Match points

[eagles123]

Ktx

Axx

A

Akxxxx

 

(P) p (3d)

 

All red MP

[nige1]

All red MP ♠ K t x ♥ A x x ♦ A ♣ A k x x x x

(P) p (3dI) ??

IMO 3N = 10, Double = 9, 5♣= 7, 4♣ (Nat) = 6, 4♦ = 5.

[billw55]

I guess I will try double, planning to raise 3M to 4M. Not perfect, but 3NT probably needs 9 cashers which feels shaky.

[PhantomSac]

X=10 others=0

[Phil]

X=10 others=0

 

What's your plan after 3M?

[PhantomSac]

What's your plan after 3M?

 

I would probably just bid 4C but of course 3N could be the winner. I may just be saying that to emphasize what I think of bidding a direct 3N though lol.

[kuhchung]

I have a lot of admiration for X then 3N but I can't bring myself to do it.

[KurtGodel]

I will double, 3NT is just wrong, for it to make we need: clubs to come in (partner to have 3 and for them to split, partner to have Qx(x) and for them to split, or xxxx and for them to split), another quick trick.

[gszes]

A direct 3n or (even worse) 3N after 3M may actually work on occasion so they deserve a solid 2 to 3 rating (I have seen worse bids). Our hand structure and the bidding appear to make our combined assets a huge favorite to be in a suit contract. The fact that p is a passed hand does not mean they are broke and even slam is still possible at this point. Even worse would you not feel a TON better if P could bid 3n? Well that is a possibility if we start with

 

x

 

It looks reasonable to convert 3M to 4C since that is probably a safer contract and this is MP and -200 can be hugely bad for us. I am willing to gamble on 4M (knowing we might miss slam) and raise 4c to 5c. The main reason I like X so much is for the times P can bid 4d. While this is a nebulous bid this is where slam becomes a real possibility. A 5d bid here should adequately point out a lack of 4 card major (else 4n or 5M) and slam in sight asking p to pick a slam.

 

NONE of the above is possible when starting with the hugely iffy 3n. Just a thought

[eagles123]

well yes I did bid 3N. as it happens pass is the winning call but obviously no-ones doing that!!

 

partners hand is some good some bad - he has the Q of clubs and nothing else lol

 

still 8 tricks was ok for -100 when they can make 4d and passed out 3n :)

 

 

thanks

 

Eagles

[jodepp]

Double keeps all options in play.

 

1) If partner passes, I will be happy;

2) if partner bids 3♥/♠ I will bid 3NT (thinking 'ick!), trusting partner to 'correct' to the major when that is right;

3) If partner jumps to game in a major I will have a decision to make but will probably pass on the theory that one should not try to be perfect on preemptive auctions.

 

Doubling then 4C is a nice description but aims at too small a target.

[jdonn]

Double has to be better than 3NT just on the basis that you can bid 3NT next round, and if partner pulls that to a major you can be pretty darn sure it's right. But I wouldn't give direct 3NT a 0/10. I'd give it like 0.6/10, I mean I guess it's possible for it to work best?

[PhantomSac]

Double has to be better than 3NT just on the basis that you can bid 3NT next round, and if partner pulls that to a major you can be pretty darn sure it's right. But I wouldn't give direct 3NT a 0/10. I'd give it like 0.6/10, I mean I guess it's possible for it to work best?

 

This is the nige system. "It could work" is not a reasonable standard to me. I mean does a 6C overcall get a 1? It could work!

[lycier]

I intend to make takeout at first,then try to rebid 4♣ showing my decent hand,slamish.

[lycier]

I intend to make takeout at first,then rebid 4♣ showing my decent hand,slamish.

[The_Badger]

X (for me) always. I'd like an extra ♦ or 2 before bidding 3NT direct (so I can hold up). Transfer a small ♣ to one of your majors so the hand is 4-3-1-5 and X looks the right bid here, and guess what partner invariably responds at the 3 level in your shorter major on this hand too :)

 

But MPs sometimes makes this an illogical game. The wrong bid can work right, and vice versa. If you are looking for a top, 3NT direct could well be the best bid.

 

Not quite sure if X - 3M - and a 3NT rebid shows this sort of hand. Partner needs so little for 4M to make that I would raise to 4M automatically. 3NT just doesn't feel sound, and there's no guaranteeing partner will remove 3NT if he doesn't feel it is right. Take the decision away from him and bid what you feel is the right game.

