Bidding the same values again & again

[jillybean]

[hv=pc=n&s=sqj9h95dak982ck73&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1dp1sp1ndp2c?]133|200[/hv]

 

This hand follows much the same pattern as the last hand I posted here.

 

Here's a decent hand, nice diamond suit, good support for partner but only 3♠'s so we settle for 1nt.

Now the opponents come into the auction, shall I pass, bid 3♦ or show partner 3 card spade support with 2♠?

She knows I wont have 4 card support as I didn't raise directly.

[Cyberyeti]

I bid 2♠, many would have bid 2♠ directly or may not get the intervention having opened 1N.

[DavidKok]

I would pass. In no particular order:

• We have some length and strength in clubs. Our hand does not scream 'compete', and even if it did the right bid would probably be a takeout double so that partner may choose to defend.
  
• West's failure to double 1♦ suggests length in that suit, making it risky to compete. It is unlikely we have a double fit, and if partner has got short clubs and extra spades they are likely to act regardless (in fact, partner might well have bid on with that hand type without the intervention).
  
• As the title suggests, it is bad to bid the same values twice. Our hand has not become more offensively oriented on the intervention, so why bid?
  
• Partner has a much better idea of our hand than we have of partner's hand. Our lack of spade raise and lack of takeout double almost pins down our shape (4+ diamonds, 3+ clubs, 3- spades, balanced), and our strength is limited to 12-14 - a near perfect description. If it is right to compete, why should we be the one to pull the trigger?
  

 

Edit: because of the concentration of values you could treat this as a raise of 1♠ to 2♠, but there is less reason to do so now than there was last round.

[jillybean]

I bid 2♠, many would have bid 2♠ directly or may not get the intervention having opened 1N.

This is the N/B forum :D

[eagles123]

if you want to bid 2S now, you should have bid 2S last time.

[mw64ahw]

Is a support X in play here?

[jillybean]

[hv=pc=n&s=sqj9h95dak982ck73&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1dp1sp1ndp2c2spp3c?]133|200[/hv]

[jillybean]

Is a support X in play here?

when?

[mikestar13]

Pass, if spades should be raised at all, the raise should have been last round. Now 2♠ scarcely gets in their way at all and if partner is minimum with four spades, pray for a 3-3 spade split: if they are 4-2 four two, you have just put your neck on the chopping block.

[mw64ahw]

when?

After 2♣

[jillybean]

After 2♣

I did not know that a support double applied here. No surprise that support doubles are up there with forgotten GB2nt.

[Cyberyeti]

[hv=pc=n&s=sqj9h95dak982ck73&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1dp1sp1ndp2c2spp3c?]133|200[/hv]

 

then I've achieved what I want to achieve, now I pass

[P_Marlowe]

I did not know that a support double applied here. No surprise that support doubles are up there with forgotten GB2nt.

Over 2C a X is usually not played as supportX, I would take the X as T/O oriented, but we play ALL low level X

as T/O, as long as there is some justification for this to do it.

[helene_t]

Maybe 2di would show this hand? I don't think I would bid 2di without a second place to play, which can only be spades.

[jillybean]

Maybe 2di would show this hand? I don't think I would bid 2di without a second place to play, which can only be spades.

Hi Helene, just confirming that you would bid 2♦ / 2♣?

[Cyberyeti]

Maybe 2di would show this hand? I don't think I would bid 2di without a second place to play, which can only be spades.

 

Depends how often you bid 1N rather than 2♦ with a 6 card diamond suit

[helene_t]

Hi Helene, just confirming that you would bid 2♦ / 2♣?

Yes that's what I mean: first 1NT and then 2♦ over their 2♣.

[helene_t]

Depends how often you bid 1N rather than 2♦ with a 6 card diamond suit

Yeah good point, strong notrumpers often open 1NT with a 6-card minor, and presumably you would rebid 1NT with the same hands in a weak NT system.

[mycroft]

...and frequently in competition decide they really didn't bid their hand properly, and come in with 3♦. And while they usually get away with it, it always puts a smile on my face when it goes for 5 or 800. "Once you've decided your hand is an X,..."

