hand has improved

[Fluffy]

[hv=pc=n&s=skj72ht952dk7caq6&d=w&v=e&b=16&a=ppp1n(11-13)p2s(to%20play)3c]133|200[/hv]

 

No further agreements.

[Cyberyeti]

I would break a transfer with this hand, thus I bid 3♠, yes I now think I have better than 11-13.

[MrAce]

[hv=pc=n&s=skj72ht952dk7caq6&d=w&v=e&b=16&a=ppp1n(11-13)p2s(to%20play)3c]133|200[/hv]

 

No further agreements.

 

Here is my thoughts; we already had max when we opened this, and now that we found a 9+ card fit and a positional AQx so it got better. We owed pd some sort of last move bid even without their overcall. Now i think our reasonable options are (i ruled out 4 level bids because i think this is way too big of an overbid. The guy barely bid 2 ♠ and he may actually be really broke.

 

Double= Imo this should be penalty like. they are at 3 level, vulnerable vs white, without established fit and a suit that they for some reason did not see it worth to open previously.

Pass= I bid like a pussy in this hand.

3 Red suit = Game try versions

3 ♠ = Barely competing

3 NT is obviously not a sign off but rather suggestion, we may debate whether we should bid it in the mean of COG with a fit but it is irrelevant since we never wanna play 3 NT with this anyway. A doubleton next to 4 card trump is very valuable in most cases.

 

Bidding a red suit has a little issues; LHO may double (or his pd can get some info from lack of double) But even if they do, that does not necessarily mean that it will lead them to do better But it sure does deliver your intention, which is to say that you have a 4 card fit and some more while 3♠ says 4 card fit and barely competing. Despite the possibility of little side affects of bidding red suit, i think it is still our best option, since it is the only one which delivers pd our intention most accurately. And i would go with 3♥

 

And the best part of bidding 3♥ is that it does not need any prior agreements. Having opened 11-13 NT previously, you don't have the risk of being misunderstood by bidding 3♥ as oppose to 3♦ which might be confused with 6 card diamonds perhaps...?

[Cyberyeti]

Bidding a red suit has a little issues; LHO may double (or his pd can get some info from lack of double) But even if they do, that does not necessarily mean that it will lead them to do better But it sure does deliver your intention, which is to say that you have a 4 card fit and some more while 3♠ says 4 card fit and barely competing. Despite the possibility of little side affects of bidding red suit, i think it is still our best option, since it is the only one which delivers pd our intention most accurately. And i would go with 3♥

 

And the best part of bidding 3♥ is that it does not need any prior agreements. Having opened 11-13 NT previously, you don't have the risk of being misunderstood by bidding 3♥ as oppose to 3♦ which might be confused with 6 card diamonds perhaps...?

 

Yes but partner is going to think his ♥Qxx is a good holding, it doesn't help him judge.

[MrAce]

Yes but partner is going to think his ♥Qxx is a good holding, it doesn't help him judge.

 

Why would any @#$% think anything special about heart suit when my options for making a trial bid is reduced to very tight space and in order to make invitation i have to use this space regardless of their quality ?http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif

 

At least he knows it is not 6 cards (maybe not even 5 cards if they dont open with 5 major)

 

EDIT: But if you really wanna apply the standard suit trial bids, Qxx is never a good help or something valuable as much as you think it is anyway. Very classic definition of a trial suit after a major fit is the suit that has the danger of losing 3 quick tricks. xxxx xxx Qxxx etc . but suit trial bids are being so overused that someone may think that he needs a help in KJxx KJx suit. And the other one, who deserves him as a pd may think that Qxx is a good value. I find it funny.

[Cyberyeti]

Why would any @#$% think anything special about heart suit when my options for making a trial bid is reduced to very tight space and in order to make invitation i have to use this space regardless of their quality ?http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif

 

At least he knows it is not 6 cards (maybe not even 5 cards if they dont open with 5 major)

 

Because most people use trial bids in exactly that way where I come from (some play short, most play long and want partner to observe their holding in the suit). And it's not really a tight space, you can make a trial bid in the 2 suits you would normally want to.

