Once more unto the breach?

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=saj542h7dq7ckj742&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1hp3h(mixed raise)?]133|200|

You are vul. Opponents aren't.

2N would have shown a better raise.

Your call?[/hv]

[billw55]

Maybe I am too chicken, but red on white I pass either way. -200/500 against nonvul ops isn't my cup of tea at any scoring.

[ArtK78]

Opposite a passed partner, bidding at IMPs is out of the question. On a bad day, the number will be 4 figures.

 

Yes, there could be a game. But the odds are against it.

 

At matchpoints, the answer is less clear. But I agree with Bill that the chances of going for a number are significant. So, I make a chicken pass.

[mikeh]

Pass

 

We have no reason to think the hand belongs to us. We can all see that bidding could easily work, but it makes little sense to go chasing that possibility.

 

My view is that on most layouts we simply don't belong in the auction, but even if I am incorrect in that, much of the time that we should be in the auction it will be because partner fits one, but not both, black suits. Those who bid should explain how it is that they propose to find the better black suit fit.

 

I can just barely see bidding at mps if one feels like one needs a couple of spectacular tops, and doesn't care about the bottom. In a similar vein, if I were stuck 70+ imps with 16 boards to go, against a good team, maybe this is a chance...the odds are I'll be stuck 80+ by the next board, but I'm desperate. Otherwise, pass is so clear I have to wonder why the 'problem' was posted.

[NickRW]

*IF* I could call 3♠ and it meant spades + a minor in this situation, then I guess this would be the hand to use it. However, I don't and even if I did, a lot of the time it is just going to tell declarer how the hands split in their 4♥ contract. That downside alone negates most of the advantage in bidding this hypothetical 2 suited overcall that I don't have.

 

Nick

[CSGibson]

I have 9 working HCP, 11 total, no spots, and I'm supposed to come in red at the 3 level opposite a passed partner?

 

A big bowl of NO.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

[hv=pc=n&s=saj542h7dq7ckj742&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1hp3h(mixed raise)?]133|200|

You are vul. Opponents aren't.

If you ask West, he'll tell you that 2N would have shown a better raise.

Your call?[/hv]

I'm sure Nigel would give PASS a 10 .

I think the reason he posted is because his side was the ♥ bidder and his opps lucked out with a ♠ call ....

perhaps successfully saving at 4S over 4H .

[nige1]

Opposite a passed partner, bidding at IMPs is out of the question. On a bad day, the number will be 4 figures. Yes, there could be a game. But the odds are against it. At matchpoints, the answer is less clear. But I agree with Bill that the chances of going for a number are significant. So, I make a chicken pass.

Over a pre-empt, some partnerships insist on sound second-hand actions.

I have 9 working HCP, 11 total, no spots, and I'm supposed to come in red at the 3 level opposite a passed partner? A big bowl of NO.

I'm sure Nigel would give PASS a 10. I think the reason he posted is because his side was the ♥ bidder and his opps lucked out with a ♠ call .... perhaps successfully saving at 4S over 4H .

Thank you, Two4Bridge. I was given the South hand and this auction, as a bidding problem, at matchpoints. I shall try to find out the full deal and the table-result to post here.

 

My original view was 3♠ = 10, Double = 9, 4♣ = 8, Pass = 7.

 

Although posts here have weakened my confidence in that judgement, FWIW, my reasoning is ...

• The hand lacks high-card strength and texture. But most of its HCP seem to be working. And it has fewer than 6 losers.
• Partner may have a fair hand but may feel inhibited because he holds 2 or 3 ♥ -- an argument for pre-protection. Both opponents have ♥ suits, so partner is quite likely to have 3+ ♠.
• Action is fraught. At matchpoints, however, It's less dangerous to bid, because frequency of gain is an important factor.

[CSGibson]

Over a pre-empt, some partnerships insist on sound second-hand actions. Thank you, Two4Bridge. I was given the South hand and this auction, as a bidding problem, at matchpoints. I shall try to find out the full deal and the table-result to post here.

 

My original view was 3♠ = 10, Double = 9, 4♣ = 8, Pass = 7.

 

Although posts here have weakened my confidence in that judgement. FWIW, my reasoning is ...

