The worst bidding problem I have EVER seen at the table

[bplotkin]

You are South, vul vs not at matchpoints. You hold:

 

AK9xx

Axxx

x

Jxx

 

[hv=d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1s3h4dp]133|100[/hv]

 

Your call. If it means anything, you're playing 2/1 with an expert partner who's won an open nationally-rated event.

[nige1]

[hv=s=SAK953HA642D7nCJ75&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1s3h4dp?]100|200|

You are South, vul vs not at matchpoints.

Your call. If it means anything, you're playing 2/1 with an expert partner who's won an open nationally-rated event.

[/hv]

IMO bplotkin has lived a sheltered life :) I rank

1. 4♠ = NAT. Any old port in a storm :)
2. 4N = NAT???. unattractive and not worth the risk of misunderstanding.
3. 4♥ = CUE. Shouldn't this show extras or a fit?
4. 5♦ = NAT. But nasty :(
5. Pass = Anti-systemic. Might destroy partnership trust.

Edited, reluctantly, to include Mr Ace's 4♥

 

 

 

Edited April 16, 2017 by nige1

[nullve]

Easy. 4N (NAT).

[gszes]

QJ754 QJ2 Q KQ32 hmm now let me see what to do what to do OH wait that's not the problem what do I do with a min full of controls????

 

4h

[Phil]

4N is definitely natural.

[blackshoe]

4♠

[FelicityR]

In my humble opinion, partner wouldn't be bidding 4♦ without ♠ support. He could have doubled the 3♥ bid instead and removed any ♣ preference to ♦ with a long ♦ suit. So bidding 4♥ over 4♦ seems ok. If he has a singleton or void in ♥ he will hopefully assume it is the ace as East hasn't raised.

 

Bidding 4NT (natural) is also a possibility. And yes, the preferred bid is problematic in my opinion, but bidding 4NT says ♥ stopper not control.

[SteveMoe]

Responder's 4♦ denies ♠ support. We lack ♦ support. 4N might have play but the best way to get there is if partner has a ♣ stop (and perhaps a secondary ♥ stop).

4♥, risking that partner knows 4NT is in the picture and preferable to 5♦. One ask, two show.

[MrAce]

Responder's 4♦ denies ♠ support. .....

 

In my humble opinion, partner wouldn't be bidding 4♦ without ♠ support.....

 

 

I strongly disagree with both of these comments which are basically the opposite of each other.

 

Having said that, as Nullve and Phil already wrote, playing 4 NT as natural sounds about right. Would I bid 4 NT without agreement? - No.

IMO we do not have the luxury to use 4♥ cue only for the ♦ support hands in high level auctions where we know it is our hand (regarding the strength). But then again it is debatable whether 4♥ cue should at least have some extras if not have ♦ support OR it could be used as some sort of COG (choice of games/suits) kinda relay even with very minimum openings, just to gain space.

 

Let's have some faith in pd. He knows damn well what kind of position he puts us to by bidding 4♦.

 

• If he has a ♠ support next to diamonds, means he is ready to show it even if we raised diamonds, and he is more about slam rather than finding the right game, or he would just bid 4♠ at this high level.
• If he does not have ♠ support, then he has a massive 1 suiter since he did not double.

So even if I had the agreement with pd that 4 NT is natural, I would still prefer 4♥ this hand. Because my ♥ holding suggests that pd has either ♠ support or a massive single suiter ♦ hand. I am not sure how good is my heart stopper in NT and whether that will discourage pd due to his shortness in that suit or not. It will definitely leave the 4♠ behind. I am a huge believer of using cuebid by opener as a flexible call after they preempt and responder makes a high level forcing bid in a new suit.

 

As a response to OP, this or this type of positions where you have more than one reasonable interpretations of calls, it becomes one of the worst problems at the table as he stated in the title of this topic. Cure is simple. Partnerships should spend much more time and practice on competitive auctions, especially the ones that contains medium to high level preempts. It is not enough to know whether 4 NT is nat or not or what the cuebid shows. You also need to to discuss the continuation of these calls. Without these, I feel the pain of OP.