[MrAce]

Because most people use trial bids in exactly that way where I come from (some play short, most play long and want partner to observe their holding in the suit). And it's not really a tight space, you can make a trial bid in the 2 suits you would normally want to.

 

I see you are a trial bid abuser. Ironically 3♦ the alternative to 3 ♥, is even worse. You do not need any help in this suit to start with. LOL

 

Not even mentioning that the values pd has in diamond suit that he thinks is valuable, mostly will be worse than Qxx ♥

 

Last but not the least, you are making a game try ffs ! Not a grand slam investigation ! And you want your pd to know that as oppose to a hand you just wanna compete with 9 trumps nonvuln ! Or oppose to specific honors in a specific suit when you have only 2 bids available !

[Cyberyeti]

I see you are a trial bid abuser. Ironically 3♦ the alternative to 3 ♥, is even worse. You do not need any help in this suit to start with. LOL

 

Not even mentioning that the values pd has in diamond suit that he thinks is valuable, mostly will be worse than Qxx ♥

 

Last but not the least, you are making a game try ffs ! Not a grand slam investigation ! And you want your pd to know that as oppose to a hand you just wanna compete with 9 trumps nonvuln ! Or oppose to specific honors in a specific suit when you have only 2 bids available !

 

Did I say I was bidding 3♦ ? no that would be silly, I said I bid 3♠. I don't like it, but it's better than 3♥ which I prefer to reserve for hands where the heart holding is relevant.

[billw55]

Partner can't be broke after both ops passed. Now they butt in at the three level, and I have AQx of trump over the bidder. With them vulnerable, I am tempted to double. Unfortunately our 9+ spade fit reduces the defensive value in that suit, and so I reluctantly bid 3♠.

[Fluffy]

I like your discussion guys, its more or less what went though my head before I made my final decision, I prefered 3♦ over 3♥ because I Expected partner to have 4 diamonds most of the time and both Ace and queen help there while in hearts that is far from true, but wasn't sure 3♦ would be taken as a fit bid while 3♥ was 100% a spade raise so I couldn't decide.

[kenrexford]

Bid where you live (3♦).

 

Now, for a more complete analysis (first was while smoking):

 

Whenever the auction involves a transfer and a break from expectations (whether competition or a super-accept), one should always be thinking (IMO) of the impact of the "re-transfer" issue. In other words, you would expect in most auction types for there to be an assumed (if not discussed and agreed) principle that a re-transfer if possible is on. So, for instance, if Opener in this auction bids 3♦, whatever that means, then if that call agrees spades we would expect Responder's 3♥ to be a re-transfer, right?

 

The second step, then, in the analysis is that if you have options on how to proceed, you avoid the one-under call (which eliminates the re-transfer) unless you have a particularly strong reason for bidding that suit.

 

Using these principles, then, in this specific auction, where a 3♦ call is available as a super-accept that preserves the re-transfer, I end up with two logical scenarios:

 

1. 3♦ is the only super-accept and is neutral, or

 

2. Either 3♦ or 3♥ can be a super-accept, but 3♥ is only used when critical.

 

The other general default that I happen to have is that one bids where one lives. Applying this to the second scenario, a 3♥ call only makes sense if you really want to focus the fact that you have heart values -- a reasonable method because you are essentially hedging against the likely scenario of a COV opposite shortness.

 

Applying both principles means that the "scenario 2" structure would be:

 

3♥ = COV in hearts, extras with support

 

3♦ = value in diamonds or neutral

 

3♠ = competitive

 

Now, against that entire scheme is the possibility of needing/wanting a natural 3♦ call. If that call would be natural for you, the whole analysis crumbles. With a weak 1NT, though, 3♦ as natural seems rich. If not, then this should be the theory/thinking, IMO.

