ATB: Who misunderestimated most?

[Jinksy]

[hv=pc=n&s=skt2ha72dat987ca4&n=saqjht654dkq65c75&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=1c1dp2cp3cp3dppp]266|200[/hv]

 

MPs with two BBFers, but very few agreements.

 

N thought that S was derelict in failing to show a C stop or a balanced hand. S thought that N had only shown about an 8 count, so didn't want to admit to what he thought a poor stop unless N showed some extras. What should have happened?

[rmnka447]

South gets the big share of the blame. I marked other because I think South missed the boat twice in the auction.

 

First, South has 15 HCP, a balanced hand, and a ♣ stopper. What's wrong with a simple 1 NT overcall unless you're playing that as something unusual?

 

Second, a cue of opener's suit by North shows at least 11+ value minimum and is unlimited. It's the normal way to show a game invitational or better hand opposite a TO double. Without that much, advancer simply makes a suit bid in 4+ card suit -- 1 of a suit 0-7, 2 of a suit 8-10 value.

 

After 3 ♣, North bids 3 ♦ simply showing something in ♦ to go along at least invitational values. With stoppers in the other suits and a big ♦ fit, South has an easy 3 NT bid at MPs.

[kenrexford]

At least 33 beats 5D.

[mgoetze]

Eh, how is "North should have advanced 1♥" an option? With 12 points?

 

2♣ may or may not be the right bid but with "few agreements" you've got to shoulder at least some of the blame when you choose it and it doesn't work out.

 

Meanwhile, were the opps playing Acol or something? If opps are playing some sort of strong NT, 5-card major system there is really no reason at all to be fussy about your club stopper, Ax is more than sufficient.

 

It seems both partners set out to make the auction as difficult as possible, and both succeeded. No blame, only praise for achieving your goals. ;)

[billw55]

While 2♣ may be murky, in context of south's hand it definitely creates a game force. 100% south.

[mike777]

Mostly south, partly north.

 

2c=lmt+ not 8, not gf

3c=extras, gf

 

clearly the big problem here is north thought after 3c they were in a gf situation and they were. South thought north had only 8 for some reason.

[Jinksy]

Eh, how is "North should have advanced 1♥" an option? With 12 points?

 

It would only make sense if you think 1♥ is forcing, obv. I don't know what, if anything, is standard here.

[mgoetze]

It would only make sense if you think 1♥ is forcing, obv. I don't know what, if anything, is standard here.

Wait, for some reason I saw South having doubled rather than bid 1♦. I guess it seemed too absurd.

 

OK this is easy then, South chose the 3rd-best option and it clearly wasn't good enough.

[Jinksy]

Wait, for some reason I saw South having doubled rather than bid 1♦. I guess it seemed too absurd.

 

That was an error when I first posted, but I fixed it before anyone replied :\

[BillPatch]

I ATB 95% to S, thus most of the blame. I agree with N's bidding, but anytime bidding blows up with no agreements I see some shared blame. Both double and 1NT would have been better, South's hand would have been ideal for a major suit game if partner had 8+ HCP and a five card major. the 3 club counter cue only makes sense if it offers a choice of 3NT, which South could have offered by bidding 3NT next. Without agreements partner might not misinterpret that sequence as a partial stopper rather than Ax, or whether counter cue allowed N to stop at 4 of minor after S bid 3NT. South's final pass deserves the majority of the blame, surely the 3♣ recue set up a force to 3NT if not to game. By the way, I attribute a bonus 50% of the blame to the problem setter; 10% for originally misquoting the auction, and 40% for not specifying whether they were playing MPs or "real bridge."

[wank]

i don't like 3d but the pass is worse.

 

south should bid 3nt over 3d which describes his hand perfectly - balanced hand, weak club stop, values for game.

 

north has modest extras and a 4th trump, so i don't think there was much danger if he did something more productive, like 3s.

 

8 counts are not UCBs.

 

as for the orignal 1D, i don't hate it. i would hate 1nt.

[Jinksy]

By the way, I attribute a bonus 50% of the blame to the problem setter; 10% for originally misquoting the auction, and 40% for not specifying whether they were playing MPs or "real bridge."