 

As for slam...partner is a passed hand, a pre-empt has been bid against you, suits are unlikely to split, etc. - be grateful for the game (if it's there!).

[wbartley]

To consider anything other than double here seems nutty. I'm with the people who say double=10 everything else=0. My plan is to bid 4C over 3M, Pass 3N or 4M, and bid 6C over 4D.

[nige1]

X=10 others=0

Double has to be better than 3NT just on the basis that you can bid 3NT next round, and if partner pulls that to a major you can be pretty darn sure it's right. But I wouldn't give direct 3NT a 0/10. I'd give it like 0.6/10, I mean I guess it's possible for it to work best?

This is the nige system. "It could work" is not a reasonable standard to me. I mean does a 6C overcall get a 1? It could work!

I avoid "My bid = 10, others = 0" -- for many reasons -- including that I'm never sure of my choice -- but not least because the OP is often worried about the call he chose, at the table. Sometimes, he wants to know how others rate his effort and if it's bad, why.

 

Here, most spurn the immediate 3N overcall, chosen by eagles123 and me. It has obvious drawbacks but it gives little away and it may inhibit a club diamond lead from a broken suit.

 

IMO, the popular choice (double, intending to rebid 3N over 3M) has subtle drawbacks, too. It's an expression doubt, so is more likely to attract a ♣ lead. What does partner do with say

♠ Q x x x ♥ x x x x x ♦ K x ♣ Q x?

To your double, perhaps he should reply 4♦ to try to reach the best major game? Suppose, instead, he elects to bid 3♥. Now, should he pass your 3N or correct it to 4♠? No doubt, JLall espouses sophisticated methods that handle such problems, but some partnerships would be left floundering.

[PhantomSac]

Nige1, I'm not sure what you're talking about.

 

1) they opened diamonds not clubs.

 

2) the "popular choice of X then 3N" does not appear to be the popular choice. A plurality of Xers indicated they would bid 4C after X (me, gszes, lycier, wbartley). The next group indicated they would double and raise 3M to 4M (billw, the badger). As far as I can tell only 1 person (jodepp) said they would X then bid 3N, so it is not the "popular choice" as you say.

 

3) The partner of the preemptor is going to be on lead, so you're not going to bluff a "broken suit" out of leading a diamond. It will be pretty easy for the partner of the 3D opener to lead a diamond if he has 2+ diamonds.

 

4) Of course no one would correct 3N to 4S after 3D X p 3H p 3N with 45xx. You don't need "sophisticated methods" to bid 4D rather than 4S with that. Partner will know to bid 4H with 3-3 in the majors, and 4S with 4-2. You constructed an example hand where 3N is perfectly fine and probably a better contract than 4H, but yes the main reason to X first (even if your plan is to next bid 3N) as opposed to bidding 3N directly is to play 4M opposite 5/4 in the majors rather than 3N.

[nige1]

Nige1, I'm not sure what you're talking about.

1) they opened diamonds not clubs.

Phantomsac is right that I meant ♦ not ♣. What I was trying to say is that rating different options might be useful -- even choices you wouldn't make yourself.. :(

2) the "popular choice of X then 3N" does not appear to be the popular choice. A plurality of Xers indicated they would bid 4C after X (me, gszes, lycier, wbartley). The next group indicated they would double and raise 3M to 4M (billw, the badger). As far as I can tell only 1 person (jodepp) said they would X then bid 3N, so it is not the "popular choice" as you say.

I thought JDonn and you both suggested that possibility. I dislike the alternative of doubling and then bidding 4♣ although I suppose it does express a strong hand.

3) The partner of the preemptor is going to be on lead, so you're not going to bluff a "broken suit" out of leading a diamond. It will be pretty easy for the partner of the 3D opener to lead a diamond if he has 2+ diamonds.

Stupid of me :(

4) Of course no one would correct 3N to 4S after 3D X p 3H p 3N with 45xx. You don't need "sophisticated methods" to bid 4D rather than 4S with that. Partner will know to bid 4H with 3-3 in the majors, and 4S with 4-2. You constructed an example hand where 3N is perfectly fine and probably a better contract than 4H, but yes the main reason to X first (even if your plan is to next bid 3N) as opposed to bidding 3N directly is to play 4M opposite 5/4 in the majors rather than 3N.

Fair enough :)