[Walddk]

cherdano, on Feb 16 2006, 05:52 PM, said:

mikeh, on Feb 16 2006, 06:44 PM, said:

I vote for silly (maybe a stronger word would occur to me at the table ) 3♠ is so clearly correct that any other bid has to be silly or worse.

As for the notion that 3♠ is non-forcing: that is even sillier than not bidding 3♠.

As for the notion that you don't want a ♣ lead, well, the arguments are getting sillier by the moment. Absent the AK♣ on your left (and as Roland points out, that is impossible), you are getting a ♦ lead (except when LHO is void in the suit ).

3♠ preserves both likely games: 3N would be ridiculous, so the likely games are in a major.

Mike, I think you share the confusion with Roland that it is RHO who is on lead against 4♥. (Other than that, I don't mind your strong words.)

Arend

Which confusion? Isn't it my RHO who is on lead against 4♥ or did they change the rules?

And I am not confused at all. When my RHO is on lead against 4♥ with ♦KQ and ♣AQ as you suggested, do you really think that he would lead ♣A whether I have bid 3♠ or not? And when my LHO is on lead against a spade contract, he will surely lead a diamond unless he has ♣AK, and that is virtually impossible.

You still haven't told us how your partner is going to make 4♥ (on any lead) if KQ10xxx in hearts and out is what you play him for. That's what you imagine, you said. In another thread (by Caren), you claimed that you can't count. Isn't that the fact in this context too?

Roland

[cherdano]

Walddk, on Feb 16 2006, 07:00 PM, said:

You still haven't told us how your partner is going to make 4♥ (on any lead) if KQ10xxx in hearts and out is what you play him for. That's what you imagine, you said. In another thread (by Caren), you claimed that you can't count. Isn't that the fact in this context too?

Just for you, I will make it x KQT9xxx xx xxx since you have told before you hate weak 2s with 7 cards

[Walddk]

cherdano, on Feb 16 2006, 06:12 PM, said:

Walddk, on Feb 16 2006, 07:00 PM, said:

You still haven't told us how your partner is going to make 4♥ (on any lead) if KQ10xxx in hearts and out is what you play him for. That's what you imagine, you said. In another thread (by Caren), you claimed that you can't count. Isn't that the fact in this context too?

Just for you, I will make it x KQT9xxx xx xxx since you have told before you hate weak 2s with 7 cards

Excellent, and don't you think that your partner would be capable of rebidding 4♥ over 3♠ with that hand?

Seriously, were you not afraid that 3♠ would be passed?

Roland

[cherdano]

Walddk, on Feb 16 2006, 07:36 PM, said:

Excellent, and don't you think that your partner would be capable of rebidding 4♥ over 3♠ with that hand?

Seriously, were you not afraid that 3♠ would be passed?

Roland

Yes I would expect him to bid 4♥, RHO to lead a club, and go down.
No I was not afraid he would pass 3♠, the thought that 3♠ could be passed didn't occur to me until I read Miron's post above which could be misinterpreted as 3♠ being a game try.

Roland please shut up, thanks. Calling my bids sick or masterminding or whatever is absolutely ok. But wild claims about partnership trust from such a thread, or other insults, are unacceptable.

Arend

[Walddk]

cherdano, on Feb 16 2006, 06:47 PM, said:

Roland please shut up, thanks. Calling my bids sick or masterminding or whatever is absolutely ok. But wild claims about partnership trust from such a thread, or other insults, are unacceptable.

Arend

Some would treat "shut up" as considerably more insulting than anything I have said in this thread. And don't you think that putting a "please" first makes it any better.

However, I am not sensitive and therefore not offended. As far as I'm concerned, you can make sick bids or mastermind all you like.

Roland

[Blofeld]

Walddk, on Feb 16 2006, 12:55 PM, said:

Some would treat "shut up" as considerably more insulting than anything I have said in this thread.

How is 'shut up' an insult?

[Walddk]

Blofeld, on Feb 16 2006, 07:36 PM, said:

Walddk, on Feb 16 2006, 12:55 PM, said:

Some would treat "shut up" as considerably more insulting than anything I have said in this thread.

