How high to show support here?

[el mister]

MPs, all vuln, playing 2/1, you pick up this fine collection of intermediates:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=st8765ht92d43c942&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=p1s2d]133|200[/hv]

 

What is your call? [Your opps are good, but the room is a whole is a bit of an ordinary standard, if that makes a difference].

[The_Badger]

Pass as quick as a flash. If partner cannot make another squeak over 2♦, you certainly don't want to be playing at the 3 or 4 level in ♠s vulnerable with this balanced trash Law of Total Tricks or not. You have the anchor suit ♠s so see what happens is infinitely preferable than deceiving partner that you have some values.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I guess I would go with 2S, although pass may well be best.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[el mister]

Pass as quick as a flash. If partner cannot make another squeak over 2♦, you certainly don't want to be playing at the 3 or 4 level in ♠s vulnerable with this balanced trash Law of Total Tricks or not. You have the anchor suit ♠s so see what happens is infinitely preferable than deceiving partner that you have some values.

If pard can't make a squeak over 2♦ then being allowed to play in 3 or 4♠ sounds great. 3 or 4♠X sounds less great, which is sort of what my comment on the strength of the room alludes to.

[ggwhiz]

3♠ or pass is the choice for me.

 

3♠ if I had a stiff somewhere but I'm passing with this trash

[The_Badger]

If pard can't make a squeak over 2♦ then being allowed to play in 3 or 4♠ sounds great. 3 or 4♠X sounds less great, which is sort of what my comment on the strength of the room alludes to.

 

The main problem here (as we are all aware) is that you are unpassed hand as South. A regular partnership will have clear parameters what 3♠ or 4♠ or 3♦ show. I, for one, will always knock off a trick under LOTT when vulnerable (especially against NV) and balanced.

 

One of Marlowe's suggestions of perhaps bidding 2♠ is all well and good except many partnerships play that as 8-11, 3 card support and constructive.

 

Personally I try not to take into consideration how good the opponents or the room are: what really matters is how your partner interprets your bid.

[silvr bull]

I remember a poker version called "Pass the trash!" I hope I can bid later, but I must pass first with this so partner does not imagine I have a great hand.

[eagles123]

2 spades we have 5 of them!!!

[el mister]

I remember a poker version called "Pass the trash!" I hope I can bid later, but I must pass first with this so partner does not imagine I have a great hand.

3♠ would be weak and preemptive here for us, showing 4 or 5+♠. Pard's not taking you for much in the way of values with that bid, although he may expect more than a 5-3-2-3 yarb, admittedly. This is actually what I bid, and was wondering what the consensus view was.

[sfi]

3♠ would be weak and preemptive here for us, showing 4 or 5+♠. Pard's not taking you for much in the way of values with that bid, although he may expect more than a 5-3-2-3 yarb, admittedly. This is actually what I bid, and was wondering what the consensus view was.

 

3S looks like the bid - I don't have enough values for 2S and don't have enough shape for 4S. If they can make game, let's make it difficult for them to find it. If they can't let's take our best guess in the part score.

[Vampyr]

One of Marlowe's suggestions of perhaps bidding 2♠ is all well and good except many partnerships play that as 8-11, 3 card support and constructive.

 

I doubt they play this in competition.

[NickRW]

I've played with partners who expect pass, 2S and 3S with this sort of hand. It all depends on which of them is sitting opposite. With a pickup partner, I guess I would probably pass this balanced trash on the grounds that it is least likely to get me into trouble.

[nekthen]

3♠ looks right to me. Partner should know this can be tram tickets because I have 3♦ available to show values and support. If I were white it would be 4

[MrAce]

3♠ for me too.

[msjennifer]

I shall PASS.The hand is nothing but tram tickets.No HCP,no ruffing values.I can't provide even a solitary defensive trick.All these mean a normal pass without pause or hesitation.

[mcphee]

The idea of passing just does not make much sense to me. How can you justify passing and letting the enemy have a free run? Lets play that a jump raise is weak and bid 3S, it's logical.

[aawk]

After intervention with a fit in partners major always support if you can. Holding 10 LTC (11 - 1 for extra trump) I would bid 2♠ (on agreement showing a fit with 9-10 LTC) and leave any other action (if needed) to my partner.

 

Raising to 3♠ or even 4♠ depends on agreed supporting style with your partner. Passing just gives opponents a extra level to show the strength of their hand.

 

Another good agreement is that first passing and then support shows defending values and interest to double opponents.

[RD350LC]

MPs, all vuln, playing 2/1, you pick up this fine collection of intermediates:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=st8765ht92d43c942&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=p1s2d]133|200[/hv]

 

What is your call? [Your opps are good, but the room is a whole is a bit of an ordinary standard, if that makes a difference].

I would pass, planning to bid ♠'s up to the 4 level if necessary. One of the opps is a passed hand, and the other made an overcall, not a T.O. double. We have at least 10 spades between us, so the overcaller must be short in spades. Where are the hcp?

[The_Badger]

The idea of passing just does not make much sense to me. How can you justify passing and letting the enemy have a free run? Lets play that a jump raise is weak and bid 3S, it's logical.

