Does the law give you courage?

[mw64ahw]

[hv=pc=n&s=sjt9htdat762ckjt3&n=saha852dk98543c98&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1s?]266|200|Your call?[/hv]

[Winstonm]

I use old-fashioned losing trick count as part of my evaluations so to me this is a 6-loser hand with all prime cards, much better than many opening hands that can have 7 or 8 losers with quacks. There is always risk in bidding, but to sit quietly when holding a better-than-average opening hand with an easy bid to make seems too cautious. I venture 2D - nothing ventured, nothing gained (or lost at times).

 

And yes, I saw the vulnerability.

[apollo1201]

The suit is terrible, we are red. But I’m 6-4.

 

Bidding 2D at MPs (not proudly).

 

Looking at the stage of the match at IMPs.

[DavidKok]

Sure, 2♦. I'm prepared for the post-mortem.

 

Somewhere out there someone is playing equal level conversion and doubles, this is the perfect hand.

[LBengtsson]

I wish you had not shown the south hand in the post until later. red/white I do not like 2♦ by north, but you cannot X and bid 2♦ next (if partner bids 2♣) as that shows a better hand. you have 2 and a half quick tricks and a six card suit, but poor six card suit. it is a bidders game so with hesitation (but not at the table I hope) I will call 2♦. it is not a good bid but it is not a bad bid. sometimes you have to just bid and suffer consequences.

[eagles123]

I would pass as north.

[jillybean]

I wish you had not shown the south hand in the post until later. red/white I do not like 2♦ by north, but you cannot X and bid 2♦ next (if partner bids 2♣) as that shows a better hand. you have 2 and a half quick tricks and a six card suit, but poor six card suit. it is a bidders game so with hesitation (but not at the table I hope) I will call 2♦. it is not a good bid but it is not a bad bid. sometimes you have to just bid and suffer consequences.

2♦ for me too, I'd like to get the hearts in with a double but with 2 small clubs that's not an option.

AAK, are too good to pass but at times my bidding is not the smartest!

[mw64ahw]

[hv=pc=n&s=sjt9htdat762ckjt3&n=saha852dk98543c98&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1S2D2S?]266|200|What now?[/hv]

 

P.S. 2♦ shows 5+♦ rather than 6+ if that makes a difference

[DavidKok]

Form of scoring? At IMPs I'm never staying out of game, so 3♠ (stopper asking) and then convert 3NT to 5♦ to show a strong raise. 4♥ would be a NF fitbid for me instead of a splinter, so I can't bid that. At matchpoints you might take the low road and bid 4♣ fitbid, intending to pass 4♦ (or you could raise anyway?). 3♠ is less attractive because pulling 3NT to 4♦ is forcing. I think 2NT is a good bid if partner will take it as a diamond raise, not a desire to play. But at matchpoints I'd probably bid 4♣ and leave it to partner.

[pescetom]

I'm not staying out of game even at MPs, we play 4♡ as splinter and that would be my choice. We would probably stop in 5◇ once it is clear we are missing a Keycard probably ♧A.

[nullve]

AAK, are too good to pass but at times my bidding is not the smartest!

There seems to be a common misunderstanding that passing is more like kibitzing than bidding,

[Winstonm]

Someone else said it but it bears repeating: passing is risky, too. Consider these two deals.

 

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s652hkqt63dqj2c43&n=saha852dk98543c98&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1sp2sp3s]266|200|3S=Non-constructive[/hv]

 

 

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s652hkqt63dqj2c43&n=saha852dk98543c98&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1s2d2s]266|200[/hv]

 

[mw64ahw]

Which South bid is preferrable?