• The hand lacks high-card strength and texture. But most of its HCP seem to be working. And it has fewer than 6 losers.
• Partner may have a fair hand but may feel inhibited because he holds 2 or 3 ♥ -- an argument for pre-protection. Both opponents have ♥ suits, so partner is quite likely to have 3+ ♠.
• Action is fraught. At matchpoints, however, It's less dangerous to bid, because frequency of gain is an important factor.

 

 

To balance those points, you are unfavorable, they have had a very precise auction, and LHO will be able to make a good decision very easily about whether doubling, passing, or bidding on is right. You only have a 5 card suit, and can easily be tapped in hearts. Your suit is AJ542. LHO has a wide-ranging hand, there is no indication that your side has half the deck, or even close to that. Since you have come in red as an unpassed hand, anytime you do make the "right" decision (ie, you can each make 3), partner will have the values to raise you to 4, since he isn't in on the joke, meaning that when neither side can make game, you are sticking your neck out - and they will again be willing and able to double if they are also aggressive matchpoint players. Finally, I admit it is low frequency, but the auction isn't over and partner can still balance on some of those hands where it is right.

 

LTC is great, but it is only an effective evaluation if you are playing in a fit, which there is no guarantee of - you are just as likely to have a club fit as a spade fit, and you will be guessing which one is right since partner won't be in on it. Frankly, I don't see fewer than 6 losers, though; I see 7, 2 in spades, clubs, and diamonds, and 1 in hearts.

[ArtK78]

Over a pre-empt, some partnerships insist on sound second-hand actions.

 

Mine is one of those partnerships. And I based my answers on that presumption.

 

I still think it is right to pass.

[mikestar13]

At matchpoints, action is very dubious IMHO. At Imps, its borderline psychotic.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=saj542h7dq7ckq742&w=sk87hkq986dakj94c&d=w&n=sq6h42dt532cjt853&e=st93hajt53d86ca96&v=n&a=1hp3h(Mixed raise)X(Psychotic?)4Hppp]399|300|

It may shed little light on this discussion, but, FWIW...

The full deal and

the actual auction.

The result was 4♥+3.

9 tables.

Only two EW pairs bid a slam.

There were no NS contracts.

[/hv]

[ArtK78]

[hv=pc=n&s=saj542h7dq7ckq742&w=sk87hkq986dakj94c&d=w&n=sq6h42dt532cjt853&e=st93hajt53d86ca96&v=n&a=1hp3h(Mixed raise)X(Psychotic?)4Hppp]399|300|

It may shed little light on this discussion, but, FWIW...

The full deal and

the actual auction.

The result was 4♥+3.

9 tables.

Only two EW pairs bid a slam.

There were no NS contracts.

[/hv]

Is it your contention, Nigel, that the double had some effect on the EW pair (West alone, actually) that prevented them from getting to slam?

 

If I were West I would redouble and move foward from there.Whether I find slam is problematic. It is a good slam after the double.

[nige1]

Is it your contention, Nigel, that the double had some effect on the EW pair (West alone, actually) that prevented them from getting to slam? If I were West I would redouble and move foward from there.Whether I find slam is problematic. It is a good slam after the double.

No hidden agenda. On this layout, the double gives EW fielder's choice:

• It facilitates EW slam bidding or
• With careful defence, EW can take a 500 penalty

[rhm]

[hv=pc=n&s=saj542h7dq7ckq742&w=sk87hkq986dakj94c&d=w&n=sq6h42dt532cjt853&e=st93hajt53d86ca96&v=n&a=1hp3h(Mixed raise)X(Psychotic?)4Hppp]399|300|

It may shed little light on this discussion, but, FWIW...

The full deal and

the actual auction.

The result was 4♥+3.

9 tables.

Only two EW pairs bid a slam.

There were no NS contracts.

[/hv]

Calling the East hand a "mixed raise" is the joke of the year.

I would consider a limit raise an underbid with the East hand, but barely acceptable.

I rather would bid Jacoby 2NT than choosing a mixed raise for the East hand.

No wonder slam was missed,

 

Rainer Herrmann

[aguahombre]

We call it a mixed game raise and have a toy to distinguish between this 5-trump raise and the crappy one.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

We call it a mixed game raise and have a toy to distinguish between this 5-trump raise and the crappy one.

What's the toy ?

[aguahombre]

What's the toy ?

You could go through forcing NT, then jump to 4H. Or you could use 3NT for that purpose, depending on what you want to adjust in your chosen methods.