[Echognome]

Scoring: MP

1♦ - 1♥
1♠ - 2♣
2♦ - 3♣
3♦ - 3♠
?

---

You are playing with a partner you seldom play with. You are playing a simple natural system (Acol in this case) and have the following bidding sequence. What is your call now?

If you disagree with any of your previous bids, feel free to state as much.

[Blofeld]

is 2♣ ... 3♣ by partner re-4SF or a genuine suit? Even if you don't know for sure, your guess is probably better than mine.

[Echognome]

Blofeld, on Aug 7 2006, 10:13 AM, said:

is 2♣ ... 3♣ by partner re-4SF or a genuine suit? Even if you don't know for sure, your guess is probably better than mine.

Hadn't been discussed. So I'm afraid your guess is going to be as well informed as mine.

[cherdano]

I disagree with 2♦. This is a default bid, and could be made with five diamonds, while I have SIX of them. A 3♦ rebid suits me just fine, I don't think it shows extras (assuming 2♣ was forcing to game).

In the given auction, I will rebid 3♦ and follow up with 4♣.

Arend

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

3NT.

I agree with the auction, 2C was 4th suit,
inv. or game forcing,
since partner did bid 3C again, ... game
forcing.

You denied a full stopper with 2D, and a
half stopper with 3D, an alternative to 3D
is 3NT since Jxx is a half stopper, but 3D
is certainly not wrong, at least you showed
a 6 card suit.

Now simply bid 3NT, showing Jxx.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

cherdano, on Aug 7 2006, 05:51 AM, said:

I disagree with 2♦. This is a default bid, and could be made with <span style='font-size:7pt;line-height:100%'>five diamonds, while I have SIX of them. A 3♦ rebid suits me just fine, I don't think it shows extras (assuming 2♣ was forcing to game).

In the given auction, I will rebid 3♦ and follow up with 4♣.

Arend</span>

Since the 2C bid was made in an Acol context, I doubt
that 2C was already game forcing.

And if you are not 100% sure about the forcing nature
of 2C, 2D is the best bid.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[inquiry]

3NT.

1) It is matchpoints
2) You have a potential source of tricks (even oppoiste a stiff diamond, 3-3 D give you six tricks)
3) Parnter heard you deny a club stopper.

[mikeh]

This hand has become a nightmare: there is a good chance that partner is 3=5=0=5 for the auction so far... in which case 3N probably has no play unless his blacks are strong.

Partner may have a different hand and is using 3♠ as a stall of some kind, in which case maybe we are going to be ok. For now, however, I hate my hand

I had better own up to my ♣ support: the question is whether I should bid 4♣ or 5♣. 5♣ should slow the auction down (which I really want to do if he is 3=5=0=5) but may screw things up if he has a different hand and agenda. So 4♣, with zero confidence.

If 3N was right, he should have bid it himself. He knows the form of scoring, and my actual hand should be no surprise, altho I am sure it will be a disappointment.

BTW, I agree with the auction so far..... 3♦ over 2♣ shows a different hand no matter what 2♣ was.... we do NOT want to be upgrading this hand with a void in partner's first suit and no fit anywhere.

[mike777]

Echognome, on Aug 7 2006, 05:02 AM, said:

Scoring: MP

1♦ - 1♥
1♠ - 2♣
2♦ - 3♣
3♦ - 3♠
?

---

You are playing with a partner you seldom play with. You are playing a simple natural system (Acol in this case) and have the following bidding sequence. What is your call now?

If you disagree with any of your previous bids, feel free to state as much.

Strongly prefer 4clubs over 3clubs. I expect 3clubs to be a real 5 card suit and partner to have little interest in a NT contract.

[kenberg]

My guess about the distribution is 3-5-0-5, as I see Mikeh believes as well. At any rate, partner sure seems to be trying to find a suit game and I have no reason to overrule him. I bid 4C. It's possible that 5D is the only game that makes, since there is a fair shot at five diamond tricks (after losing one) with that suit as trumps, but I imagine 5C is the winner. At any rate, 4C is my call. I have no interest in playing 4S on my J high suit.

[hrothgar]

I like the auction so far...

Like MikeH, I think that partner is sitting on a 3=5=0=5 hand, in which case 3N is going to be VERY ugly...

I'm torn between 4♣ and pass...

I have a minimum opening bid and I don't believe that partner has established an absolute GF. I wouldn't be surprised if the limit of the hand was 9 tricks.

Ultimately, I'm going to bid 4♣ because I don't want to be ruffing hearts with Spades and I suspect that partner would have passed 3♦ with an absolute minimum. Even so, I'm quite a bit weaker than partner should expect.

[HeartA]

I agree with Mike and Ken. And I agree the auctions so far and would bid 4C.

BTW, 3D rebid is complete out of the line.

[EricK]

Now I bid 4♣ as I think partner has 5 of them and probably no ♦.

I know this is the closest thing to blasphemy in modern day bridge, but I am wondering whether 2♦ is a better bid than 1♠. Over 1♠ partner will probably rebid 2♥ with any 6 card ♥ suit in a weak hand. Whereas over 2♦ he will tend to leave you in 2♦ which is likely to be a better contract. If, on the other hand partner has a strong hand, you can still unearth a 4-4 fit in ♠ with the added bonus that your sequence will have shown strong ♦ and weak ♠. And if there is no 4-4 fit then there is no need to bid your weak ♠ suit.

[P_Marlowe]

I would like to make just one other
comment, usually if one holds 5-5
in the suits opener did not bid and has
a strong hand, one makes a jumpin the
4th suit, i.e. 3C over 1S would have
shown this hand.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mikeh]

EricK, on Aug 7 2006, 02:35 PM, said:

Now I bid 4♣ as I think partner has 5 of them and probably no ♦.

I know this is the closest thing to blasphemy in modern day bridge, but I am wondering whether 2♦ is a better bid than 1♠. Over 1♠ partner will probably rebid 2♥ with any 6 card ♥ suit in a weak hand. Whereas over 2♦ he will tend to leave you in 2♦ which is likely to be a better contract. If, on the other hand partner has a strong hand, you can still unearth a 4-4 fit in ♠ with the added bonus that your sequence will have shown strong ♦ and weak ♠. And if there is no 4-4 fit then there is no need to bid your weak ♠ suit.

I think that it is wrong, in principle, to make a misleading call in a purely constructive auction.

It is NOT true that you will be able to find a 4=4 ♠ fit on all good responding hands. If partner has 4=4=2=3 with, say, KQxx Axxx Jx KQx, he is going to happily bid 3N over 2♦ and you will usually end up wishing you had been in 4♠.

There are times to make tactical bids, knowing that you may misled partner, but you should not do this when partner is unlimited.... you are essentially over-riding partner's ability to participate as an equal in the auction, and that is a sure way to lose good partners.

[pclayton]

4♠

Matt - no XYZ, right?

I agree with the others that 3N rates to be a touchy contract, even if pard has a stiff. If pard has a void diamond, and this is what I expect, 3N is flat hopeless.

I think a reasonable hand to expect is: Axx, AQxxx, void, Axxxx. I am not at all confident about making any number of tricks on this layout, but I can probably handle 8 or 9. But add a few honors and I think I can probably scramble 10 tricks. I might pass NV in an event that meant anything, but I really hate passing forcing bids.

I think 4♠ will be passed even when pard has a mountain, since he realizes that we have a misfit and his diamond shortness is hitting my strength. I can even see a pass with the above hand and both black suit queens.

[mike777]

you guys seem to be assuming 2c is not 100% game forcing.

If partner has some invite/weakish hand 3=5=0=5 partner may have gambled out a pass in one spade at MP hoping to go plus or choose to raise to 2nt or 2s.
It seems bidding some shaky 5 card club suit is waste of time at MP?

With Phil's game force hand after:
1d=1h
1s=2c
2d=3c
4c=? Partner can choose his poison 4s or 5clubs.

[Winstonm]

4C is my bid - if partner can't bid 3N I don't want to be the one to play it - let him stew in his own juice. I can always claim he bid clubs twice. At this point in the auction it is no longer about reaching the correct contract but positioning oneself to win the postmortem....

[HeartA]

mike777, on Aug 7 2006, 06:31 PM, said:

you guys seem to be assuming 2c is not 100% game forcing.

If partner has some invite/weakish hand 3=5=0=5 partner may have gambled out a pass in one spade at MP hoping to go plus or choose to raise to 2nt or 2s.
It seems bidding some shaky 5 card club suit is waste of time at MP?

With Phil's game force hand after:
1d=1h
1s=2c
2d=3c
4c=? Partner can choose his poison 4s or 5clubs.

I pefer 3D to 4C. 3D shows decent 6-card suit. If pd had 1-5-2-5, ...

[Echognome]

At the table, I considered many of the suggestions above. I thought about 3NT, but it didn't sound like partner was angling toward 3NT the way he was bidding. Seemed time to mention my club support. Like Mike, I wanted to bid 5♣ just to slow down the auction. However, in these type of muddled auctions, I don't like to cross up partner's intentions. Thus, 4♣ it was.

The next bid that hit the table was 6♠! Mind you that we hadn't discussed much in terms of system (e.g. XYZ would have been sensible), partner went a bit off the deep end on this hand. He held:

♠K9xx ♥AKQxxx ♦--- ♣KQx.

His worry on the hand was that fourth suit was not game forcing, but rather forcing one round. I can certainly sympathize with that, but I felt 3♣ was really misguided. Anyway, this isn't a hand to win the post mortem (partner knew as much immediately), but rather an interesting bidding problem in its own right. Many pairs got too high on this board.