2 spades seemed such a nice idea

[sceptic]

-800 I can't say any more, opinions as to how bad 2 spades was please.

 

remember I have feelings :(

 

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=skqj2h3dt53cq9872&w=sat83hj2d876ct653&e=s765hakt8dq42caj4&s=s94hq97654dakj9ck]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

West North East South

 

 -     Pass  1♣    1♥

 Dbl   Pass  1NT   2♦

 Pass  Pass  2♠    Pass

 Pass  Dbl   Pass  Pass

 Pass  

[pbleighton]

Bad.

 

Sorry :(

 

1) You've shown your hand, and pd passed.

2) I will raise on 3 to the 2 level, but not with 3 small and a flat hand.

3) Play defense.

 

Peter

[whereagles]

Honors on opps suits is a hint that you should defend. Pard's double is a bit wafer-thin as well.. lol.

[Free]

Awful... :)

 

You're going to play when you know for about 95% of the time trumps will be 4-2 or even 5-1 or 6-0 BEHIND the long trump hand after such a bidding. Also, you don't have ANY use of your 3 card ♠ support, since you won't be able to ruff something. And if this wasn't even enough, you already told your hand: you've shown a minimum hand which is balanced, and no 4 card ♠.

 

Bidding 2♠ is just asking for trouble, you should thank your opps to friendly fulfil your demands :)

[luke warm]

i kinda concur :)

 

see how much easier this would be if you'd just opened 1nt :) ... then you *couldn't* (or shouldn't) bid again unless partner asked you to

[paulg]

This is a hand that would have been better to poll for East's final action. It is so easy to criticise 2♠ when you've gone for 800, but it's unlucky to find partner so weak for the double and a hand when they can double.

 

OK, perhaps the signs are there that this is a hand where pass would be more prudent but I don't see this as too serious, certainly not a partnership breaking decision. Getting the odd 800 is part of the education in the BIL :)

 

Paul

[pbleighton]

"Getting the odd 800 is part of the education in the BIL"

 

Oh, and other players keep getting refresher courses, too :)

 

It's Bridge Continuing Education.

 

Peter

[pclayton]

I can't say this any more plainer:

 

2♠ is a really bad call.

 

Its not even close.

 

Instead of "14 points" think of the East hand as this:

 

1. 4333

2. Questionable Q♦

3. 7 card fit with pard

4. 3 card support doesn't have a ruffing value

5. Ten of hearts not of value

6. Misfit auction + RHO is marked with spade length

 

As far as the marginal negative double; how much better is 2♠ if the 10 and Q of spades are exchanged?

[mr1303]

THese normally go for -150 or something. Unlucky to go for 800. Your partner doesn't really have a double, but we've all done it. YOu don't really have a 2S bid, but we;ve all done it.

[sceptic]

ok, next question, I read (mike lawrence) saying never let opps play at the two level (I try and abide to this most of the time) would x be a good balance as opposed to the 2 spade bid????/

[the hog]

THese normally go for -150 or something. Unlucky to go for 800. Your partner doesn't really have a double, but we've all done it. YOu don't really have a 2S bid, but we;ve all done it.

Agree 100% with all of this comment. Actually here is an ad for the weak NT. Would Sth overcall 2H? On best defence it looks 1 off to me. Sth can take the D hook, but figures to lose 4H 1S and 1C.

[cherdano]

ok, next question, I read (mike lawrence) saying never let opps play at the two level (I try and abide to this  most of the time)  would x be a good balance as opposed to the 2 spade  bid????/

I suspect what Mike Lawrence said was "Never let the opponents play at the 2-level when they have a fit." (The reason for which is, of course, the LAW! ... hope ML doesn't read this :D )

 

But here it is not clear at all that they have a fit, rather to the contrary.

1. Your partner has exactly 4 spades.

2. He won't have 5 clubs, as otherwise he would bid 3♣ himself.

So you only have a 7 card fit. Unless your partner made a negative double with doubleton diamond (depends on your style whether that is possible), opponents only have a 7 card fit, too. In that case, bidding 2♠ is already a LAW violation by one trick.

 

However, now look at your hand again with LWA (law with adjustments) in your mind:

You have very bad spades. Unless your partner has extremely good trumps (such as AKQJ, in which case he may have overcalled 1♠), your RHO will score trump tricks in spades with cards that are useless in offense. Typically 2 of them. (Give Partner AQTx.) 1st adjustment down, but a rather big one here.