[Zelandakh]

Why would you worry about re-transfers when partner made a natural 2♠ call Ken? FWiiW I like 3♥ too given the circumstances described in the OP.

[kenrexford]

Why would you worry about re-transfers when partner made a natural 2♠ call Ken? FWiiW I like 3♥ too given the circumstances described in the OP.

 

Whoops! Missed that.

 

I suppose with natural drop-dead 2♠, then bid where you live seems simple and obvious. If one assumes that a hand can only grow up in this context if Opener has Kx or AQ in clubs, and good trumps, and a maximum, then three-of-a-red should fill in the missing honor for partner's consideration.

 

 

 

[MrAce]

Why would you worry about re-transfers when partner made a natural 2♠ call Ken? FWiiW I like 3♥ too given the circumstances described in the OP.

 

Thank god someone else read the OP.

 

That's the only reason why i have chosen it.

 

No agreement --------> make sure you deliver the msg clearly -----> be careful when you are making an artificial bid to prevent accidents, (to Cyber) which means do not reserve any bid for future for an auction which will never come again in your life time even with remote similarity, in a topic where your pd has no ***** clue what bids you reserved for what hands. Because at the end of the day "no further agreements" means "no further agreements" Your reserved bids may carry some value 30 years from now if you are still playing with same pd. But unfortunately this pd in this topic is not that pd. And i don't think OP wants to know what people reserved for future or not, unless this pd who we don't have any further agreement can know it due to being universal, which is far from facts. And we indeed need help in heart suit this hand. I don't ***** know when we will ask for ♥ help if not with this,

 

And stop fearing pd may raise with Qxx heart. Worry about hands like Qxxxx AJx Qxx xx or AQxxx Kxx xxx xx or Qxxxx KQx Qxx xx etc etc. which will auto pass over 3♠. None of those hands are cold but as i said before, we are not investigating a grandslam, we are investigating just a game and those hands combined are much better games than most games we daily bid and play. The auction makes these type of hands held by pd very likely if he has 9-10 hcps. He will not bid game with anything less than 9-10 hcp anyway, he saw we opened 11-13 NT. By bidding 3♠ you are not only being unhelpful to pd, but you are also disabling him to make the right judgement by expressing your hand weaker than it is.. If you passed instead of 3♠ he could have at least make an other move over 3♣ with Txxxx KQx AJx xx or similar hands just for competitive purposes and you could still bid a very reasonable game. Even at MP, since we are about to commit to 3 level anyway.

 

EDIT: If i ever want to make an agreement between red suit trial bids when only 2 suits were available for trial bid, i would arrange one of them being a a max hand with 4 card support and the other one for something about their suit because that's what they will lead. You wanna know if pd has xxx or xx or x in their suit vs your 13 hcp max hand but holding Jxx ♣

[Cyberyeti]

Thank god someone else read the OP.

 

That's the only reason why i have chosen it.

 

No agreement --------> make sure you deliver the msg clearly -----> be careful when you are making an artificial bid to prevent accidents, (to Cyber) which means do not reserve any bid for future for an auction which will never come again in your life time even with remote similarity, in a topic where your pd has no ***** clue what bids you reserved for what hands. Because at the end of the day "no further agreements" means "no further agreements" Your reserved bids may carry some value 30 years from now if you are still playing with same pd. But unfortunately this pd in this topic is not that pd. And i don't think OP wants to know what people reserved for future or not, unless this pd who we don't have any further agreement can know it due to being universal, which is far from facts. And we indeed need help in heart suit this hand. I don't ***** know when we will ask for ♥ help if not with this,

 