 

Then I hope you will accept a further 40% for failing to observe the word 'MPs'.

[Jinksy]

i don't like 3d but the pass is worse.

 

south should bid 3nt over 3d which describes his hand perfectly - balanced hand, weak club stop, values for game.

 

north has modest extras and a 4th trump, so i don't think there was much danger if he did something more productive, like 3s.

 

8 counts are not UCBs.

 

as for the orignal 1D, i don't hate it. i would hate 1nt.

 

How would you rate an initial X?

[eagles123]

i would just always x with the south hand, i pretty much think equal blame maybe a bit more to south but north hardly covers himself in glory either.

[MrAce]

100 % South

[kenberg]

Starting with 1NT seems best. I have a 15 count, a five card suit that can reasonable be expected to proved some tricks, and stops in every suit. It's true I like to have more nines and tens when I choose NT over a suit, but I go with 1NT. Having three cards in each major is an asset, since I will be delighted to accept a transfer whether it is on a weak hand or a strong hand. The fact that I only stop clubs once bothers me not at all.

 

Now suppose I start with 1D and partner bids 2C. I checked both that S should bid 2NT and 3NT. Myself, I think the 2C shows more than an 8 count. With an 8 count I raise diamonds if I have diamonds and either pass or bid something, maybe 1Nt, with a decent 8 count and scattered values. At any rate, I don't bid 2C.

 

So if 2C couold be on an 8 count then 2NT is a sensible response to 2C. If, as I think, 2C shows either a diamond fot and 10+ or else quite a big hand, then 3NT seems right.

 

 

There are choices, and there are agreements. We choose as best we can, but an agreement to bid 2C on an 8 count seems weird to me.

[Zelandakh]

Eh, how is "North should have advanced 1♥" an option? With 12 points?

Jinksy is British and the most common agreement there is for a new suit to be forcing. You can also see this bias in 2♣ being assumed to be a UCB.

 

I think it is clear that South here takes the blame. There are lots of possibilities depending on what sort of agreements are in place but in my book North showed ~10-12 with a diamond fit and for South to pass that in 3♦ is difficult to support. At the end of the day though this comes down to expectation and the lack of agreements. South clearly thought North was showing ~8-9 with a diamond fit. If that is standard for the country/area where this pair come from then I will revise my opinion.

[mgoetze]

Jinksy is British and the most common agreement there is for a new suit to be forcing. You can also see this bias in 2♣ being assumed to be a UCB.

No, I'm sure even in Britain (1♣)-X-1♥ (the originally posted auction I was commenting on) is not forcing.

 

I do play (1♣)-1♦-1♥ as forcing myself... come to think of it most of the proponents of it being non-forcing that I've met have been British.

[ggwhiz]

Not starting with 1nt is glass half empty bidding especially at mp's. 100% south for starting the rot and then hammering it home after a cue bid by north.

[BillPatch]

i don't like 3d but the pass is worse.

 

south should bid 3nt over 3d which describes his hand perfectly - balanced hand, weak club stop, values for game.

 

north has modest extras and a 4th trump, so i don't think there was much danger if he did something more productive, like 3s.

 

8 counts are not UCBs.

 

as for the orignal 1D, i don't hate it. i would hate 1nt.

Assuming that you have another way to express a strong ♠ hand, most traditional systems don't, at least among English speaking

world.

[Wackojack]

So far no one has speculated on what South’s bid of 3♣ could mean. Normally I think it should mean “Have you got a stop in clubs for 3NT?” But does it mean this here?

 

This is how I see things:

 

South did not overcall 1NT, so at that stage could be:

(i) balanced 8-14 lead directing

(ii) balanced 15-17 with no club stop and 5 or 6 diamonds

(iii) unbalanced 8-17.

The points given are inevitably approximate.

 

North cues 2♣ which would normally shows at least 3 card club support and about 11+ (good 10?)

.

Then South with:

 

(i) would bid 2♦ with 8-11. With a club stop and a good 12 or 13 might try 2NT or 3NT with 14. With no club stop South might try 3♣ with a good 13 or 14. So asking for a club stop.

