[han]

Yesterday I had:

Scoring: IMP

---

Bidding goes:

p-(1H)-p-(1NT)
p-(2C)-p-(2H)
2S-(3C)-3S-(4H)
??

Do you agree with my initial two passes and the 2S bid?

Do you bid 4S?

(I may have had some pointed 10, and it is possible that they were not vulnerable. I will look it up later. Feel free to comment if this changes your bidding. You know from a previous hand that the opponents are playing constructive raises. Sadly such negative inferences are rarely alerted.)

[inquiry]

Pass, They were vul as were you. Kick your partner for bidding wrong.

[whereagles]

I think overcalling 2♠ after RHO's preference is WAY more risky than straight after 1NT. Besides, if you had bid

p (1♥) p 1NT
2♥

you would know to pass if it followed

p (1♥) p 1NT
2♥ (3♣) 3♠ (4♥)

In the actual acutcion you're guessing whether you should bid 4♠ or not. I would guess 'yes', though.

[pbleighton]

The auction thus far is fine, and I would pass now.

Peter

[Trpltrbl]

I would bid 2♥ directly over 1NT, let my pd know what I have and have him/her make the decision.

GBB

[cherdano]

It looks like you have both on offense and defense about what partner should expect, so I think it is ok to pass and blame him.

Arend

[tysen2k]

I'm a 2♥ bidder over the 1NT. In the auction given, I pass.

[mike777]

Great Hand Han, very advanced, very difficult.
1) Do we pass, bid 2h or 2s at second bid?
2) Do we pass or bid 2s at third bid?

[mikeh]

Auction was fine.

Bidding now is wrong on virtually every possible basis.

Your poor partner, sitting with good defence, bid a quiet 3♠. His typical shape will be 4=4=1=4, with defensive, not offensive, values.

If you bid 4♠ you are telling partner that his choice was defending 3♣ or 3♥ (which he cannot afford to double even if he expects to beat it a trick) or lay down dummy in a phantom 4♠ doubled.

The opps sound as if they were pushed there, or that, at the least, they are marginal on values for game. LHO is 5-5 or better, and RHO probably has a partial ♣ fit. But partner rates to be long in their suits, and your pre-balance is going to get the defence off to the best lead.

I would rather double 4♥ than bid 4♠: that is how little I think of 4♠

(I would NOT double... but I would not be the least bit surprised to hear partner double and see us collect 500.

No way would I bid at this vulnerability over 1N with this hand. The problem with bidding on garbage in a misfit situation (the opps have found no fit yet) is that you have a partner.

I like my partners to be able to contribute to the auction. How is partner going to know that you were pre-balancing rather than showing a real hand?

For me, an immediate 2♥ bid, vulnerable at imps, shows real values: AQJxx x KQ10xx xx would be okay. And not a maximum, either . If you agree, then 2♥ on the given hand is absurd: a partner-killing device. If you disagree, how do you bid the good hands, and how is partner ever going to tell the difference (don't assume that the opps pass or double 2♥... life is rarely that easy)

Bridge, as a partnership game, becomes unplayable if one partner assigns meanings to certain bids because the assigned meaning fits the given hand.

[whereagles]

mikeh, on Oct 5 2005, 08:11 PM, said:

For me, an immediate 2♥ bid, vulnerable at imps, shows real values: AQJxx x KQ10xx xx would be okay.

You passed originally. You can't have that hand if you bid 2♥ over 1NT.

Also, pard's 3♠ is mildly encouraging to 4♠. If he thought 4♥ was going down, he shouldn't have bid 3♠. (See Robson's book..)

[Al_U_Card]

Despite not being close to a reasonable Michaels bid, the bidding was good as it put the opps to a guess. Reluctantly bid games in competitive auctions rarely make (they are hoping for a small minus because they think that you are making) and you might not make 3S (did he preference with 2 H, of course not! he is weak with 3 or even 4 H cards)

[mikeh]

whereagles, on Oct 5 2005, 03:27 PM, said:

mikeh, on Oct 5 2005, 08:11 PM, said:

For me, an immediate 2♥ bid, vulnerable at imps, shows real values: AQJxx x KQ10xx xx would be okay.