You, the short trump hand, has no ruffing value at all. 2nd adjustment down.

If your partner has the ♦J, you may well score a trump trick in defense that you cannot score in offense. 3rd adjustment down.

Your RHO is short in hearts. If you start leading trumps immediately, your LHO may not be able to ruff any hearts in dummy; if he cannot lead hearts from dummy, you may well be able to score your ♥10 in defense, but not in offense (because then you will have to lead hearts yourself). 4th adjustment down.

 

Thats 4 adjustments down from an initial 14-15 total tricks. So you may expect a total of 12-13 tricks, and I honestly think pass is the only bid with this hand. I would expect it to turn +100 into -100. Going for -800 is quite unlucky, of course.

 

Hope I haven't been to harsh, but I think it's really an instructive hand on the adjustments to the law.

 

Now let me check: I see (on a trump lead) 8 tricks for declarer in diamonds. Seems 12 tricks is not such a bad estimate...

[Guest Jlall]

I read (mike lawrence) saying never let opps play at the two level

In this day and age of people obsessed with competitive bidding common sense seems to be lost. This rule is a good example. Think of what you are risking at imps and for what gain. At best you go +110 instead of -90. OK that adds up, but do you really expect to make 2S when 2D is making? This rule made you bid 2S with three small with pard marked with only 4, and a spade stack likely behind him, holding 4333 shape and a useless DQ and a defensive hand. Common sense ALWAYS prevails against such "rules"

[Walddk]

-800 I can't say any more, opinions as to how bad 2 spades was please.

 

remember I have feelings :)

In retrospect sceptic knows that 2♠ was wrong. However, it's not particularly educational to use words like "bad" and "awful". As a matter of fact, in a learning process, I don't think 2♠ is that bad.

 

The result was bad alright, but the lesson is worth learning provided that it won't happen again. Some prefer to learn things the hard way; there is nothing wrong with that, on the contrary. It would actually have been worse if sceptic had survived unhurt, because then he would have been inclined to do it again.

 

He now knows that a limited hand should not act unless forced to do so by partner. Excellent point in my opinion. I have spent 35 years trying to teach my students that making mistakes, even serious mistakes, is not necessarily the same as no hope for the future.

 

I'd like to believe that I got my message across in an overwhelming percentage of the cases.

 

Roland

[Chamaco]

ok, next question, I read (mike lawrence) saying never let opps play at the two level (I try and abide to this  most of the time)  would x be a good balance as opposed to the 2 spade  bid????

What ML (and most competitive bidding books) says is "never let opps play at the two level" IF THEY HAVE A FIT.

If they have a fit, most of the time, we have a fit too, and it's our job to discover it.

If they do not have a fit, better let them play, doubled or undoubled, according to the combined strength and defensive tricks.

 

In some cases, the fit is explicit (opps bid+raise), in some others you can gues wheter or not they have a fit, analyzing the auction.

 

In this auction:

 

1- they did not bid and raise; so the fit is not guaranteed, neither for their side, nor for our side;

 

2- by looking at your hand and the bidding, you can estimate that it is a no-fit

auction. In fact, pard has denied a fit in clubs (he would have raised at least at the second round) and a 5 card spades.

 

3- in one of the suit of opps you have strength and length (AKxx in H), usually a sign of misfit, and an indication to defend

 

4- in the other suit, diamonds, you have Qxx, a doubtful value in offense, another indication suggesting to defend

 

5- if opps had a decent fit in diamond, pard would be short in D, and, having adequate strength, would have certainly supported clubs or would have 5+ spades (since he is certainly short in H);

 

6- 4333 hands are not well suited to compete; some people deduct 0.5-1 hcp for this shape; some others consider 4 cd support in 4333 = 3 card support, 3 cd support in 4333 = 2 cd support, etc, because of no ruffing values.

I cannot say whether this is going too far, but I think that usually, the 4333 bidder is better off leaving any aggressive decisions to his pard, who's the only one that might have the suitable distribution for aggressive bids; 4333 hand are happy to sit fo defense.

 

7- finlly, would DBL be a good balancing bid ? I do not think so; you have moe or less bid your hand, and you have little extra. Actually, your pard did overbid with his negative double and as a consequence you may be thinking that your side has the balance of power; still, pard, with an invitational hand and no fit, would have bid a second card-showing double or 2NT. I think the safest course is pass and defend.