And stop fearing pd may raise with Qxx heart. Worry about hands like Qxxxx AJx Qxx xx or AQxxx Kxx xxx xx or Qxxxx KQx Qxx xx etc etc. which will auto pass over 3♠. None of those hands are cold but as i said before, we are not investigating a grandslam, we are investigating just a game and those hands combined are much better games than most games we daily bid and play. The auction makes these type of hands held by pd very likely if he has 9-10 hcps. He will not bid game with anything less than 9-10 hcp anyway, he saw we opened 11-13 NT. By bidding 3♠ you are not only being unhelpful to pd, but you are also disabling him to make the right judgement by expressing your hand weaker than it is.. If you passed instead of 3♠ he could have at least make an other move over 3♣ with Txxxx KQx AJx xx or similar hands just for competitive purposes and you could still bid a very reasonable game. Even at MP, since we are about to commit to 3 level anyway.

 

EDIT: If i ever want to make an agreement between red suit trial bids when only 2 suits were available for trial bid, i would arrange one of them being a a max hand with 4 card support and the other one for something about their suit because that's what they will lead. You wanna know if pd has xxx or xx or x in their suit vs your 13 hcp max hand but holding Jxx ♣

 

I also read the OP, with no agreements I presume long suit game tries, KJxx, KJxx, xx, KQx is what I'd bid 3♥ on. On the actual hand, game is terrible opposite the second of your hands and poor opposite the 3rd, nothing will encourage me to bid game on any of the hands you posted opposite 11-13, they require what has now become a 14.? count to get close. The hands I want partner to bid 4 on are things like Qxxxx, Qxx, AKx, xx opposite my hand but not the one in the OP (and yes I would bid 2♠ on that trusting partner to raise with 4 and a max).

[Fluffy]

with an 11 count partner would had already open actually

[Lord Molyb]

with an 11 count partner would had already open actually

I like your system

I content myself with 3♠

[Cyberyeti]

with an 11 count partner would had already open actually

 

OK he probably does playing 11-13 NT or a 5 card spade (we pass the hand I posted as it's a 12-14 1N/pass never 1♠ for us). I think TBH we're being deflected here, partner almost never bids game in this auction anyway with a hand he doesn't open, and actually it requires a hand that has upgraded well outside 11-13 for it to have much of a chance even with some seriously fitting cards.

 

I think you're aiming for too small a target trying for game here, even 3♠ shows a reasonable hand as you can easily be going -2X here if partner is unsuitable, and if partner really likes his hand and has a 6th spade, he can bid game himself, but there are precious few hands with only 5 spades without a lot of extra shape where it's good, your best bet is probably AQxxx, xx, QJxx, xx or similar.

[Fluffy]

partner won't have 6♠ either :P

 

I though mroe or less like you, partner is not accepting ever, and bidding 3♥ is missleading since my best hope is that he has doubleton. So I blasted game directly which looks like an overbid, but my opponents are insanely agressive and I really though partner was going to show 4♦ with their lack of action.

 

Partner got what I expected: ♠Q10xxx ♥Axx ♦10xxx ♣x, but ♦A was offside :(, 3♠ would had won a lot of IMPs on MBC as many pairs were allowed to play 3♣ which is normal if RHO opens 3♣

[MrAce]

LMAO!

 

One of them bids game vs a pd who can theoretically have very little Other one does not even bother to make any trial with this hand.

 

They both agree that 3♥ is misleading ! http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif

 

Here are my most favorite comments in this topic;

 

I though mroe or less like you, partner is not accepting ever, and bidding 3♥ is missleading since my best hope is that he has doubleton. So I blasted game directly which looks like an overbid.....

 

Overbid ? Really ?

 

And your best hope is doubleton ♥ ?

 

Looking at your "best hope" and your final decision, i nominate you the man of irony in 2013!

 

 

 

Partner got what I expected: ♠Q10xxx ♥Axx ♦10xxx ♣x, but ♦A was offside :(,

 

So you think if ♦ A was on you would make it ? Of course you also expected spades to be 2-2 in this auction i believe, after finding 4 card diamonds, which was obvious due to their lack of action up to you...if that's what you wanna call an overcall at 3 level red vs white when we were about to stop in 2♠ ? IMP! Lack of action ! http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif

 

 

I also read the OP, with no agreements I presume long suit game tries, KJxx, KJxx, xx, KQx is what I'd bid 3♥ on.