[hv=pc=n&s=sjt9htdat762ckjt3&n=saha852dk98543c98&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1S2D2S3S4S?]266|200|Do you take it to 5♦?[/hv]

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sjt9htdat762ckjt3&n=saha852dk98543c98&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1S2D2S4D4S?]266|200|Do you take it to 5♦?[/hv]

[DavidKok]

At these colours the 2♦ bid really promises a 6-card suit, so North doesn't have that much extra shape. You can tolerate 5♦ and you can tolerate defending, so I'd make a forcing pass to let partner decide (over the 3♠ bid). South has extra shape and knows that North's diamond values are wasted on defence so they hopefully bid the 5♦ (following Simon's rule - if you don't know, bid one more). Of course this was South's plan anyway, but 4♠X might be a juicy harvest once in a while.

If partner bid 4♦ - a poor bid, in my opinion - I think you have to bid 5 as North. South promises a weak hand with shapely diamond support, 5♦ is probably only one or two off and 4♠ seems to be cold.

 

The whole point of competitive bidding is to paint an accurate picture of your hand as early as possible to prepare partner for 5-over-4 and 5-over-5 decisions. You do not so much want to get to your final contract as much as you want to also have informed partner on the right course of action over interference.

[mw64ahw]

How it turned out

 

We play the Overcall Structure with 3♦ ostensibly showing 5♦5♥.

I had a close choice between 2&3♦, but with 6.5 playing tricks (just about Ok with unfavourable vulnerability) and wanting to show ♥ as well I chose the latter given the 10 cards in 2 suits and suspecting 2♦ would be bettered with at least 2♠.

5♦ (for down 1.7) made with the optimum contract being 5♥X. The better positive scores were 4x5♦ and 4♦X

[hv=pc=n&s=sjt9htdat762ckjt3&w=sq8532hqj94dqcaq7&n=saha852dk98543c98&e=sk764hk763djc6542&d=s&v=n&b=5&a=p1s3dppp]399|300[/hv]

[DavidKok]

3♦, lying about the length of a major suit, is a bad bid.

[mw64ahw]

3♦, lying about the length of a major suit, is a bad bid.

Yep - serves me right, however that was the best of the minus scores save for those that made 6♦ so some small consolation.

[Cthulhu D]

How it turned out

 

We play the Overcall Structure with 3♦ ostensibly showing 5♦5♥.

I had a close choice between 2&3♦, but with 6.5 playing tricks (just about Ok with unfavourable vulnerability) and wanting to show ♥ as well I chose the latter given the 10 cards in 2 suits and suspecting 2♦ would be bettered with at least 2♠.

5♦ (for down 1.7) made with the optimum contract being 5♥X. The better positive scores were 4x5♦ and 4♦X

[hv=pc=n&s=sjt9htdat762ckjt3&w=sq8532hqj94dqcaq7&n=saha852dk98543c98&e=sk764hk763djc6542&d=s&v=n&b=5&a=p1s3dppp]399|300[/hv]

 

 

Ha, I was thinking the overcall structure makes it very easy - but we play it 5/4. I don't think the 5/5 version comes up nearly often enough to be worth playing.

[mw64ahw]

I play it such that if I can bid the suit at the 2-level or pass then I require 4, otherwise 5(+). So 1♣-2♣ could be 4♦ & 4♠. The 2NT bids can be 5-4 though with 8.5 playing tricks.

 

The other variation I play is that the 2♠ bids can be 4+♠ & 5(+)♣ or 6+♠ similar to Frelling2♠

 

In the above case I veered from my norm since I had 10 cards in 2 suits and the opponents were likely to bid 2♠

[mikl_plkcc]

[hv=pc=n&s=sjt9htdat762ckjt3&n=saha852dk98543c98&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1S2D2S?]266|200|What now?[/hv]

 

P.S. 2♦ shows 5+♦ rather than 6+ if that makes a difference

 

I think I will directly bid 5♦ to play.

[Winstonm]

I think I will directly bid 5♦ to play.

 

Good time for understandings - mine was that unnecessary jumps are always splinter so I get to bid 4H - and we are only a club Q away from 6 as it turns out. But my bid has nothing to do with LoTT.

[Douglas43]

Put me down for a simple 5♦ as well.