balance with 2 jacks?

[Stephen Tu]

[hv=pc=n&n=sj3h543dt842cj975&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1d1hp1spp?]133|200[/hv]

 

Matchpoints

 

1d promises 4 unless exactly 4=4=3=2

[MrAce]

No!

[rmnka447]

I'm passing. If RHO had passed originally, you would have passed also. You have virtually nothing, so partner has to have a big hand to get to half the points in the deck. If you had 5-6 points you might contest figuring both had about half the deck, but with nothing best to let things lie.

[mikestar13]

For me, thinking about bidding 2♦ would be a very severe overbid. Actually bidding 2♦ would probably give me (or my partner) a heart attack.

[Phil]

I'm balancing. Believe in da law.

[johnu]

11 loser hand, no defense, and no offense to speak of. Maybe East intended 1♠ as forcing and they have had a misunderstanding. At best, you push them up a level which I expect them to easily make. If partner competes further, you can get doubled and go for a lot more than a spade partial.

[eagles123]

no way we could easily balance them into 4s

[Phil]

Ok, let's assume good competition and make sure that they are breathing. Against club hacks; they might have missed a game but even then they'll just slap 2 or 3S down and we havent lost anything.

 

Partner probably owns 18-19 balanced here so it's a 20-20 deck. It's NON VUL VS NON VUL which is the time we should be bidding our heads off.

[Jinksy]

The main thing I fear by bidding is find W with a shape like 2533, E with something like 4225, and pushing E into a competitive 2♥ bid that scores a trick more than spades.

 

It doesn't seem likely enough to stop me bidding. As Phil said, this is W/W. If P's got some distribution we might profitably compete to the 3 or even 4 level.

[Phil]

The main thing I fear by bidding is find W with a shape like 2533, E with something like 4225, and pushing E into a competitive 2♥ bid that scores a trick more than spades.

 

It doesn't seem likely enough to stop me bidding. As Phil said, this is W/W. If P's got some distribution we might profitably compete to the 3 or even 4 level.

 

They have at least 7 trump otherwise pard has 5S.

[akwoo]

This depends quite a bit on what partner's pass means. Some seem to play that they only pass in that seat with 12-14 balanced (or a freak with long spades). Others pass with a much wider range of hands.

 

Can partner have 18-19 balanced, or would she have rebid 1N?

 

Can partner have a 14 count (31)54, or would she have rebid 2C or X?

 

Can partner have a 12 count (22)63, or would she have rebid 2D?

[Jinksy]

They have at least 7 trump otherwise pard has 5S.

 

Good point. Hard to think of any way they're going to improve their part score, then.

[kenberg]

I'm balancing. Believe in da law.

 

I am at least an agnostic when it comes to the Law. This hand illustrates a bit of why. LOTT: The total number of tricks for us playing in our suit plus the total for them in their suit equals (well, tends to approximately equal) the total number of trump in our suit and their suit.

 

OK, we have how many diamonds between us? If (as here we are told is the case) partner opens 1D on 4=4=3=2 it might be seven. More likely it is at least eight. It could be nine. Or (not likely) ten. They have how many spades between them? My guess is seven, maybe 5-2. Possibly 4-3. Or maybe they have eight. I suppose they could have nine, if the spade bidder has six and the heart bidder is minimal for his overcall and has three spades. At any rate, I have no confident opinion about how many diamonds we have and no confident opinion about how many spades they have. So even if I believe in the Law, and I am a skeptic, I don't see how to apply it.

 

Of course if we take the Law to be: Bid to the level equal to how many trump you (think that you) have, then this says bid 2D. Not for me. I have too often seen contracts improved after a balancing act from the opponents. And it cost the Palmer team 800 on a part score hand yesterday. So I pass.

 

I may be wrong, but I'll be right someday--- Josh White.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&n=sj3h543dt842cj975&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1d1hp1spp?]133|200|

Matchpoints

1d promises 4 unless exactly 4=4=3=2

[/hv]

I rank

1. Pass = NAT. Let sleeping dogs lie. If partner has a good hand, then he probably has ♠ length. Hence, It's unlikely that you can outbid opponents. Opponents might have underbid or chosen an inferior strain. The better your ♦ fit, the more likely that opponents have a good fit , of which they are presently unaware.
2. 2♦ = NAT. Brave but might work. Phil's argument is persuasive.
3. 3♦ = PRE. Worth consideration.

[Winstonm]

I've balanced too many people into game with hands much better suited than this - Pass, and quickly.

 

I think in these situations it is always a good idea to remind oneself of the purposes of balancing - either to find our own contract, to find a mini-sacrifice that is worth less than the opponents partscore, or to cause the opponents to bid to a level where our chances of a set are increased, all the while doing so with some reasonable degree of safety.

 

I really don't see any of these reasons satisfied with this hand nor do I see an upside to bidding on.

[1eyedjack]

I pass. Quite apart from the possibility of bouncing them into game, it means that when I do balance with 2D next time, partner will be better placed whether to accept the push to 3D when the opponents (inevitably) bid again.

[Tramticket]

I'm bidding. Let's push them a level higher.

 

I don't understand the comments about bouncing them into game - this is much less a worry at match points.

[MrAce]

I polled this in BW.

 

Here is the poll results

 

http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/bidding-problem-12522/

[wank]

partner must have 18-19 balanced and not bid because he's happier defending spades.

 

if he's 4342 1S and 2D might both make, but it's a tiny target to aim for. 2D is very dangerous. the opps know they have a misfit. they're going to be gagging to smack 2D. we could get carted out, particularly if p is 4432.

[ggwhiz]

Matchpoints

 

1d promises 4 unless exactly 4=4=3=2

 

And this is EXACTLY the auction where partners shape is 4-4-3-2 as the reason partner has passed AND/or the opponents have severely underbid.

[neilkaz]

I polled this in BW.

 

Here is the poll results

 

http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/bidding-problem-12522/

Thx for the link so I could add my vote to pass there as well.