[Winstonm]

Scoring: IMP

P P P 1♣
P 1♦ P 2♣
P P P

North argued that NV there was no reason to stretch to game; South countered that in 4th seat the 1C-2C auction had to show a top end hand and North should bid 3C. North continued that the South hand should be opened 1N. South contended that in another seat this would be true but there was no reason to wrong side the NT in 4th seat - the 4th seat opening of a minor had to have some kind of game aspirations else why bid at all?

Which side are you on? Who gets to eat crow here?

---

[mike777]

South should clearly open 1nt 14-16 or 15-17.
North should clearly raise to 3clubs, just bid games at IMPs! Even NV games.

[mr1303]

Maybe the South hand should rebid 3C?

Not sure what North should do after this. I don't like 1NT by S, or do I really like a raise to 3C by North, since game looks a long way away, and his majors don't really inspire looking for game

[david_c]

I'd probably end up in 2♣ as well. But I think North is closer to a 3♣ bid than South is: from South's point of view the club suit is relatively poor, but from North's point of view it's likely to be running.

I really dislike the idea of opening 1NT.

[dogsbreath]

hi
North has 3 trumps and 2 Aces ..a raise to 3 Clubs should be completely automatic..
Rgds Dog

[mikeh]

North has an easy 3♣ raise. Virtually textbook. The idea of being a little conservative at non-vul is only that: be a (very) little bit on the conservative side.

NV games are (essentially) a 50-50 proposition: all the more so when the auction suggests that the opps are not about to double. And, remember, that defence is the toughest part of the game, so many bad contracts get past even good defenders.

It is easy to picture 13 counts which have 9 top tricks in notrump. OTOH it is very difficult to construct hands on which 3♣ has no play.

If you want to open 1N as south, be my guest, but please don't ask to play with me. It is a needless distortion. The only reason North suggested it in the post-mortem was in an attempt to deflect blame. I know that a lot of posters here like to distort their 1N opener's but I think that that is losing bridge witha good partner.

[cherdano]

dogsbreath, on Sep 25 2005, 07:32 PM, said:

North has 3 trumps and 2 Aces ..a raise to 3 Clubs should be completely automatic..

Exactly my thoughts, although 2NT or 3NT might be fine

Saying that the South hand should be opened 1♣ seems non-sense to me. This is a very suit oriented hand in my opinion. While 1NT is certainly an option, and I wouldn't disagree if someone did it, a claim that 1♣ is wrong should be left to those who know it all and don't accept that there are different successful styles in bridge.

Arend

[whereagles]

Bidding seems fine to me. North might have streched to bid 3C, South might have streched to bid 3C or open 1NT. Bridge is a guessing game!

[Double !]

ALERT:
"Bridge is a Partnership Game"

I see so many bidding questions on this forum that, imo, involve taking views or master-minding instead of bidding one's values. Regardless of my choice of opening bid, I expect my P to show support and invitational values when he/she has them. I claim the right to re-assess my hand in view of the bidding. (I wouldn't have been displeased had P initially responded 1NT.) To not bid 3 clubs with the north hand is a lie imo. It's a unilateral decision, a failure to communicate the value of your hand to partner, and an action that doesn't permit partner to be part of the decision-making process regarding where the hand should ultimately play.

[cherdano]

whereagles, on Sep 25 2005, 09:08 PM, said:

Bidding seems fine to me. North might have streched to bid 3C, South might have streched to bid 3C or open 1NT. Bridge is a guessing game!

If I bid 3♣ with the North hand, I would be worried about partner playing me for less than that, not more!

Arend

[Winstonm]

Double !, on Sep 25 2005, 02:14 PM, said:

ALERT:
"Bridge is a Partnership Game"

I see so many bidding questions on this forum that, imo, involve taking views or master-minding instead of bidding one's values.      Regardless of my choice of opening bid, I expect my P to show support and invitational values when he/she has them.  I claim the right to re-assess my hand in view of the bidding.  (I wouldn't have been displeased had P initially responded 1NT.)  To not bid 3 clubs with the north hand is a lie imo.  It's a unilateral decision, a failure to communicate the value of your hand to partner, and an action that doesn't permit partner to be part of the decision-making process regarding where the hand should ultimately play.

I agree strongly with your assessment - obviously I held the South hand. I simply don't see any benefit to passing 2C when game might be on - the rare day in May when 3C is down 1 and 2C makes on the nose will never compensate for missed games.

I would never fault anyone who opens my hand with 1N and thought of doing so myself; the factor that dissuaded me was the lack of tenaces to protect - if partner held something like, Jxx, xxx, Kxxx, AQx then he should be playing the NT contract.

Winston

[Winstonm]

Quote

JLall: I don't think 1C then 2C shows top end of the bid. with KJx x KJx KJxxxx you would just have a normal opener. This is not "top end" by any means. Opening doesn't show game aspirations, it says that we are more likely than not to go plus given my hand.

This is certainly a reasonable point - however, I'm not so certain that an aceless minor suit 12 count should be opened in passout seat. For the hand to be of much value partner needs either a decent spade suit (and he didn't open 2S) or a near opener himself with a good club fit.

Perhaps I misstated what I meant - the auction of:
P-P-P-1C
P-1D-P-2C

IMO should show full values - a goodish hand not necessarily in HCP but if not then certainly in playing strength: Axx, x, xxx, AKJxxx.

Seems to me that anything much less than this simply is allowing the opponents' to find their major suit partscore or pushing us to an unmakeable level. But then, I've never won a world championship, so what do I know?

Winston

[Winstonm]

Jlall, on Sep 25 2005, 03:24 PM, said:

Winstonm, on Sep 25 2005, 03:12 PM, said:

if partner held something like, Jxx, xxx, Kxxx, AQx then he should be playing the NT contract.

Winston

Not sure how you will achieve that after 1C-1D-2C-3C you will prob just bid 3N?

This is a good question and one pard and I talked about in length - do you now make an "asking-type" bid of 3D or the "telling bid" of 3H? We finally decided on the "telling type". In this auction I would have bid 3H, denying a diamond stopper and inferring both majors stopped - not perfect but would perhaps get the job done.

Winston

[pbleighton]

"To not bid 3 clubs with the north hand is a lie imo. It's a unilateral decision, a failure to communicate the value of your hand to partner, and an action that doesn't permit partner to be part of the decision-making process regarding where the hand should ultimately play."

Agree completely.

As to opening 1NT - as someone else said, it's a style thing. OK either way.

Peter

[Fluffy]

seems like perfect fitting 24, and even then game is not foolproof.

[whereagles]

Double !, on Sep 25 2005, 07:14 PM, said:

ALERT: "Bridge is a Partnership Game"

I see so many bidding questions on this forum that, imo, involve taking views or master-minding instead of bidding one's values.

Having a dialogue is the idea. But unfortunately it's not that simple. Sometimes one of the players has a borderline hand and has to take a decision as to whether underbid slightly or overbid slightly. This is what I mean by "guessing".

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

North has a courtesy raise to 3C, which is,
what he should simply do, ... and if does not
do it, for what ever reasons ( altough I dont see
any valid reason for not doing it, a opening bid
in 4 hand is not crap), he should shut up not
continue argueing.
This does not mean, that you will reach game, but
North took a view, he gets the praise, if he is right,
he should therefore take the blame, if he was wrong.

With kind regards
Marlowe