Bid this over opps 2D Multi

[Chamaco]

Matchpoints, EW vulnerable.

 

South deals and opens 2♦ Multi, alerted as weak 2 in a major or 21-22 balanced.

 

You hold

8-Q96-AJ953-K753

 

You did not agree on Multi vs Multi nor granovetter defense nor anything fancy, so you pass.

Bidding goes:

 

S.....W.....N.....E

 

(2D)-p-(2S*)-Double

(p)-3S**-(p)-4D

(p)-?

 

(*)2S shows a hand that can stand 3H rebid, and might still bid games in heart. If opener has spades, he is expected to pass.

 

(**) Stop ask. Do you agree with this bid ?

The alternative could be 3 diamonds, which is indeed invitational (since we play Lebensohl) , but is nonforcing and shows about a good 7 to a poor 9 count.

Since pard promises a good hand for this double (e.g. a minimum opener with 12 hcp would not double unless great shape), our hand is game force.

Additional info: we do play leaping michaels, so double by pard can also come from a minor-based single suiter.

 

Finally, when pard denied spade stop, what do you bid over 4D ?

[whereagles]

I must confess I would have bid 3D. Still, having bid 3S and heard 4D, I think I'll add a 5th, since there seems to be no wastage in spades.

[Fluffy]

WE seem to have a ♠ and a ♣ loser, this hand depeds on agreements of strenght to overcall preempts, I have a minimum on my agreements adn will bid 5♦.

[aray]

Really surprising where all those ♠ gone. Looks like partner is 3-4-5-1 or may be 3-3-5-2 (if this, then high strength) and 3-3-4-3(then super strength to take action with such flat hand). also i have seen people opening weak 2 with 7 card and so partner can be 2-4-5-2 as well. With all these I need ♥A, K ♦ K and ♣ A with p to make slam which is nothing but the minimum partner must have.

 

While playing with my partner I would brust to 6♦, while playing with someone I do not have agreement but believe is a good player will cue 4♠ (do not care if it means ace or void as long as i show willingness for 6).

 

But offcourse there are partners who double on any 12 point, where 5♦ is good enough. By the way no doubt, 3♦ response over double is too timid and 3♠ is the correct bid.

[mike777]

1) Disagree with 3s, I would bid 4nt for minors and get this hand off my chest with one bid. Will pass 5 or 6 of minor. You say 3s is looking for 3nt so P should know I have stiff spade, with my 4nt minor bid. With minors or hearts and more spades I would bid 3s. To repeat, bidding past 3nt should tell P I have short spades. Having passed the multi has limited my hand, I assume.

 

If partner thinks this is blackwood for even a second then we both need new partners fast and am surprised we lasted this long.

[Chamaco]

Furter question to all the posters (and the others).

 

Since we play Lebensohl, West could respond to to pard takeout double with a direct 3NT which means "I have values for 3NT but no stopper and no interest in a major" (bidding 3NT going via 2NT Leb would show the same hand + stopper).

 

Was this perhaps the best bid in your opinion ?

[whereagles]

If you judge game to be a certainty, by all means bid 3NT. Otherwise 3D is just about par.

[kenberg]

About Lebensohl: It sounds as if this partnership has had enough discussion so that the bid can be used with the meaning understood. It is not the way I learned Lebensohl over weak twos however, so I looked it up to see if it was just me.

 

Marty Bergen (Better Bidding with Bergen, p82) says a direct 3NT over a TO of a weak two shows uncertainty and shows an example with one stop (Axx), and says a slow 3NT shows more confidence that 3NT is right and shows an example with KQT in the opponents suit. Steve Robinson (Washington Standard p258) reverses this, saying a direct 3NT is "to play" while a slow 3NT "shows doubt". This is of course a different approach from Lebensohl over a no trump opening but it seems right. When partner opens 1NT he will frequently have the opponents suit stopped and 3NT will frequently be right. After a take out double 3NT will rarely be right unless partner of the doubler can contribute something, and the methods above sort out the level of commitment to NT. It seems likely this will more often be the useful agreement.

 

Possibly you think this is crazy and "everyone" knows a direct 3NT denies any stopper at all. If you watched the Cavendish on this great bbo site, you saw a prominent pair play 4S in something like a 5 card fit when they held 8 or 9 hearts. Assuming "everyone knows what this means" is a recipe for disaster. When I play with someone who wants to play Lebensohl over weak twos, I usually agree (I'm an agreeable guy) but I secretly hope it doesn't arise.

 

This being said, I agree with the earlier comment that 4NT is not, and can not be, Blackwood. Some things are clear.

