[e552787]

Scoring: MP

---

Playing R/S-Style
The bidding went:
pass pass 1[d] 2[s]
double ?

a) Do You raise now?
Would You raise in nvul?
c) Would You act otherwise, if West would have been dealer?

If You don't raise in some case, what smallest changes of the hand
would qualify in then for a "push-bid"?

[e552787]

sorry for mistake,
East was dealer and the following question should have asked,
if things might change, if South was dealer

[Apollo81]

If you believe the LAW, then there are 16-18 total tricks, depending on how big their fit is and how many minor honor issues there are. Bidding seems right only if there are 18 and the tricks are divided 9-9 (seems impossible since 3♠ rates to be down 1-2 tricks). Clear pass red IMO. NV I would pass also, as I rate 16 TT more likely than 18, but it's closer.

[inquiry]

We are vul and they are not, and partner made a jump overcall of 2♠? Not sure how you play this, but at these colors, I prefer that North should pretty much have some sort of play for 2♠ (within a trick). Playing this way, I think 3♠ is ok here, sure you might go off one if the Heart KTx is not worth a trick, but I like our chances.

On the other hand, if 2♠ is just a preempt without too much regard for the vulnerability, I will pass quietly. So to bid or not depends upon what your partner thinks a preempt vul verssu not looks like (I don't generally "preempt" per se, but rather bid pretty much close to what I think I can mke, or one trick short of that).

[mikeh]

Pass at the speed of light.

Give him a 'good' 2♠ hand: AKQJ10xx xxx xx xx, and if the ♥ is offside, as it rates to be, 3♠ is down 200 even if they pass it out.

Even thinking of bidding is overbidding.

When you are outgunned in hcp, the only reasons to compete are:

1) to push the opps higher, so that you may be able to beat them
2) to steal their bidding space, so that they can't find the best spot
3) because going set will be less than their score expectation playing the hand

Here, the opps have no fit as yet so we have no reason to think that we can push them higher. Ironically, the only times they are likely to push higher after we raise is when we would prefer them to play a partscore: our raise may cause opener, for example, to stretch with xxx in ♠, knowing that partner has shortness.

We have enough defence (whether actual as in the ♦A or potential as in ♥) that the opps are not about to go slamming or to get to the wrong denomination merely because of a 3♠ bump by us

And, critically, we cannot expect to get a good score against competent opps. If they can make game, they will either bid it (and maybe bid it successfully when they would have stopped in partscore had we passed) or they will double us. If they can't make game, they will still usually get us for 200, often undoubled. If they can make game, we are often -500.

4333 hands are NOT the sort to go adventuring on, LOTT or no LOTT...and as has been observed, the LOTT actually suggests passing anyway.

[e552787]

Facing a passed hand, pd will more often than not have opening values
as we play this with the given vulnerabilty, so its not clear, whose hand it is.
Giving them a guess might pay.
What would you bid as Dealer with a third-hand-opener
♠ xx ♥ Qxxx ♦ KDxxx ♣ Ax ?
The actual Opener had: ♠ xx ♥ AQxx ♦ BTxxx ♣ Ax
Without the push You will describe your hand perfectly by Lebensohl-convention

[HeartA]

Jlall, on Oct 23 2006, 01:34 PM, said:

I would not raise at any vulnerability. Too much to lose.

I would not raise, but will not blame pd if he does.

[awm]

In these kinds of situations it's often easier to try to visualize the play than to depend on LOTT and such rules. What does partner have for the 2♠ call?

Some typical hands for a vulnerable 2♠ (and I'm a pretty sound preempter) include six solid spades and out, or seven good but not great spades and out, or six spades missing one honor with an outside card.

Opposite the first hand, we have six spade tricks, an ace, and maybe a heart trick for 7-8 total. Opposite the second hand we have about the same. Opposite the third hand, we have five spade tricks and, if we're lucky, three side tricks (suppose partner's side card is the ♥A). In addition to what's described, partner often has 6331 or 6421 type shape (I tend to be conservative with 6322) but since our hand is totally flat there's no strong reason to think that we can establish a four-card side suit in partner's hand (if any).

So the upshot is, 3♠ will almost always go down, frequently by one trick and occasionally by two. This is assuming a fairly sound preempt style from partner. At unfavorable it is generally bad strategy to bid contracts that you're sure will fail, because down two undoubled or down one doubled is usually a very poor result. In essence you are giving the opponents the choice of bidding on or defending when both options lead to an average-plus result for their side.

If we were non-vulnerable, I would certainly consider bidding 3♠. If partner's NV preempts look like my vulnerable preempts, bidding 3♠ is certainly right. At MP NV, it's often right to bid to a contract you expect to fail by one trick. But virtually no one (including me) preempts this soundly at NV. So I'd expect partner's hand to be about 1-2 tricks worse which leads again to passing 2♠.

[whereagles]

Playing Robson/Segal style, this is a 100% clear-cut PASS.

RS weak overcalls do NOT invite pard into the fray. Especially if he's already passed!