5-level decision

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&e=sk4haqjt3dq6cat94&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=p2hd4h5dpp]133|200|

Matchpoints, adv pard

Bid? Pard weak 2 style is usually sound. [/hv]

IMO at MPs, Pass = 10, 5♥ = 9, Double = 7. 5♦ is quite likely to make. Partner probably has 7♥ and 5♥ might be a reasonable sacrifice. If opponents have a ♠ fit, however, then pass should achieve a reasonable score.

[whereagles]

Phantom Sac sums it up well, assume that partner is a good player.

 

I can be more concise: "a lousy 7 card suit is as good as a fair 6 card one", ha!

[whereagles]

If opponents have a ♠ fit, however, then pass should achieve a reasonable score.

 

That we will never know, since they don't have a spade fit. Only two tables (out of 30 or so) found the 5♦ contract. Dbl or no dbl you'd score 4%. (The other table made a doubled overtrick lol.) Bidding the 5♥ sac would net ~8% if doubled, ~25% if not.

 

You are well and truly fixed on this one!!

[kgr]

5H, but i am the worst bridge player ever

First I thought agreeing with this (where 'I' is me and not him;) )...

 

This: Pard weak 2 style is usually sound.

 

+

 

This: Why is no one bidding spades?

 

+

 

This: i always have 7 if i've opened such a bad suit 2nd r/r

 

Make bidding 5H pretty clear. Partner is very likely 47xx and if it's 4702 that could well be a double game swing. Either way we will very likely make 5H and may or may not beat them.

 

If partner does somehow have 3 spades and they have 8 spades he still has 7 hearts in which case we are probably down 1 and we very well might not beat them. I would still take my chances and bid 5H. I do not think partner having 6 hearts is possible, I think a hand like x Kxxxxx xx KQxx is a reasonable 2H opener but our hand and their failure to bid spades makes that impossible. The same hand type with 4 good spades and 6 bad hearts is not a 2H opener. Qxxx K987xxx --- xx is a perfectly fine 2H opener to me, passing is pretty lame and 3H is way too much.

...Then I read this, so maybe the first quote is not completely true

[cherdano]

"Bad suit" is relative, I have 7 of them. I view my suit as much better than QJT9xx which surely is a fine suit for a preempt? If we are going to play in hearts having 7 is obviously a big plus vs having almost any 6 card suit. If we are going to get doubled at least there is some safety in being 7-4, I mean I'd rather have KQJT98 if I'm in 2H X but nothings perfect lol. I also don't view my hand as very playable in spades, with 7-4 I am unlikely to want to play in spades unless partner has lots of them and few hearts in which case we can still often find spades. I also don't view it as misdescribing my hand, I have a weak hand with hearts. The auction is unlikely to time out well for me if I pass. I guess you view the risk of missing spades as much greater than I do, I rarely preempt with 6-4 in the majors (only with extremely good 6) but with 7-4 I don't think it's such a big deal, most of the time I will want to be in my 7 card suit even when it's bad.

 

Do you just view opening 2H on a 7 card suit as a misdescription or flaw? Because probably most of those suits are "bad suits" else you would open 3 (or you are just 7222 or w/e). I personally don't find it to be a flaw but I guess that's where knowing your partnership style is important. It seems ludicrous to me to say you're a sound preemptor and open 2H on Qxxx Kxxxxx and makes it impossible for your partner to judge in these situations.

 

I don't think the suit is "bad" enough - I think it's just a different hand than a hand containing a good 6-card suit. My thinking is that partner has no chance to judge how high to compete, or even how high to bid constructively - our hand is very different from a normal weak two, and depending on partner's hand it will be much stronger or much weaker than partner expects; meanwhile, there is really no need to preempt in second seat when we have both majors.

 

Of course, you might say we will never be able get such decisions right after passing either, and maybe that's the strongest case for bidding 2♥. I guess I am not that pessimistic about pass.

[chasetb]

All 4 players made ludicrous actions in this one hand. South didn't open a weak 2♦ (assuming (s)he could), West opened on crap, North made a takeout double on a 5-0-(5-3) hand, and East is a bean counter, not a trick counter and unable to diagnose fits properly.

 

I disagree slightly on people opening 2♥ on a 7-4 hand, I would enter at the 3-level, because a 7-card fit alone would be an upgrade for me, let alone a 'concentrated' 7-4.

[whereagles]

when in doubt,

bean-count

[jogs]

So what's the lesson?

If you preempt a crappy hand, you better find the killing lead?

[whereagles]

I woudl say it's more like.. if pard preempts on a junk suit, expect extra shape. Well, a reasonable pard at least... lol.

[jogs]

The agreement shouldn't be sound. It should be rational depending on hand's suit pattern.

6322 would be sound.

 

6331

6421

6430

 

The more skewed the pattern, the less HCPs promised.

[Jinksy]

Am I the only one to whom 'sound' should mean 'good suit' rather than 'random scattering of 9HCP'?

[kuhchung]

Am I the only one to whom 'sound' should mean 'good suit and/or shape' rather than 'random scattering of 9HCP'?

 

no

[Jinksy]

I dunno, I agree with Justin that 'good suit' can mean a 7th, but I would not dream of a 2nd in vul 2H bid on the W hand. Dist like that doesn't stop you from getting smashed if the opps have your suit (and gives you more defence against 4S, though I wouldn't bid it with 4m instead, either).