[Echognome]

Kenberg is right in that some play "slow shows" and some play "fast shows". I personally like "all bad hands go through 2NT" as my memory device. But they are basically equivalent methods, so the important thing is to agree with your regular partner.

[mike777]

Kenberg is right in that some play "slow shows" and some play "fast shows". I personally like "all bad hands go through 2NT" as my memory device. But they are basically equivalent methods, so the important thing is to agree with your regular partner.

Again disagree.

 

Agree most play "slow shows stopper" but when your goal is clearcut (with a stopper you are going to play either in 3nt or your major if Partner has a fit), so it is best to obstruct any further interference. So "Fast shows a stopper" version is theoretically better.

[kenberg]

There is the choice of slow versus fast but that wasn't my point. In both Bergen and Robinson, both slow and fast show stoppers, the distinction is whether they think with their stopper they only might be willing to play in 3NT or are sure they want to play there, I presume barring some exceptional hand by doubler. The current hand has a stiff spade. My understanding of Bergen/Robinson is that neither would bid 3NT over the double, not slow and not fast. Bergen explicitly gives Axx as an example of fast, KJT as an example of slow. Singleton spot is an example of some other bid.

 

They do not give their logic, but my logic is as I stated. When pard opens 1NT and RHO overcalls, say, 2S then on many hands I will think it perfectly reasonable to play 3NT if one of us can stop spades. Over 2S-dbl (more or less the equivalent of the multi auction) it is more likely to be useful to tell partner how confident I am of 3NT. Also on the current hand, if I bid (playing Lebensohl) a constructive 3D, there is a good chance a partner holding a spade stop and a little extra will figure out on his own to bid 3NT. Moreover there are positional issues. Kx may be adequate if partner bids the NT. Not if I do.

 

 

Slow versus fast, to show a stopper after an overcall of NT, is a choice for Lebensohl that most people think to resolve. I'm saying that after a weak two there are more than a few people who play that both slow and fast show some sort of stopper. It follows that "Let's play Lebensohl, slow shows, fast denies" may mean different things to different players with one thinking it applies to weak twos as well, the other thinking it applies only to overcalls of NT. Such things happen.

 

k

[mike777]

Over 2S-dbl (more or less the equivalent of the multi auction) it is more likely to be useful to tell partner how confident I am of 3NT. Also on the current hand, if I bid (playing Lebensohl) a constructive 3D, there is a good chance a partner holding a spade stop and a little extra will figure out on his own to bid 3NT. Moreover there are positional issues. Kx may be adequate if partner bids the NT. Not if I do.

 

 

 

 

k

If I understand your point here, I discussed this in my first post.

 

4NT I have no interest in 3nt. I do have interest in slam. I think most others here are showing a strong interest in 3nt by bidding 3s as explained by poster. Others I guess have strong interest in inviting game while I am inviting slam..oh well.

[kenberg]

Now that I think about it, this is strange. I have a stiff spade, partner has a TO of spades, LHO has bid as if he has more hearts than spades. What's up? I don't play the multi so I guess I am about to learn something.

[Chamaco]

The full hand was:

 

[hv=d=s&v= &n=saxhjtxxdtxxcqxxx&w=sxhq96daj953ck753&e=sxxxxhakxdkqxxcax&s=skqjxxxhxxxdxcjxx]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

EW have a good slam in diamonds.

 

East made a takeout double a little offshape but right on honors concentration

 

After East denied stopper with 4D, West raised to 5D only.

I wonder whether using the "fast 3NT denies stopper" version of Lebensohl (or its alternative version = slow denies) would have helped here.

[whereagles]

"Fast denies" wouldn't let pard know of the singleton spade, which is the key to the hand.

 

A splinter would be the only way to get to slam, but I don't see how you could splinter here.

[Fluffy]

IMO its another of those perfect fited hands where bidding 6, specially after a preempt is so hard, and I would even say it is not the best bid in the long run.

[MickyB]

Agree most play "slow shows stopper" but when your goal is clearcut (with a stopper you are going to play either in 3nt or your major if Partner has a fit), so it is best to obstruct any further interference. So "Fast shows a stopper" version is theoretically better.

IMO "slow shows" is superior because with a stop, you are less worried about further intereference; However, I play "fast shows" in all of my partnerships because the small theoretical gain isn't worth the memory strain of having a direct 3N bid mean anything other than "to play".

[Al_U_Card]

Did anyone contemplate bidding 4S instead of 3S since NT is not a likely contract that will play, and without help in S why bother to ask? The 4S bid shows values for game (in a minor) and asks pard to continue as he sees fit. 4NT by him would then be ......?