 

I agree that 3♠ at this vulnerability, as long as partner undertstands it is a very weak bid is acceptable using LOTT, but there is no logic to it, in totality.

 

There are plenty of instances where using LOTT doesn't work out well. But as most bridge players use LOTT whatever the circumstances, 3♠ will be the right bid. But it doesn't guarantee it will be the most successful action given the whole hand. It could well bounce the opponents into a makeable game, for example. And then what? Partner sacrificing at the five level? Yuk!

[RedSpawn]

3♠ or pass is the choice for me.

 

3♠ if I had a stiff somewhere but I'm passing with this trash

 

I will co-sign ggwhiz with backup from the ACBL.

 

1st -- your team has 10 secured trump in the boss ♠ suit. This means your opposition are sharing 3♠ cards. You already know your team's trump fit while the opposition must scramble to find theirs. While your team may not have game values, you need to block the opposition from looking for any fits they may have in major or minor suits. A bid of 3♠ will accomplish this.

 

A bid of 3♠ over 2♦ can be a weak or intermediate raise per ACBL so your partner should exercise discretion if he holds a minimum or medium strength hand.

 

See link below where the ACBL shows 1♥-2♣-3♥ to be a weak or intermediate raise:

 

http://www.acbl.org/clubs_page/club-administration/club-directors/rulings-faq/major-suit-raises/

 

Now, you can also call "pass" as ggwhiz says, and that is not a "wrong" call either since you have 0 HCP ==> "bust" hand with ample trump support. However, if you call "pass" in this auction, that doesn't come for free. You implicitly give permission for the opposition to explore a heart fit or minor fit or even an NT contract (which could very well lead to game bids).

 

So, 3♠ or "PASS" depending on your strategy and risk appetite.

[Vampyr]

I will co-sign ggwhiz with backup from the ACBL.

 

......

 

See link below where the ACBL shows 1♥-2♣-3♥ to be a weak or intermediate raise:

 

http://www.acbl.org/clubs_page/club-administration/club-directors/rulings-faq/major-suit-raises/

 

This link is not a bridge lesson. It is a portion of ACBL alert regulations.

[GrahamJson]

It's all very well playing weak raises but I suspect most partners will expect something a little better than this for a raise, even to the 2 level let alone higher. It seems to me that bidding on this mess has far too big a risk that partner will go 800 to more in 4Sx or higher if he is weak or going one or two levels too high if strong.

[MrAce]

It's all very well playing weak raises but I suspect most partners will expect something a little better than this for a raise, even to the 2 level let alone higher. It seems to me that bidding on this mess has far too big a risk that partner will go 800 to more in 4Sx or higher if he is weak or going one or two levels too high if strong.

 

It depends on the level of your partners. If you are playing mostly with intermediate minus partners then you are absolutely right that this is not what they will expect. Because it takes time for people to understand the tiny line between hcp and shape and number of trumps held combined.

 

By bidding 3♠ you are not only preempting but also telling your pd that his values in spades are not worth much, if any, in defense. Which can be a vital info for his decisions over their actions.

 

And no, you are absolutely wrong about the likelihood of going down -800 when your side has 10 trumps. But even if you do let's do the raw math about it. Assume they do not have a great fit and their fit is only 8 cards.

 

10+8 = 18 trumps=18 tricks.

 

If your side is going -800 this means you collect only 6 tricks in 3♠

 

18-6= 12 tricks for them if they chose to play their fit. 12 tricks for them which is worth -1430 or -1370 for us. I would take -800 on any day that ends with Y.

 

Oh I know, LOTT is not precise. So let's assume for the sake of argument that LOTT was inaccurate for 1 trick or 2 tricks on this particular deal so what happens? What happens is you lose -800 instead of -650 or -620, losing 3-4 imps. And ask yourself whether it is worth of losing 3-4 imps once in a while and gain much more frequently and help pd to make more accurate decisions (i am not even mentioning the space you stole from them)

 

And do not forget an important note, I gave them only an 8 card fit. Which is not usually the case when your side has 10+ cards fit in spades (also your pd is allowed to hold more than 5 spades for opening 1♠http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

 

Edited to fix typos

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=st8765ht92d43c942&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=p1s2d]133|200|

MPs, all vuln, playing 2/1, you pick up this fine collection of intermediates:

What is your call?

[Your opps are good, but the room is a whole is a bit of an ordinary standard,

if that makes a difference].[/hv]

I rank ...

1. 4♠ = PRE. A reasonable gamble, Hope 4♠ makes or is a good sacrifice. At worst, 4♠X is a bottom. Reduce bidding space for opponents to reach the right level/strain. e.g. At MPs, for opponents, the difference between playing in ♥s/♦s might be top/bottom.
2. 3♠ = PRE. Pusillanimous at match-pointed pairs (Enough at imps).
3. 2♠ = PRE. But might be a red rag to a bull.
4. Pass = PSYCH. Worth consideration against poor opponents, who might not appreciate that they're playing with a 30-34 HCP deck.

[aguahombre]

deleted.