressive.

[Zelandakh]

South's 2♥ rebid does not show extra values so let's get that out of the way up front. If North is going to bid over 3♦ then I think 3♥ is the better choice. Whether to bid or not seems fairly close - thinking about it in terms of LoTTy (everyone's favourite on BBF) we have an 8 card fit, +1 for double fit, -1 for bad shape and they are likely to have a 9 card fit or 2 8-card fits for a total count of 17. So as usual for red versus white, we want to bid if we are making and defend if we are down. The problem here is that partner might have 5 hearts, and will often have 5-5 shape here. That makes bidding more attractive but again only 3♥, not 3♠. If South had doubled 2♦ instead then West has an easier time passing. So a little blame to both but not for the reasons being given.

[billw55]

South's 2♥ rebid does not show extra values so let's get that out of the way up front. If North is going to bid over 3♦ then I think 3♥ is the better choice. Whether to bid or not seems fairly close - thinking about it in terms of LoTTy (everyone's favourite on BBF) we have an 8 card fit, +1 for double fit, -1 for bad shape and they are likely to have a 9 card fit or 2 8-card fits for a total count of 17. So as usual for red versus white, we want to bid if we are making and defend if we are down. The problem here is that partner might have 5 hearts, and will often have 5-5 shape here. That makes bidding more attractive but again only 3♥, not 3♠. If South had doubled 2♦ instead then West has an easier time passing. So a little blame to both but not for the reasons being given.

Interesting, I thought south should have just a little more to bid freely in this situation. Although I do agree that if north bids at the three level, hearts is better.

[Zelandakh]

Interesting, I thought south should have just a little more to bid freely in this situation.

You would not bid with ♠Axxxx ♥AQxxx ♦x ♣xx, assuming this was a minimum in your methods?

 

Edit: Thanks Bill, club removed.

[mike777]

I thought north has a tough decision whether to bid 3h or pass at MP, rest of bidding is fine.

 

2h is fine, keep in mind 1nt can be quite a large range.

[billw55]

You would not bid with ♠Axxxx ♥AQxxx ♦x ♣xx, assuming this was a minimum in your methods?

Sure, but the 55 shape is a big difference.

Edited December 2, 2013 by billw55

[ArtK78]

South's bid is fine. It shows 5 spades and 4 hearts, and does not promise extras.

 

North has a typical problem at matchpoints. He has fits for both of partner's suits but minimal values. Does he risk bidding and going for 200? I would pass. It is possible that NS might go for 200 even if not doubled.

 

And, as Z suggests, if North is going to bid, he should bid 3♥. But I think he should pass over 3♦. Aside from the fact that the three level may be too high, there is a danger that partner will bid one more.

[neilkaz]

North bid at the 3 level red vs white with a 4333 aceless 6 count. If he must bid this hand which is a very clear pass he should bid 3♥.

 

Playing S/A (not forcing NT and not constructive raises) I raise to 2♠ initially and will likely buy the hand there. However, the OP comes from the land of ACOL and 4 card majors so 1NT has to be the response.

[the_clown]

I disagree, I think South has no business bidding 2♥ with a minimum hand and no shape at all.

 

North might have bid 3♥ rather than 3♠, but with double fit I think its clear to bid at the 3 level. Hell if South has a real hand like AQxxx AKxxx xx x game is practically laydown and South is certainly not bidding over 3♦.

[gszes]

south has a minimum hand period (some might say sub minimum). The 1s opening

seems fine but why the 2h bid did the 4th heart suddenly make this hand so much better

than say AQTxx Axx xxx QJ?

 

the problem with bidding 2h with this hand is what will you do if you actually have a 2h bid

AQTxx AKxx xx xx same hcp same distribution but all concentrated in the majors??

that is a minimum 2h bid the lack of minor suit shape is not the problem it is more the

useless honors that rate to be worth little (on offense) opposite a p with a minimum hand:))))

 

Even with a minimum hand the double fit and 100% hcp concentrated in p two long suits is more than

sufficient to raise to 3h (44 almost always better than 53). I do not hold n to blame for getting too high

south just plain overbid:))

[mike777]

[hv=pc=n&s=saqt94ha843dt6cqj&n=sk63hqj97d874c642&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1sp1n2d2h3d3sppdppp]266|200[/hv]

 

somewhat of an MP disaster going for 500 in -2

 

South thought North had a minimum hand for 1NT and should've passed rather than bidding 3S

 

North thought that there was a known double fit in Hearts and Spades, and with 3 diamonds partner was likely to have D shortage. Also commented that S was showing a stronger hand than they had for 2H bid.

 

 

Thanks,

 

Eagles

 

Clearly a good problem if posters cannot agree if 2h can be a minimum 7 loser hand or not and if north should pass or bid 3h.

[quiddity]

shrug.. looks like bad luck to me. Even seeing both hands I'd probably still bid 3M over 3♦. They're almost certainly cold and we have good chances to either make or be down one undoubled. Fortunately my opponents don't always double when it's right.

[ArtK78]

I disagree, I think South has no business bidding 2♥ with a minimum hand and no shape at all.

