jillybean Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 Matchpoints [hv=pc=n&s=sk52hj863da873ca8&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=p1cp1dp3cp?]133|200[/hv] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broze Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 Can't see any alternative to 3NT at Matchpoints. However, I would have responded 1♥. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 If pard is unreliable, 3NT If reliable, 4♣. Great chance for a club slam here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 If pard is unreliable, 3NT If reliable, 4♣. Great chance for a club slam here. Not really whether he's reliable, it's all on his heart holding, if it's x, slam is near certain, if it's xxx, 3N could be the limit, if it's Kx it's probably on who's got the ace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 Right. But it would be hard luck if pard does come up with ♥xxx. After all, he's got a good hand. I suppose you can also try the imaginative bid of 3♠. If pard doesn't bid 3NT over it, odds are he has the dreaded heart holding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 Right. But it would be hard luck if pard does come up with ♥xxx. After all, he's got a good hand. I suppose you can also try the imaginative bid of 3♠. If pard doesn't bid 3NT over it, odds are he has the dreaded heart holding. Yeah the xxx hand is pretty specific, A, xxx, KQ, KQJ10xxx or AQ, xxx, KQ, KQJ10xx but there are plenty of holdings like Qx/Jx where 5♣= will get you a bottom and you have to be sure of your agreements that you can stop in 4N if you go beyond 3N. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 Maybe 3♦? If p can bid 3NT over this it is good news as she almost certainly is short in one of the red suits. If she bids 3♥ I can still sign off in 3NT. But it's matchpoints and I haven't discussed this with anyone so in practice I will probably bid 3NT. As Nuno says, it is good to know partner's style. If partner is Cyberyeti, bid 3NT and hope you can make it. If partner is MikeH, bid 6♣ and hope you didn't miss a cold 7 :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 But it's matchpoints and I haven't discussed this with anyone so in practice I will probably bid 3NT. As Nuno says, it is good to know partner's style. If partner is Cyberyeti, bid 3NT and hope you can make it. If partner is MikeH, bid 6♣ and hope you didn't miss a cold 7 :) While there is some truth in this, it really depends on whether something like GGG is being played. If it is (and I do play a GF bid for the really big 3♣ rebids), 7 won't be making, and 6 is possible but unlikely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 Maybe 3♦? If p can bid 3NT over this it is good news as she almost certainly is short in one of the red suits. If she bids 3♥ I can still sign off in 3NT. But it's matchpoints and I haven't discussed this with anyone so in practice I will probably bid 3NT. As Nuno says, it is good to know partner's style. If partner is Cyberyeti, bid 3NT and hope you can make it. If partner is MikeH, bid 6♣ and hope you didn't miss a cold 7 :)ouch...that hurt :D edit: also unfair. Go back over threads where posters have suggested jump rebids on 18 counts..if I have commented it will invariably be to point out that such is a bad underbid. My jump rebids are never more than a decent 17 count, and I strain to find another call on such hand....typically the jump rebid is a great 15 to any 16 Here: AQx Axx x KQJ10xx would be typical, altho of course there are many, many hands possible. I find it interesting that the posts so far focus on xxx v x in hearts, which seems to me to suggest that those posters aren't thinking about the real world at all. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilkaz Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 At MP and opposite my typical PD's I just bid 3NT and hope that the what ever major the opps lead is the one that leads to me taking the most tricks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 I find it interesting that the posts so far focus on xxx v x in hearts, which seems to me to suggest that those posters aren't thinking about the real world at all. I agree xxx is unlikely, but x (or Q or K which may make a difference to 3N but not 6♣) I would have thought is quite likely. There is an unbid spade suit about, partner isn't as likely to have a singleton there, it figures to be in a red suit if he has one. Opps have few enough points it's unlikely either of them can do anything without a 5 card major and possibly not even then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 By the way, JB: I really think that the 1♦ response was a poor choice, even if you don't like the walsh-style. The problem arises when LHO bids spades. 1♠ ought not to be a problem, but as soon as LHO bids 2♠ or 3♠, you run the risk of losing the heart suit. Assume partner passes: you can hardly afford to reopen with a reverse in hearts on Jxxx Axxx in the suits, and while you can always double, both partners are going to have difficulty getting to hearts. when holding 4 diamonds and a 4 card major, I believe very strongly that one should respond the major. When the suits are the reds, I think it to be a very bad move, indeed, to bid diamonds first. At least if our major is spades there is less chance of the auction going badly for us after 1♦. Put it another way: when was the last time that your side belonged in diamonds when you hold Axxx and partner opened 1♣? Compare that vanishingly low number to the times you belonged in a major and you held 4 cards in that major when partner opened 1♣. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 On the given hand, btw, I think 3N is automatic at mps. I don't really see any alternative at imps either, but I would be a little more nervous at imps. Even if 6♣ is making, which must surely be on far fewer than 50% of partner's possible hands, in a typical mp field few pairs are reaching it so 3N with my partner at the helm ought to be at least average most of the time. The problem with 4♣ is that I can't see any plausible auction that allows me to ever know that 12 tricks are likely. I love cuebidding to slams more than most, but here all control-bidding will do is tell us whether we have 1 or 2 quick losers. It won't usually tell us whether we have 12 tricks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 @mikeh: that's actually the crux of cue-bidding: it emphasizes on secondary things (controls) rather than primary ones (shape/strength). This suggests standard approach to cue-bidding is simply wrong and something else should replace it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 With any sort of reasonable agreements, it is possible to have a quantitative auction after this start, and I am sure Mike is aware of that. (Either play 4nt as last train/optional keycard for clubs, or bid 5c later, skipping 4nt, to show partner you need to know more than just keycards.)But the problem on the actual hand is that a maximum is not enough, we need a well-fitting maximum, and partner won't know which cards are well-fitting. I dont want to be in slam opposite AQx Kx Kxx KQxxxx. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 But the problem on the actual hand is that a maximum is not enough, we need a well-fitting maximum, and partner won't know which cards are well-fitting. I dont want to be in slam opposite AQx Kx Kxx KQxxxx. Well, personally, if I held that hand, I'd lead a heart to my K early. If it won, and clubs split I claim. if it lost, then I would announce I had 14 cards and get a redeal. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 Well, personally, if I held that hand, I'd lead a heart to my K early. If it won, and clubs split I claim. if it lost, then I would announce I had 14 cards and get a redeal.Haha, well done, I deserved that :) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 As a completely unrelated note, perhaps, this discussion has caused me to realize something interesting. Bidding up-the-line has a problem that is not obvious, namely removal of a punt bid. Had Responder started with 1♥, the alternative auction is 1♣-1♥-3♣. In that sequence, 3♦ by Responder is an easy alternative, because some degree of patterning out may well result (e.g., Opener might show a fragment in either major), and Responder has a pause bid to allow different sequence options. An early introduction of diamonds naturally, however, erases that option. Sure -- one could say that a major suit alternative is also an option, like a flexible 3♥ in this sequence, but (1) 3♥ takes up more space, and (2) major bids sound more natural. Thus, Walsh might be best not just because of the early introduction of the major but also because of the reservation of 2♦ or 3♦ as late auction punt bids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted September 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 Here's the full hand. Partner is showing 16-17, 7 clubs for his bid[hv=pc=n&s=sk52hj863da873ca8&n=sa4hadk94ckq96532&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=p1cp1dp3cp3sp4cp5cppp]266|200[/hv] I'm thinking slam on these hands so in attempt to get more information from partner, bid 3S. Perhaps 4C would have been better, if I am sure partner will give me a courtesay cue. Mike, you are right that 1D is a poor choice. I decided that I could easily show the 4 hearts if opps came in 1S and hadn't considered the trouble created by a 2 or 3 level bid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 When you raise 4♣ to 5, partner might as well raise to 6, you're probably not getting a vast amount of MPs for 5♣=, it could be wrong, but I suspect the number of times you were making 5♣= and getting any kind of score is exceeded by the number of times 6♣ makes, partner only needs you to hold the pointy suit Ks, one of the Qs and ♣Jx in the probable knowledge that you don't have a heart stop of your own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 Whether this hand bids 3♣ or not is a matter of agreement. I am used to lighter style 3m bids, for example Ax Ax xx KQJTxxx is a 3♣ bid for me. I remember me and Tez used to play 1♣--1♦2♥(either real heart reverse or club hands stronger than direct 3♣) over this responder asks via 2♠ 3♣ = better than direct 3♣Rest= ♥ reverse hands and whatever you want it to show besides ♣+♥ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 No method deals well with all hands. Opener will hold a 6331 16 count far more often than a 7321 hand. Make opener Ax Ax Kxx KQJ10xx, which is in some ways a better hand than he had (picture you with a stiff club x), and you don't want to be in slam, especially after an auction that pinpoints the heart lead. While it is good practice to rethink hands where your partnership got to a suboptimal spot, that doesn't mean doing mental contortions to create an auction that would invariably get you to the optimal spot. Here, at mps, 3N would likely have got you a good result...average at least. Even in the Blue Ribbon pairs I would expect most non-big club bidders to have problems reaching slam. BTW, Timo's notion of using a gadget makes a lot of sense, but of course one needs to have discussed it beforehand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted September 18, 2014 Report Share Posted September 18, 2014 Well, now I see another unexpected benefit from Walsh. Not bidding 1D preserves Opener's option for a more convenient fake 2D reverse. Not that this deal proves that point, but 3C is a wide call. Enabling the 2D reverse allows 3C to be better defined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdegrande Posted September 18, 2014 Report Share Posted September 18, 2014 North has a monster hand - lots of controls and point count undervalues aces and kings, and a seventh club. I think it's even too good for 3♣, but that bullet has been dodged. Once South cooperates enough to bid a game, North should bid (not invite) a slam. At IMPs I think 6♣ is an easy bid. At matchpoints, you would have to at least consider 6NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted September 18, 2014 Report Share Posted September 18, 2014 Here's the full hand. Partner is showing 16-17, 7 clubs for his bidIf 3♣ shows 7, what would North have bid if we make one of the small clubs a small spade? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts