[awm]

Scoring: MP

---

You open 2♦ natural and intermediate, showing 6+♦ and 10-14 points (a 4cM is possible). LHO bids 2♥, partner raises to 3♦, and RHO bids 3♥. Partner's raise is just competitive, not a try for game.

What's your plan at this point?

[P_Marlowe]

5D

More interesting would be to know,
if 3H was simply competitive?

With kind regards
Marlowe

[pbleighton]

Adam:

Do I read the vul right, we are at unfavorable?

If so, I pass now and over 4H. I'm thinking they can probably make 4H, I'm not willing to bid 5D, and I won't push them into it.

I noticed a bunch of immediate 5D votes, which made me think I am wrong on the vul. If favorable, I will also bid an immediate 5D.

Peter

[P_Marlowe]

pbleighton, on Oct 15 2006, 08:40 AM, said:

Adam:

Do I read the vul right, we are at unfavorable?

<skip>

all are green

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Winstonm]

Jlall, on Oct 15 2006, 01:03 PM, said:

Wow... I'm getting old... I pass twice. Bidding 5D seems nuts, we have a lot of defense with a wide ranged partner and opps who haven't even bid game yet. Why can't partner have 1.5 tricks for us? He might well have a doubleton diamond and might well just be pushing the opponents into 3H. He may even have 4 good hearts. They haven't even bid game yet, and there's no reason for me to think they will.

Whether or not to bid FOUR diamonds here seems like a close decision at these colors, but I have hopes of beating THREE hearts even, and am worried about a possible -300 in 4D. -1 in 3H and 4D seems like a possible result.

That's what happens when you turn 21 - you lose the old cajones.

However, I happen to agree that pass is right. There is no reason to assume that LHO is going to bid game - our actions may well have prevented them from finding a makeable game. A further bid of 4D could get us into -300 territory, push them into a non-biddable but makeable game, or simply be a wash.

[the hog]

Pass!!!! Wh bid your hand twice? Your partner knows a lot more about my hand than I do abou his. Bidding on - therein madness lies.

[Gerben42]

Tricky one. I guess pass twice is correct but if I would find that at the table...

(Age 21 with 6 years of experience)

[mr1303]

What do I have extra and above my 2♦ opening? A 7th diamond perhaps, but nothing else. Therefore the most I'd ever bid is 4♦ and probably not even that.

[zasanya]

They may stop in 3♥ which is probably makable.
We may possibly be making 4♦ .Even if we are not, we probably will not be doubled.Even if we are doubled we may be down one.It may push them to unmakable 4♥.
So why not 4♦?
Incidentally we are not bidding the hand twice.When we bid 2 ♦ we didnt know P has ♦ support and P didnt know we have 7th ♦.

[inquiry]

2♦ described my hand, partners 3♦ bid did not invite further participation. I am out of the auction, happy with my defensive values...

[Flame]

I bid 4♦ and pass 4♥.
Partner's 3♦ bid wouldnt be 2 cards in diamond and long H, so he is probebly 3 cards diamonds, we have a 10 card fit and i have a singlton in thier suit, 4♦ rate to give us a better result then 3H. If they go to 4H i will pass, since i feel i did my job of showing my offense value with 4D and partner his in good position to judge now.

[MickyB]

I'm not sure I agree with that Flame - if pard has a couple of diamonds, 4 decent hearts and a stiff spade, he might raise to try to keep oppos from finding their spade fit?

I think this is close between 4♦ and pass.

[Chamaco]

The_Hog, on Oct 16 2006, 03:39 AM, said:

Pass!!!! Wh bid your hand twice? Your partner knows a lot more about my hand than I do abou his. Bidding on - therein madness lies.

Ditto.

Why should I take unilateral decision ?
I already bid my hand, and it seems to me that against decent opps, 4D means simply giving opps the fielder's choice: both my hand (10-14) and pard's hand (comp. raise) has been limited by the earlier bidding.

Indeed, I am surprised that the poll results are so balanced for now :-)

[awm]

There are a lot of interesting assertions being made in this thread. Let me explain why I disagree with them.

Many people have suggested that we've already described our hand. But this hand has two features that suggest bidding on: the seventh diamond and the singleton heart. I'm sure that most of us, seeing the auction 1♥-1♠-2♥-2♠ would bid 3♥ holding a minimum hand with a sixth heart and a singleton spade, wouldn't we? This is true regardless of the fact that partner's single raise is fairly wide-ranging in terms of shape and values, and regardless of whether our opening is limited in terms of high card points. So just because we've shown six of our seven diamonds and our approximate values shouldn't mean that now we automatically must pass for the rest of the auction and let partner take over, should it?

It's extremely likely on this hand that 4♦ will fare well. The number of total tricks is quite likely to be 18 or more. The only reason I can see not to bid 4♦ is the possibility of pushing the opponents into a 4♥ contract they would not otherwise bid. Certainly if I were asked to choose between pass and 4♦ with the information that opponents will never bid over 4♦ then I think it's obvious to bid 4♦.

So what about that 4♥ contract? At IMPs there's a serious risk/reward issue. Opponents will almost surely bid 4♥ over 4♦, figuring that on a bad day they're trading a +50 for a -50 and on a good day they score up +420. This is fairly obvious "IMPs math" and even if 4♥ is fairly low-percentage to make (like say around 30%) the bid is reasonable because you're risking so few IMPs to win so many. So if I pass and 3♥ passes out, I get either -140 or -170, and if I bid 4♦ I get either +50 or -420. Unless I think the odds are substantially in favor of 4♥ failing, I should pass. This implies that bidding 4♦ can only be right on hands with substantial defense, which this hand is not!

But the scoring here is matchpoints and not IMPs. This means the opponents decision of whether to bid 4♥ over 4♦ is far from obvious, since +50 and -50 are quite different scores. In fact there's a strong need to go plus on the deal, and the IMP math doesn't apply. At matchpoint scoring, the opponents should only bid 4♥ if they think it will make reasonably often, which greatly increases the chance that 4♦ passes out. If opponents do bid 4♥, they might well have bid 4♥ over a pass as well, and it's a likely sign that there's some shape in their hands (for example someone may have a diamond void). So I think that at MP scoring bidding 4♦ is a big favorite. If opponents now bid 4♥, several things have changed. A MP 4♥ bid will not be "automatic" so there's a better chance that 4♥ makes. Also, partner did not double 4♥ so he doesn't have some kind of "trapping" raise with good defense. I think this sequence makes 5♦ a reasonable call. Of course, this pair of bids (4♦ over 3♥ and then a balancing 5♦ over 4♥) is quite nonsensical at IMP scoring and I would never consider it!

[FrancesHinden]

There is a conceptual difference between the auction

2D (2H) 3D

and

1H (1S) 2H

In the first auction, the 2D bidder (theoretically) limited their hand, as is not expected to act again. The 3D bidder could have all sorts of things - I've seen this type of raise done on a VOID by an absolutely top world class player, which generated a huge penalty for him (he knew how to pick his moment).

On the second auction, the 1H opener is unlimited and undefined, so the 2H bidder has to limit his hand; the opener can then take subsequent action as he chooses.


There was a while ago a long discussion on captaincy. When you open with a limited opening, in general you concede captaincy to partner unless he asks your opinion.

[Flame]

MickyB, on Oct 16 2006, 10:37 AM, said:

I'm not sure I agree with that Flame - if pard has a couple of diamonds, 4 decent hearts and a stiff spade, he might raise to try to keep oppos from finding their spade fit?

I think this is close between 4♦ and pass.

imo normal 3♦ shows a 3 card support. Its possible to bid with only 2 if there are some good other factors, but long in thier suit doesnt seems like a good idea to me.

[awm]

In any case, here's the full hand:

Scoring: MP

---

At the table, I bid 4♦ and LHO bid 4♥. Then I balanced with 5♦. This was doubled by RHO. After the lead of two rounds of hearts I scored up -100 (yes, a spade lead with the king unblocked at trick one can set the contract by more, but the heart lead seems normal). This was a fairly good result at the regional pairs (I think about 12/17 MPs). Note that 5♥ can be made by EW.

If I had bid 5♦ directly, most likely I would have obtained the same result. If I pass throughout, most likely partner will pass also and the opponents will either play 3♥+2 or 4♥+1.

My partner thought I was crazy to bid this way, but by his own admission he's a better IMP player. The poll seems to confirm partner's opinion though , so I guess it's better to be lucky than good.

[joshs]

Speaking as the partner. I will give the conventional wisdom is that bidding like this is merely bad at imps but horrible at mps (at imps a direct 5D bid isn't terrible but at mps it is).

lets break the issue in two pieces:
a. saving at all

The reason for this is if you save (or even an advance save) in a situation where the opps will not bid on you are betting on a parley at mps:
1. This is a good save
2. The field is bidding game

Going for 300 when half the field is playing a part score is never a good score.

Lets give an example:
Suppose half the field in in game and half the field is in a part score.
Let P=probability that they make game and let us assume that the save will go for at least 300 whenever they are making.

Here we have the following (I will deal with the case where the save might be for only -100 later)
Let us assume there are 12 pairs half in part score and half in game:

Case A: 4M +420, 3M +170, 5m -300
Case B: 4M -50, 3M +140, 5m -300

In A Passing 4M gives you 2.5 MPs on an 11 top;
Saving gives you 5 MPs on a 11 top;

In B Passing gives you 8.5 mps on a 11 top;
Saving gives you 0 mps on a 11 top;

Thus you require 8.5-2.5 odds to make this a good save.

If you have a good chance of going for less than the value of a part score this changes the odds:

Suppose in A and B you go -300 1/2 the time and -100 half the time. Then saving in B gives you 6 mps half the time, for an average of 3 mps. And in A you get 5 half the time and 11 half the time, for an average of 8. Thus the odds become 5.5-5.5, which is even money.


2. The tactics of bidding 4m. You don't want to push them into 4M unless you either A2. Expect to beat them OR
B2. Believe that 5m isn't worse than down 1 (or that you may not get xed).


Since its hard to estimate, both the likelyhood that the opps would bid game freely if not pushed, as well as the exact number of tricks for each side, you have the following rule of thumb:

Rule: Bids of 4m in jockeying competative auction at mps (not as an advanced save) are always to make (similarly saves of 5m are for down 1 at the worst).

(Note: If you can bid 5m before they have exchanged information, then you have factor in the odds of them making a bad 5 over 5 bid, which is significant if your bid is at least somewhat close)

Now as to the hand in question ,I had a very good offensive hand for you despite only 2 trumps. I could have had:
Jxxx
Kxx
Qxx
KTx

Which is likely down 2 or 3 in 5D and has good chances of beating them in 4H.


In fact if Had
xxxx
xxx
KQx
KTx
Now its easier for them to get there spade tricks, and you are almost always going down 2 unless the defense is bad.


Anyway, thats my two bits. The reason I claim to be better at mps is not a failing in competative bidding at mps, is the increased value of good constructive bidding at imps relative to mps, and the fact that my card play isn't as good as my bidding (and good card play matters on every hand at mps, good bidding only matters on some of them).