How is 'shut up' an insult?

Don't ask me; I said that I was not offended. My English girlfriend, however, who has read other of Arend's posts where he dislikes my provocative style, finds it insulting.

Could be an English-German issue, I don't know, but I promise to ask her next time we're in touch. I sincerely hope that it has nothing to do with politics. I think it's more a matter of style. Some can take it, some can't. I can.

Roland

[Al_U_Card]

Is not "to mastermind" to invent a reason for doing something unreasonable? As Mike says, 3S is so obvious that anything else IS unreasonable.

btw, I think that shut up vs other idioms for remaining unresponsive are like the Norwegians giving a Canadian skier a ski pole whereas the Danes only like to give us a sfs.....lol

[luis]

I won't discuss the shutup issue but I found it funny :-)
My view about the bid is the following one:
Since 3NT is crazy the debate is between 4♥ and 3♠.
I don't think 3♠ is "so clear ", the analysis I make is:
If you bid 3♠ you will play 4♠ when pd can support or 4♥ when he can't that's good.
You might also land in 4♠ in hands where you can never reach dummy and 4♥ could work better.
When spades are breaking very badly and you land in 4♥ it can trigger a penalty double that will be hard to find otherwise.
The opponents with a singleton in spade and a double fit in the minors and shortness in spades can better evaluate their hands and find a good 5♣/5♦ contract, when they don't they are sure you have a spade suit so they will be in a cash-out situation, RHO is likely to lead an unsupported club ace to make sure they cash all their minor tricks in the right order, that's a standard procedure.

In contrast 4♥ keeps spades hidden but has the problem of playing 4♥ when 4♠ is a lot better.

In conclusion I think 4♥ is a better bid than 3♠ and will probably choose that at the table. Preempts in second seat MUST have a good suit, it's the most conservative position for a preempt I don't know if somebody mentioned that.

Luis

[Kalvan14]

I would assume that 3♠ (certainly forcing) shows either a tolerance for hearts or a very strong hand, which would rebid a different suit. Or both, possibly.

I would also assume that partner is capable of evaluating the trick-taking potential of his hand: if the 2♥ comes from Jx KQTxxxx x xxx, it's not difficult to bid 4♥. I will go one step further,, and say that if you change a small club with a small spade, the contract is still 4♥. If his hand is xxx AQxxxxx x Kxx, I would not like to play 4♥.
In a good evening, 3♠ might attract a 4♣, but I am not going to look for an impossible slam: IMHO, after 2♥-(3♦), bidding 4♥ means taking an unnecessary inflexible position, .

[joshs]

Well 4H is a bit arbitrary. I remember Hugh Grosvenor's advice to me years ago in some auction where I was not sure if I should support partner or bid game in my own extremely strong suit. His advice was "trust the suit you are looking at-you know its solid and you can only guess at what partner's suit looks like". If you have decided to go to game I think its silly to not at least suggest playing in spades.... Well thats my 2 cents.

[hrothgar]

Am I the only one considering pass as an option?

[mikeh]

hrothgar, on Feb 16 2006, 07:15 PM, said:

Am I the only one considering pass as an option?

Pass did not occur to me. Now that I have thought of it: pass still does not occur to me

[Kalvan14]

Nor to me either.

[pigpenz]

if your going to pass why not double then....but I would bid three spades

[Winstonm]

I think saying "shut up" is masterminding. The correct bid is: "Silence, moron!"

[coyot]

Am I the only one here who sees the spade suit quality as more important in heart contract than the other way?

Give partner something like x-KQ10xxx-xxx-Kxx or the like.

How many tricks does THIS hand contribute to your spade contract?
Compare with AKQxxx an ace and the heart jack that you contribute to the heart contract.

The probabilities of various spade lengths in your partner's hand are in favor of bidding 4♥.

Given the game state and the position, partner's hearts should be pretty nice and he'll appreciate 3-4 quick tricks, especially with the guaranteed diamond entry. Entries to hearts may be pretty questionable, with the stronger of opps behind that hand - what are you going to do with your 5 losers if partner fails to come up with AKQ in hearts?