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif i knew it, i even wrote it. You don't really want to be so precise when bidding games in IMPS for various reasons

 

......... someone may think that he needs a help in KJxx or KJx suit. And the other one, who deserves him as a pd may think that Qxx is a good value. I find it funny.

 

 

 

If you see the hand in OP as a bad hand with 4 card trump, then be it. I am looking at the original pd's hand Gonzalo posted, i think both 3♠ and 3 red suit bidders would be fine ending in 3♠. I love my chances though, if pd held Qxxx ♦ an 8 count hand, or some other 9-10 hcp hands where i know all will be out of club suit, combined with my doubleton ♦ next to 4 card trumps.

[Cyberyeti]

I think the original hand is excellent in context, I also think you're making 4 5% of the time or less so I'm not bothering to shoot for it. I think partner will bid 4 if you make a try far more often than that, so making a try is a net loss.

 

Our game tries are "long suit with values" and I think this is pretty common here, partner won't evaluate xx as a good holding when it really is about the best here, and will evaluate Hxx as excellent when it isn't, which is why 3♥ is completely out. Clearly anybody with agreements different to MrAce's is a complete idiot, so there's no point in arguing with him.

[MrAce]

t. Clearly anybody with agreements different to MrAce's is a complete idiot, so there's no point in arguing with him.

 

You nailed it !

 

I was not saying "We have a max hand, and now we found 9 card fit + my AQx club improved almost to AKx ♣. And that we should make a better description of this hand as oppose to just bidding game or just trying to sign off in 3♠ After all as 1 NT opener i should not be the one who decides everything in the pdship and just bid game or just shut the door for my pd ! I just think everyone else is an idiot who disagrees with me.

 

I love the way you understand things, the way you think when looking at a hand, and the way you have a specific agreements with your pd for this type of "maybe 1 in a lifetime" auction, and the way you covered the hands with KJxx ♥ and brought this up in a topic where "no further agreement" was in charge . Pd is so idiot that, even when you open NT, you should be in charge of all the analysis and decisions to prevent pd from making stupid things like bidding game more often than not when you already opened 1NT.! You have mad skills! Way to go !

 

Re read what i wrote, i did not disagree because of your agreements. I don't really care on people's agreements even if they bring it up almost each and every time after OP says "no further agreement" I just disagreed with the logic that says "i can not describe my hand because due to my agreements, 3 ♥ is reserved for a specific hand" Period. ( most people don't even have that kinda agreement for their grandslam investigation.)

 

If there is anyone who thinks someone is idiot, i think it is you who thinks pd is an idiot. When you open 1 NT, an 11 -13 balanced hand, your hand does not improve by a lot. You will not be raised more often as you claimed. . Just be clear about the main msg you are sending to your pd and stop worrying about details of details. Because you are drawning in details which you to think is so important and can not even see that you have disabled yourself from sending the correct msg anymore.

 

You can not even see this entire debate was not about agreements and you thought i was disagreeing your agreements. No, we disagreed about whether this hand worth a game try or not. This has absolutely ***** nothing to do with agreements.At the end of the day, i or you may be wrong. But please don't tell me that i thought you are idiot because i did not like your agreements. I never thought you are an idiot to start with (imo you are one of those who likes to talk and read more about the styles-agreements-systems than the logic of the game) Looking at a hand and evaluating it has very little to do with agreements, and has nothing to do especially when OP says "no agreement" I admit you dragged me into "which heart holdings should bid 3♥" kinda argument, and i admit that i found it funny, but never said you are an idiot http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif

[kenrexford]

Can partner have ♠Axxxx ♥xxx ♦AQx ♣xx?

