[temp3600]

You hold Kxx - A - KQJ8xx - Jxx in first seat at MatchPoints, Red vs White. The bidding goes :

1D  (1S)  X  (2H)
?

X promises 4 hearts.
2H is natural, non forcing.

What do you bid, and how much do you like it ?

[P_Marlowe]

3D

Marlowe

[joker_gib]

Yes, 3♦, good suit and not minimum, wtp ?

Alain

[mike777]

great problem

Would Al Roth open this hand ..I think yes but think this is extras?
Please no mean responses. I assume x =8 whcp.

[Chamaco]

I see I am in a minority, but at this vulnerability I shall pass.

I'd bid 3D holding better intermediates (say the T or the 98, not just the 8), in other words, at these colors, I rebid 3D with a suit that is very likely to play for 1 loser opposite pard shortness.
KQJ8xx vs a singleton is not guaranteed not to lose 2 tricks if diamonds split badly, and, at red, -200 might be a bad board.

Pass has the advantage of flexibility: pard can still double for business, or, it is still possible that our best strain is not diamonds but clubs.

Passing indeed relinquishes chances to compete in diamonds (if we do not rebid diamonds, pard will hardly bid them, I suppose).

However, I'd feel better about my pass if I were playing weak NT and 1D opening guaranteeing an unbalanced hand....

[mr1303]

I bid 3D, and wouldn't consider any other action.

[Al_U_Card]

How good IS your hand? Good suit, decent distribution, reasonable honor placement, top of range for a minimum opener. The 6th diamond says bid 3D so I would.

[pbleighton]

3D, but the vulnerability makes pass pretty close.

Peter

[whereagles]

Nice add for good-bad 2NT

Not playing that, 3♦ is in order. Hearts, very likely, split 1-3-4-5 and it's necessary to help pard take a decision, should LHO bid 3♥.

[mghmaine]

Pass. Spades on my left and partner has values in my singleton. No problem

[luis]

3♦, automatic.

[han]

yep, 3D.

[cherdano]

I think this is a bad hand for good-bad 2NT btw. You would either overbid with 3♦, or you haven't shown your nice suit when they bid over your 2N.

Arend

[jdeegan]

Looks like a comfortable 3♦ bid. Only danger is our missing a game if partner goes ultraconservative. 3NT makes opposite a 10 HCP magic hand: Ax in diamonds, the ace of spades and the queen of clubs (I don't mind missing the game opposite this particular hand). I would hope pard can bid on with most 12+ HCP hands since my 'free' 3♦ bid does promise extra values and 6+ diamonds. Busy bidding opponents reduces the likelihood that pard has extras.

[adhoc3]

Chamaco, on Feb 17 2006, 04:57 AM, said:

.....pass ...

I'm another minority.

I think I have a poor hand. Stiff A and SK looks ugly. I will not hope pard bid 3NT after 3D and I don't worry about how to defence 2H. So I'll wait and hear.

[Codo]

3 ♦ had not seen a problem before reading some posts, but even now, I have 14 HCPs, some cotrols and a 6 card suit. Much to much for a minimum opener...

[temp3600]

Here's the full hand :

Scoring: MP

---

I bid 3D, and it went :

1D (1S) X (2H)
3D (X) All Pass

West's X showed willingness to compete, and East had an easy pass. This lead to -200 which wasn't a complete success.

Since the bad spade position can be guessed from the bidding, and we are misfitted in hearts, I was wondering if these negative adjustments were enough not to rebid the diamonds. Thanks for you replies.

[Chamaco]

This raises another point on bidding aggressively /conservatively as opener vs responder (and especially about negative doubles).

We all like to bid (this is true especially if you are good declarer-unlike me).

However, I have seen that there are some people who:

a. like to be pushy when holding opener's hand here ( I do think that KQJxxx suit quality is often overrated, lacking intermediates- in situations where pard does not guarantee a fit)

b. others like to be pushy as responder when making a negative double; for instance, in this sequence, they would have Xed with responder's hand, even holding only xxx-K9xx-xx-Kxxx which is even weaker than the hand you posted


Of course, I think all approaches are plausible after pship agreements.
However, my point is:
if we are going to bid 3D with opener's hand, then in the same partnership it is not advisable to double negative with light hands such as xxx-K9xx-xx-Kxxx

If one side is aggressive, the other one must be conservative, at least at red: if opener is to decide whether bidding 3D, he should know if he can expect some "good stuff" and NOT just a pair of straw kings with a side 4 card major.

Or, we can watch the same situation the other way around: if - by pship agreement - I am going to make a negative double with just 2 Kings and a side 4cM, I want to be sure that pard does not hang me at the 3 level just because he has KQJxxx in his suit that I did not support.

I think the outcome of the posted hand (which turned out badly despite responder having a textbook negative double) is self-explanatory