[ggwhiz]

4♠ expecting to be on a 5-2 fit if I play there or if not to respect partners next call to probably set the contract. I might find myself cueing hearts next but realistically can't do it immediately in my partnership, especially with a 12 count and no diamond help.

 

4nt natural? Now that is not only indefensible if undiscussed but even if it is, is partner really supposed to know/guess that it shows no club card(s), a bare heart stop, no source of tricks, negative diamond help and no extra values?

 

Puleez! Drop your cards on the table and back away slowly.

[Fluffy]

I would bid 5♦, sure partner will expect better fit, but I have useful cards in the majors to compensate. I don't like playing in spades or NT with all the hearts flowing.

[Dinarius]

First question: "Is partner forcing or merely competing?" I assume the latter.

 

I started with a seven loser hand, and 4♦️doesn't improve it greatly. I have three quick tricks, but I expect a stack of ♠️ on my right. So, I'm not bidding 4♠️.

 

The best player I ever played with said that sometimes you have to "manufacture" a bid. Is that what partner has done here? Could 4♦️be first round control agreeing ♠️? Or does he hold seven or eight ♦️AKQ etc...? I presume the latter. And if he's that confident of 4♦️, why not bid five? I have nothing extra to offer over my original opening bid.

 

Up to what level were negative doubles agreed?

 

Passing and taking an almost certain plus score might not be bad at this scoring.

 

5♦️may well go down to ❤️ and ♠️ ruffs.

 

Wouldn't consider bidding 4NT natural for a second with ♣️J, X, X.

 

Am dead curious. 😎

 

D.

[bplotkin]

Double would have been negative.

 

I don't have the other three hands handy. At the table, I chose to pass with this hand, which beat the people in ridiculous contracts going down like dogs. Score was about 70 percent on the board.

It worked, that's about all I can say for it. :)

[nugatory]

First question: "Is partner forcing or merely competing?" I assume the latter.

If 4D isn't forcing, then partner (unpassed and so far unlimited) has no force except 4H. That feels impractical.

[aguahombre]

If 4♦ wasn't forcing, or if Opener passed it and got lucky, we would be paying off to a huge fix if we were the opponents. If a pair our same direction scored well by passing 4♦, they aren't our competition anyway.

[Dinarius]

I'm not surprised that passing was the winning action. That's what I intimated in my first reply.

 

As I already wrote, 4♦️ does not improve your 7 loser hand one iota.

 

In fact, you could argue that 4♦️ is the last bid you want to hear. It is like the dreaded 2NT response, neither here nor there.

 

At matchpoints, taking an almost certain plus score, when a misfit is suggested, is rarely the wrong course of action - and so it proved here.

 

Also, by passing, you are waiting in the long grass to double 4❤️ If they carry on. I would expect a diamond lead to slaughter 4❤️.

 

Passing is a win/win action, in my view.

 

D.

[aguahombre]

I'm not surprised that passing was the winning action. That's what I intimidated in my first reply.

 

As I already wrote, 4♦️ does not improve your 7 loser hand one iota.

 

In fact, you could argue that 4♦️ is the last bid you want to hear. It is like the dreaded 2NT response, neither here nor there.

 

At matchpoints, taking an almost certain plus score, when a misfit is suggested, is rarely the wrong course of action - and so it proved here.

 

Also, by passing, you are waiting in the long grass to double 4❤️ If they carry on. I would expect a diamond lead to slaughter 4❤️.

 

Passing is a win/win action, in my view.

 

D.

I guess it depends on what Partner will bid 4♦ on, so I can't guess about your situation. 7-1 or 8-1 is not really a misfit, and my partner would not see the humor in my passing 4♦ here, even if it magically succeeded. It would throw doubt into other auctions which must be forcing as well.

[Dinarius]

I guess it depends on what Partner will bid 4♦ on, so I can't guess about your situation. 7-1 or 8-1 is not really a misfit, and my partner would not see the humor in my passing 4♦ here, even if it magically succeeded. It would throw doubt into other auctions which must be forcing as well.

 

As I asked in my first reply: Is partner forcing, or merely competing?

 

To my mind, he is merely competing. And this is what appears to have been the case here.

 

If Partner wants to force he can Double (if it's not for penalties at this level), or bid 4H.

He could also have bid 3NT with ♣K,x and ♥K,x and a stack of diamonds. Granted, this is highly unlikely, and so it proved here. (4NT now by Opener is still bonkers, in my view)

 

If Partner had a stack of diamonds and a 5/6 loser hand, I would have expected him to bid 5♦on his own. He didn't. What's more, he bid the last suit I wanted to hear AND, I'm both minimum for my original opening AND unsuitable for his hand.

 

Passing will gain most of the matchpoints, most of the time, in this situation. This was no exception.

 

I would expect 4♠, 4♥ (by them, obviously) and 4NT to not have a prayer. And I would expect 5♦to be gambling, at best. (Also, if 5♦makes, and there are one or two in it, I'm probably getting a second top, or near second top for my 4♦+1.)

 

D.

[Dinarius]

If 4D isn't forcing, then partner (unpassed and so far unlimited) has no force except 4H. That feels impractical.

 

I totally disagree that 4♥forcing is impractical.

 

If it is, he can't merely compete in another suit (♣ or ♦) as he wanted to do here.

 

To my mind, partner is screaming, "I have no defence to 3♥ - he can't, you're looking at 4 of them! - I can't bid 3NT on my own, and I don't have enough to force with 4♥. Nor do I have enough to bid 5♦ on my own."

 

So, he competes with 4♦- to which you have NOTHING to add.

 

"Look after the averages and the tops will look after themselves." as they say. Doing that here, by passing 4♦, will be the winning action in the long run.

 

D.

[MrAce]

You are South, vul vs not at matchpoints. You hold:

 

AK9xx

Axxx

x

Jxx

 

[hv=d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1s3h4dp]133|100[/hv]

 

Your call. If it means anything, you're playing 2/1 with an expert partner who's won an open nationally-rated event.

 

I see you asked this same question 1.5 years ago in BW. Many people voted your in that poll. I will not say you are not an expert just because you passed a forcing bid and got lucky one day. We all do weird stuff and get lucky now and then. Though experts do not do it by passing forcing bids. What makes me curious is, what is your obsession with this hand and your pathetic solution at the table which worked out well that you keep posting it every 1.5 year in different forums? You conveniently skipped to give the other hands back then and you did it here too.

 

http://bridgewinners...-problem-10740/

 

What happened in other hands that you passed forcing bids? Did they lead to the link below?

 

http://bridgewinners...on-long-island/

 

Had you tried this poll in B/N forum of BBF (or any other forum) you would have A LOT OF company to your pass.

[Dinarius]

I see you asked this same question 1.5 years ago in BW. Many people voted your in that poll. I will not say you are not an expert just because you passed a forcing bid and got lucky one day. We all do weird stuff and get lucky now and then. Though experts do not do it by passing forcing bids. What makes me curious is, what is your obsession with this hand and your pathetic solution at the table which worked out well that you keep posting it every 1.5 year in different forums? You conveniently skipped to give the other hands back then and you did it here too.

 

http://bridgewinners...-problem-10740/

 

What happened in other hands that you passed forcing bids? Did they lead to the link below?

 

http://bridgewinners...on-long-island/

 

Had you tried this poll in B/N forum of BBF (or any other forum) you would have A LOT OF company to your pass.

 

4♦ is "forcing"? Forcing to what, precisely?

 

And if it's forcing, what would 4♥, by Partner, mean?

 

Thanks.

 

D.