 

If so, then this discussion seems easy. If you super-accept by bidding where you live (3♦), then partner can count tricks. Three diamonds, plus an expected five spades = 8, assuming both the diamond and spade King (6 HCP) plus either the spade Queen or the spade Jack(10) and a good guess or a 2-2 split. If Opener's hand grew up because of the club bid, Opener has another club trick assured if the King, two if the Ace-Queen or King-Queen (11-13 HCP net), with a tenth in the former coming somewhere for the super-accept (which seems like 4+ expected covers). If you do not show the diamond value, he needs too much for game and cannot find out if it is there.

 

 

 

[Cyberyeti]

You nailed it !

 

I was not saying "We have a max hand, and now we found 9 card fit + my AQx club improved almost to AKx ♣. And that we should make a better description of this hand as oppose to just bidding game or just trying to sign off in 3♠ After all as 1 NT opener i should not be the one who decides everything in the pdship and just bid game or just shut the door for my pd ! I just think everyone else is an idiot who disagrees with me.

 

I love the way you understand things, the way you think when looking at a hand, and the way you have a specific agreements with your pd for this type of "maybe 1 in a lifetime" auction, and the way you covered the hands with KJxx ♥ and brought this up in a topic where "no further agreement" was in charge . Pd is so idiot that, even when you open NT, you should be in charge of all the analysis and decisions to prevent pd from making stupid things like bidding game more often than not when you already opened 1NT.! You have mad skills! Way to go !

 

Re read what i wrote, i did not disagree because of your agreements. I don't really care on people's agreements even if they bring it up almost each and every time after OP says "no further agreement" I just disagreed with the logic that says "i can not describe my hand because due to my agreements, 3 ♥ is reserved for a specific hand" Period. ( most people don't even have that kinda agreement for their grandslam investigation.)

 

If there is anyone who thinks someone is idiot, i think it is you who thinks pd is an idiot. When you open 1 NT, an 11 -13 balanced hand, your hand does not improve by a lot. You will not be raised more often as you claimed. . Just be clear about the main msg you are sending to your pd and stop worrying about details of details. Because you are drawning in details which you to think is so important and can not even see that you have disabled yourself from sending the correct msg anymore.

 

You can not even see this entire debate was not about agreements and you thought i was disagreeing your agreements. No, we disagreed about whether this hand worth a game try or not. This has absolutely ***** nothing to do with agreements.At the end of the day, i or you may be wrong. But please don't tell me that i thought you are idiot because i did not like your agreements. I never thought you are an idiot to start with (imo you are one of those who likes to talk and read more about the styles-agreements-systems than the logic of the game) Looking at a hand and evaluating it has very little to do with agreements, and has nothing to do especially when OP says "no agreement" I admit you dragged me into "which heart holdings should bid 3♥" kinda argument, and i admit that i found it funny, but never said you are an idiot http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif

 

You utterly misunderstand what I was saying.

 

What I was saying is that absent other agreements, most people here play long suit with values game tries. Hence that's what 3♥ is without any agreements special to this sequence, so this hand is inappropriate as partner will raise on the wrong hands.

[rmnka447]

I bid 3 ♠.

 

With a "good" 11 count, partner might have opened. If not, then partner might well make an invitational bid as responder. Partner did neither of these things, so chances of game seem remote. OTOH, partner could be bidding on virtually nothing with 5 ♠s to get out of 1 NT. Most of the time partner is somewhere in between.

 

Over a weak NT, opener's LHO can have considerable values and not be able to bid. That's because with the NT bidder opening with less, opener's partner is more likely to have values behind the LHO. So paradoxically, you need better values to intervene immediately over a weak NT than over a strong NT. (Over the years, a steady stream of +500s and +800s from those who didn't pay heed to the foregoing after our weak NT openers has confirmed this.)

 

So it's not clear that the NT opener's side has the balance of the points.

 

In the meantime, 3 ♠ obstructs the opponents as much as possible. If responder has the right hand, we might get to a thin game that makes.