 

Having said that, partner has shown signs of life, and as the Yeti says, there are many who will raise partner rather than bid 1NT with 3-card support and a weak doubleton. Not something to spring on partner without discussion. But here, after bidding 1NT, it's usually safe, especially when LHO has shown effectively "takeout of spades". Yes, when RHO is the one with the 5 spades rather than partner, it might not play well. Would I do it here? Not sure. But not "no".

 

In the continuation, I strongly agree. Operation "get them to the 3 level" has succeeded, now I leave the rest to partner.

[jillybean]

...and frequently in competition decide they really didn't bid their hand properly, and come in with 3♦. And while they usually get away with it, it always puts a smile on my face when it goes for 5 or 800. "Once you've decided your hand is an X,..."

 

Having said that, partner has shown signs of life, and as the Yeti says, there are many who will raise partner rather than bid 1NT with 3-card support and a weak doubleton. Not something to spring on partner without discussion. But here, after bidding 1NT, it's usually safe, especially when LHO has shown effectively "takeout of spades". Yes, when RHO is the one with the 5 spades rather than partner, it might not play well. Would I do it here? Not sure. But not "no".

 

In the continuation, I strongly agree. Operation "get them to the 3 level" has succeeded, now I leave the rest to partner.

 

Were you peeking?

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sqj9h95dak982ck73&w=sk743haqt8dqj74c6&n=sat65hkj2d53ct984&e=s82h7643dt6caqj52&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1dp1sp1ndp2c2spp3c3dxppp]399|300[/hv]

 

The delayed double by West is strange, perhaps an immediate double would have stopped South's eagerness sooner.

[DavidKok]

Against optimal defence East can be held to 3 tricks in 2♣X, for a clean +1100 to NS. I'm not sure if I would have led the queen of spades at the table though, but even +800 is fine. Doubling them at the 3-level would have scored even better, but my bidding does not push them that far.

 

West does not have a double over 1♦, nor one over 1NT. (If you must bid, try 1♥ - but this is only for partners who can take a joke.) South does not have a bid over 2♣, and is certainly in no position to bid on over 3♣.

 

My guess is that many people felt they left something unsaid after the first round of the bidding - West their HCP, South their fifth diamond and spade values, and East the good 5-card club suit. As a result all three went crazy and kept bidding. The general defence against this behaviour is called 'quick in, quick out' - describe your hand as early as possible, then sit back and wait for partner to make the competitive call.

 

Incidentally, 3♦X seems to make. I suppose congratulations are in order.

[jillybean]

Unfortunately, it didn't make -1 for a 0 (MP)

 

Quick in , quick out - that's another thing I like about 12-14nt , I have had my bid.

[Cyberyeti]

Unfortunately, it didn't make -1 for a 0 (MP)

 

Quick in , quick out - that's another thing I like about 12-14nt , I have had my bid.

 

It seems very difficult to go off, you really should make it, how would 3♣-4 have scored ?

[mycroft]

Wow.

 

I think I am happy with North's auction, and probably East's (depending on the meaning of West's double of 1NT).

 

I would have taken West's double of 1NT as "takeout of spades, I couldn't T/O X diamonds" - the same hand, but with the black suits switched. I know doubles of 1NT are traditionally penalty, and if West thought he was doubling for penalty, fine. He's not good enough, but fine. East should be happy to pass, and 1NTx is going to be a good score. We'll start with what's West's opening lead?

 

But East either thought "too weak, run from penX" or "takeout of spades" (but if that's the case, why do I have a doubleton and they're not in spades?)

 

I like sessions where I push the opponents around and they make mistakes. But I really like the sessions where the opponents make mistakes (whether because I pushed them around or they did it themselves) and I don't let them off the hook.

[jillybean]

It seems very difficult to go off, you really should make it, how would 3♣-4 have scored ?

Yes , it should make. 3♣ - 4 would have been a great result.

I'm not really focused on the play, I'm trying to improve the contracts we find ourselves in.