 

(ii) would bid 3♣ asking for a club stop

 

(iii) would bid 2♦ with 8-11 and 5 cards, probably 3♦ with 6 cards. With 12-17 and a singleton major would bid 2 in the other major.

A singleton club is not possible unless having a distribution like 3-3-6-1 but again 3♣ here would be asking for a club stop.

 

So we have to conclude that 3♣ has to be asking for a club stop. So North with a balanced 12 must do as he is told and bid 3♦.

[wank]

Assuming that you have another way to express a strong ♠ hand, most traditional systems don't, at least among English speaking

world.

 

1 spade if it's forcing. for me it would be 2 spades as i play 1 spade as non-forcing as i overcall on qtxxx and out (not vul against not admittedly).

[BillPatch]

North's 2♣ cue is normally a LR in diamonds, which he would normally express with the minimal diamond rebid. If he had some other type of hand which required a cue bid force he would not be following South's orders at this point. The 3♦ rebid now makes South boss/captain.

[Jinksy]

I'll come out as S in this auction now. I don't claim that I bid this well, but I don't agree with some of what has been said.

 

Firstly, I still hate a direct 1N overcall with Ax in their suit. 5cMs or no, the expected min length of whichever opps' club suit is the longest is surely close to 5 (if not greater) here. If so I do not want to be in game opposite P's random 9 count, since I strongly doubt we'll have 8 cashing tricks elsewhere. My feeling was 1♦ ~= X > 1N.

 

Secondly, everyone seems convinced N's UCB shows a solid 10+ points. For a bid that only pushed us to the 2 level, that seems like very inefficient partitioning, given that even at these colours P will likely raise on something close to a suitable Yarborough. No less than Andrew Robson recently wrote a column claiming that at MPs, UCBs should be about 8+ as standard since (IIRC) once P's shown values it makes it easier to X them if they over-compete, and makes it commensurately less likely that they'll compete in the first place. (I've seen a number of people here complain about the overly strict requirements for Drury, and that's in a constructive auction where P's lower bound is already higher the Drury bid's lower bound is lower, and it otherwise seems analogous)

 

Thirdly - in part because of the previous point, but however much strength we're supposed to have between us - 3♦ didn't look to me like a forcing bid. If P wanted to probe for 3N, I reasoned, he could have bid 3M. The odds of us wanting to pursue a diamond slam esp at this scoring seem remote (and there are plenty of other ways of doing it), so 3♦ looks like a 'I have nothing more to say' bid. Expecting no help in clubs and no substantial extras opposite, I didn't think 3N's prospects seemed any brighter than when I was considering my first call. I felt (and still feel) that with 2-4 points to spare (depending on whether you accept the previous point), N should have bid his major stops, over which I'd intended to rebid 3N, admitting to a weak C stop.

 

I can be persuaded out of any of this but asserting that '3♣ sets up a gameforce' isn't enough.

[kenberg]

I was glad to see you address the use of 2C on 8+ since that may have a lot to do with the rest.

 

I just wouldn't use it that way, I don't raise the 1D overcall to 2D without some values. Maybe a 6 count with a doubleton somewhere. It is just different. This is one of those things that I cannot imagine myseff changing my mind about. It doesn't mean that I am right, I just won't be changing my mind.

 

I'm trying to see things in this different light, as to how I would then act after the 3C and 3D bids. Your partner certainly has more than an 8 count. On the other hand, he has a worthless doubleton in clubs so unless your 3C showed or club stop, I don't see him trying for 3NT. And he envisions losing the first two tricks in clubs with diamonds as trumps, so 5D doesn't look good (and isn't good). So I guess 3D seemed best.

 

But I accept that my thoughts are not apt to be of much use since raising 1D to 2D on nothing, and bidding 2C on an 8 count, is just not at all my approach so it is hard for me to think in these terms.

 

I said earlier that if the 2C could be on an 8 count then, over 2C, I would have bid 2Nt. I still would. I think 1NT originally is better, but having not done so I would bid 2NT now, rather than 3C. Unless I have had a lengthy discussion with my partner as to what to expect from my 3C bid. I expect him to understand a 2NT bid.