[mpefritz]

Scoring: MP

2♥-P-P-?

---

Playing a MP indy. Your call in balancing seat after LHO opens a weak 2♥.

thanks,

fritz

[whereagles]

2♠. I don't speculate with double.

[pbleighton]

2S seems pretty clear, playing standard methods (and it's an indy).

Peter

[inquiry]

Too good for 2♠, which could be same hand with ♦AQ changed to xx. I would bid 3♠. However, in an individual, I would like to have a feel for my partners ability before I made that bid. Would he take a jump overcall in balance seat as preempt? If so, then 2♠ is the bid.

[han]

2♠, close to 3♠.

[Blofeld]

I copy Han.

[mcphee]

2 or 3S look like the options. This is really close with that 109 of trumps to fill in the suit. I'm a tad concerned about wasted H values and feel that the lesser agression of 2S leaves me better placed and is unlikely to cost me a game. I would not be really unhappy if partner bid 3S. Just a bit skinny for me.

[EricK]

The trouble with 2♠ is we might miss a game. One trouble with 3♠ is that partner might bid a game which isn't there. The other trouble with 3♠ is that RHO may be sitting with a fair misfitting hand - I wouldn't like to be -300 on a part score hand.

It's MP so I'll try to go plus. 2♠ for me, but if partner shows any sign of life, we'll get to game.

[jdonn]

2♠, all this talk about 3♠ is from bizarro world as far as I can tell. Give me another ace and we will talk about that bid.

[cade909]

2♠ seems right.

[luke warm]

2♠... who knows, partner might even raise

[Free]

2♠, too weak for 3♠, silly to double.

[pbleighton]

3S on an 11 count (OK, an excellent 11 count, and in the balancing seat) seems out of line to me.

What is the minimum hand for 4S?

Peter

[Codo]

2 ♠ wtp.

[han]

You can call this an 11-count, you can also call it a 5-loser hand. Game is quite good opposite xxx xxxx Kxx xxx.

I agree that this is not strong enough for 3♠, but I think that we don't need to be that much stronger Josh. I have never discussed how strong one would need to be for a 3♠ bid in the balancing seat here, have you?

[jdonn]

Hannie, on Jun 26 2006, 06:24 AM, said:

You can call this an 11-count, you can also call it a 5-loser hand. Game is quite good opposite xxx xxxx Kxx xxx.

I agree that this is not strong enough for 3♠, but I think that we don't need to be that much stronger Josh. I have never discussed how strong one would need to be for a 3♠ bid in the balancing seat here, have you?

Is game good before or after they cash their four top tricks?

I haven't discussed it in particular but I have a general rule that covers it. Balancing actions over weak two bids are only barely weaker than in direct seat. And certainly this is nowhere near a direct seat 3♠ bid. I would bid much more aggresively if some bid could show long spades with secondary diamonds, but here for every time you reach game opposite the three card support, the diamond king, and an ace (partner barely needs more than that to raise 2♠ anyway), how many more will you reach game where partner has the wrong king instead?

[HeartA]

I am voting for another "2S wtp?"

[han]

jdonn, on Jun 26 2006, 09:12 AM, said:

Hannie, on Jun 26 2006, 06:24 AM, said:

You can call this an 11-count, you can also call it a 5-loser hand. Game is quite good opposite xxx xxxx Kxx xxx.

I agree that this is not strong enough for 3♠, but I think that we don't need to be that much stronger Josh. I have never discussed how strong one would need to be for a 3♠ bid in the balancing seat here, have you?

Is game good before or after they cash their four top tricks?

I haven't discussed it in particular but I have a general rule that covers it. Balancing actions over weak two bids are only barely weaker than in direct seat. And certainly this is nowhere near a direct seat 3♠ bid. I would bid much more aggresively if some bid could show long spades with secondary diamonds, but here for every time you reach game opposite the three card support, the diamond king, and an ace (partner barely needs more than that to raise 2♠ anyway), how many more will you reach game where partner has the wrong king instead?

Good points Josh. Certainly this is nowhere clear to a direct 3♠ bid.

How mainstream is the idea not to bid much lighter in balancing seat after preempts? I notice Ben balances with KQ10xxx x xxxx xx, is there an expert consensus on this issue?

[jillybean]

I'd even bid 2♠ here

[mpefritz]

First of all, several examples from a well known book on balancing (I don't have the exact spots, but they were not great):

♠J8764
♥A7
♦K65
♣A98

was suggested to balance with 2♠


♠KQJ654
♥7
♦AQ97
♣K6

was suggested to balance 3♠.

Being an indy, I figured I could have no obvious way to figure out how to continue after any response from partner after my 2♠ call. So (being an idiot at 1AM) I made the "practical" 4♠ call . My partner wanted me to bid 2♠ (fine) OR X (what?) Surprisingly the book on balancing has no examples of a 4♠ call (heckling self--no need to pile on).

Both opps also misbid, and most players with my cards faced a call after either:

3♥-P-P-?

OR

3♥-P-4♥-?

Holding my hand of
KQT9xx
x
AQxx
xx

How would people bid in those 2 circumstances?

fritz