You passed originally. You can't have that hand if you bid 2♥ over 1NT.

Also, pard's 3♠ is mildly encouraging to 4♠. If he thought 4♥ was going down, he shouldn't have bid 3♠. (See Robson's book..)

Oooops: not for the first time, I forgot an important point from the auction

However, that does not alter the fact that in my opinion 2♥ shows a better hand: ok, maybe not an opening bid but, say, KQJxx x QJ10xx xx... a hand with better playing potential.

As for 3♠ inviting 4♠: count me out... I do not have Robson's book so cannot say that he is wrong (if he says this) but for my money the way partner invites 4♠ is by bidding 3♥.

Now, if LHO had bid 3♥ over 2♠ (rather than 3♣.... I checked this time, and he did bid 3♣ ), I can understand (and agree) that 3♠ must be inviting 4♠.

[luis]

whereagles, on Oct 5 2005, 08:27 PM, said:

mikeh, on Oct 5 2005, 08:11 PM, said:

For me, an immediate 2♥ bid, vulnerable at imps, shows real values: AQJxx x KQ10xx xx would be okay.

You passed originally. You can't have that hand if you bid 2♥ over 1NT.

Also, pard's 3♠ is mildly encouraging to 4♠. If he thought 4♥ was going down, he shouldn't have bid 3♠. (See Robson's book..)

Pd has other ways to invite. A raise is always just competitive.

[han]

Before I post partner's hand let me ask question B:

Suppose the auction had gone instead:

p-(1H)-p-(1NT)
p-(2C)-p-(2H)
2S-(3C)-3D-(4H)
??

Do you agree with the previous calls? (just kidding, they are the same as before, only partner's last call is different).

What hand do you expect partner to have? (try to forget that partner actually bid 3S, not so easy)

What is your call?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

No, I would have bid 2H the 2nd round, if playing michaels,
... or make the bid to show the 2 suiter.

Pass over 4H. You have a 8 card suit fit, 3H just promises 3,
they as well, in other words, just follow the law. The law predicts
-4, but even -3 is nothing to cheer about, and you will only gain,
if you go -2: 120 Points.

If you had bid 2H, you may have found out, that partner has 4 card
spport, but even then the law predicts -3.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[junyi_zhu]

Hannie, on Oct 5 2005, 06:48 PM, said:

Yesterday I had:

Scoring: IMP

---

Bidding goes:

p-(1H)-p-(1NT)
p-(2C)-p-(2H)
2S-(3C)-3S-(4H)
??

Do you agree with my initial two passes and the 2S bid?

Do you bid 4S?

(I may have had some pointed 10, and it is possible that they were not vulnerable. I will look it up later. Feel free to comment if this changes your bidding. You know from a previous hand that the opponents are playing constructive raises. Sadly such negative inferences are rarely alerted.)

The second pass is bad and a common mistake by many players I think. If you decide to bid, enter the bidding early. Either 2H to show S + minor or 2S if you don't play michaels is fine. Pass and bid 2S later is just an invitation to disaster. Bidding is usually an ever or never issue.

[P_Marlowe]

Hannie, on Oct 5 2005, 03:51 PM, said:

Before I post partner's hand let me ask question B:

Suppose the auction had gone instead:

p-(1H)-p-(1NT)
p-(2C)-p-(2H)
2S-(3C)-3D-(4H)
??

Do you agree with the previous calls? (just kidding, they are the same as before, only partner's last call is different).

What hand do you expect partner to have? (try to forget that partner actually bid 3S, not so easy)

What is your call?

If you play fit bids, than 3D is a fit bid,
if you dont play fit bids, than 3D is a lead
director, but partner is on lead =>
that is no option, in other words, the bid
does not exist, and partner gave you a
reason to shoot him, if you get it wrong.

With kind regards
Marlowe