 

North might have bid 3♥ rather than 3♠, but with double fit I think its clear to bid at the 3 level. Hell if South has a real hand like AQxxx AKxxx xx x game is practically laydown and South is certainly not bidding over 3♦.

At matchpoints if the auction over 2♥ continued (3♦) - P - (P) then this hand would have a double. The hand with 5-5 has to reason that either his side should be playing in 3 of a major or they should be defending 3♦x.

[eagles123]

Thanks folks, I was North on this hand.

 

I see people can't agree on the 2H bid, I guess sometimes these things are quite complex!

 

And I didn't know 4-4 played better than 5-3 thought it was the other way round :lol:

 

still got a lot to learn!

 

Thanks,

 

Eagles

[Fluffy]

4-4 doesn't play better than 5-3 neccesarily, it does so on this case because the 5 card suit gets tapped and you lose control, and spades breaks 4-1.

 

4-4 does play generaly better than 5-3 when your side has big control of the hand and makes 10+ tricks. Also on low level hands where they can only force one hand to ruff and so the other can control the trumps.

[the hog]

I disagree, I think South has no business bidding 2♥ with a minimum hand and no shape at all.

 

North might have bid 3♥ rather than 3♠, but with double fit I think its clear to bid at the 3 level. Hell if South has a real hand like AQxxx AKxxx xx x game is practically laydown and South is certainly not bidding over 3♦.

 

This is incorrect. South has a normal 2H bid. Nth overbid and why Nth bid 3S rather than 3H is anyone's guess.

[Zelandakh]

This is indeed not an easy hand eagles and would not be out of place in I/A. One thing to discuss right away (as a forum perhaps) is whether the double shows clubs or not. I learned that double here tends to show 4 hearts and 2♥ tends to show 5, but with some fudge room either way. If 2♥ is instead the bid to be made with 4 hearts then presumably double must show a hand that would have rebid 2♣ (or some strong hands). As I wrote before, if the agreement is the first then South can double and North has an easy pass. If it is the latter then that is not available because the chance of ending up in a silly 3♣ contract would be too high. I suspect from the answers here that there is not even agreement amongst forum members on this point. But it is an example of how a little system can make decisions easier. And these kinds of decision are the absolute bread and butter of MP bidding. I would guess that typical club players are not much above 50% on getting these right unless their partner gives them a little UI help.

[mike777]

Bridge is wonderful. Here we have a very basic every day hand and so many issues:

 

 

1) should we start with 1nt or 2s

2) 5-3 fits vs 4-4 fits in part score battles.

3) what does 2h promise or x promise by south over 2d?

4) should north pass or bid 3h?

5) double fits vs flat hands vs hcp in pard suits.

[neilkaz]

Thanks folks, I was North on this hand.

 

I see people can't agree on the 2H bid, I guess sometimes these things are quite complex!

 

And I didn't know 4-4 played better than 5-3 thought it was the other way round :lol:

 

still got a lot to learn!

 

Thanks,

 

Eagles

Yes but sometimes opener has 5♥ for this sequence. That's why responder, if he wants to bid (I don't at these colors) he should bid 3♥.

[eagles123]

This is incorrect. South has a normal 2H bid. Nth overbid and why Nth bid 3S rather than 3H is anyone's guess.

 

Maybe cos I make mistakes and am learning the game?

[nigel_k]

North did stretch a little and 3♥ would have been a better choice 3♠. I suppose two eight card fits is literally a 'double fit' but is nothing to get too excited about. The 4333 is not an problem though when partner has shape. It's really just a general lack of high cards that is the problem.

 

North was a bit unlucky to strike such an unsuitable South hand. Opposite something like AQxxx Kxxx x Axx 4♥ could make when their 3♦ also makes. It's also unlucky to go for -500 when they have no game, though -200 would have been almost as bad. What was the full layout?

[mike777]

I don't really think 3h is a stretch guys.

 

 

2h is either

 

extras

full opener=decent 6 loser hand

wide range bid=dead minimum to extras

 

game is cold on many hands based on above.

[mike777]

btw someone asked me why play constructive raises.

 

For me 8-11 total points and 3s spades it too little to make a limit raise across what pard opens on.

 

with a bit less or a bit more I start with 1nt.

 

I should add that of course this is all part of Bergen style and the"law"

 

If you don't like Bergen or the law ..you wont like this.

[rmnka447]

Unless N/S are playing a raise to 2 ♠ as constructive, I think North's first bid should be 2 ♠. If they are playing the raise as constructive, then a forcing NT intending to rebid 2 ♠ is correct. Since there is no mention of constructive raises by OP, I going to assign the bulk of the blame to North.

 

I also disagree with South's 2 ♥ free bid. The South hand is an absolute minimum opener because the doubleton ♣ QJ are in no way worth anywhere near full value. While you would like to show the 4 ♥s, freely bidding on such a minimum makes it very difficult for responder to make sensible bidding decisions later in the auction. This is especially true at MPs where -1 doubled vulnerable is the kiss of death on part score hands.

 

If you want to insist that the 2 ♥ bid is fine, then responder has to take that possibility into account and have a correspondingly stronger hand to compete further.