[mr1303]

A couple of points:

1) 3S here is sick at any vulnerability. QTx in hearts is completely worthless, and I'd be happier with xxx instead, and only a 4 count.

2) This isn't our hand at all, unless partner will bid again, in which case I can support spades later. Since any heart finesses that may be required rate to be onside, trying to push the opponents into a game that rates to be cold doesn't look to be a good idea.

3) A raise in spades might blow a lead on defence, if partner has a suit like KJxxx

[FrancesHinden]

Jlall, on Dec 30 2006, 11:14 PM, said:

If 2H ends the auction I think it's so likely to lead to a terrible result that I can't bring myself to pass.

What he said.

I really cannot stomach bidding 3S on this hand, but only two days ago we missed a good save when I 'only' raised to two on a very similar hand (admittedly that was game all). Partner had no reason to bid on.

The best reason not to raise is Mark's point that it may lead us to blow a trick on lead.

[ulven]

mike777, on Dec 31 2006, 05:50 AM, said:

why is pard overcalling light when vul?...no why is pard overcalling at unfav vul...does he think our leads are idiotic if he does not bid?

Just a point about light overcalls when vul:
I played against Lauria-Versace 2 weeks ago in Milano. Versace overcalled 3D in 2nd position (i.e. unpassed partner) over a weak 2sp red against white (teams) on Kxx/x/QJTxxxx/QJ !!

Lauria had -/ATxxxx/AKx/T8xx and bid 4NT good raise over 4sp to his right and then passed 5D. Just a spot-on +600...

[Winstonm]

Quote

It's strange because the example hands you gave to back up pass might have been hands I chose to back up a 2S bid 

That's because you are still young and idealistic - and you've been hanging around Hamman way too much.

Seriously, though, I appreciate your input. I see your points but am still nervous about raising, especially as the few cards I have argue for defending rather than playing, and unless partner produces the AK of spades, just about any other lead will turn out better for our side.

[Fluffy]

I find it close, I will just raise because pass is too agressive.

[000002]

leading from ♠KJxxx? what is the distribution of ♠ outside,2-2 or 3-1?
we get lossing 75% of 22,50%of 3-1.
when the distribution is 22 on ♠, i believe that they will seek 3nt before 4♥;and they should take a coperation DBL before their 3♥ overcall.

i don't worry about the leading question,but i think i ought to take a plenty press on opps .

regards 000002:(

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

2S, ... probably at any vul.
I dont really care if partner makes
regular overcalls on 4card suits,
I have 4 card support and I raise.

We have the spades, ... and this
message I am going to send.
Take away a spade and give me a heart,
and you may talk me into passing, but
not with 4 card support.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

Winstonm, on Dec 30 2006, 09:00 PM, said:

pbleighton, on Dec 30 2006, 08:50 PM, said:

"The top of of the overcall does have some bearing, but even then you can easily get too high with a 13-14 count and a 6-card suit, no?"

A good 14, yes.

13s, hardly ever.

I can be pretty pushy bidding games when we open the bidding, especially with the opps silent, but when the opps start the bidding, i'm not nearly so optimistic.

Peter

Here, Peter, I'm not so worried about overbidding to game but in overbidding to the 3-level.

Even for LOTT advocates, this 4333 argues for a reduction in total tricks, so assuming 17 total tricks to start that is reduced to 16 - according to LOTT if they can make 9 tricks we can only make 7, down 2.

It is not that the 4333 hand will bid 3, but partner is not excluded from bidding 3 with heart shortness and dummy will surely disappoint.

Hi,

if he bids 3S, he should have more than just
heart shortage and a min overcall.
He should either have add. strength, which
means the 9 card trump fit and the side Queens
will be good news, or he will have a 6 carder,
which makes the LOTT raise to 18 (reduce the
number by 1) and you still have a fair chance
to escape for -1.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Apollo81]

2♠. I can't imagine passing with some high cards and 4-card support. A good player won't have only 4♠s on this hand

[sathyab]

The problem with hands like this is that we tend to be influenced by results that occured as a result of an action on a given lay-out, not because the action was the percentage call or not, but that it worked or didn't work on the given occasion. Are there any simulators out there that're sophisticated enough to analyze most likley results of a raise or pass ? I tried doing some search for simulators a while ago but there didn't appear to be much non-sales kind of information.

[mikestar]

Unadjusted LOTT suggests 3♠ on this hand. Let's look at adjustments:

1. QTx in enemy trump suit is a major negative adjustment all by itself. It isn't always worthless on offense, but it is very often and is never worth a full 2 points even when it isn't. On the other hand, it has good defensive potential
2. 4-3-3-3 hands often result in fewer total tricks. These two are enough to disqualify 3♠.
3. We are red vs. white so we should pull it in a notch.
4. The raise may encourage a losing ♠ lead. A minor but real negative.
5. The wide range hampers constructive efficiency. These days, both 1♥ and 2♥ may be wafer thin--partner may well have a game try, and this hand will disappoint him quite a bit. (If we have a conventional method of showing a good three-card single raise, this point vanishes.)
6. This is IMPs -- the reward for -100 vs -110/-140 is much lower, but the cost of large sets is relatively more. This argues for conservatism in close cases.

So we have four meaningful negatives to 2♠--four strikes and you're out. I can see no positives. I can agree with someone who bids 2♠ with (silent) fear and trepidation, but I can't imagine bidding 2♠ gleefully.

As for 3♠, I think this is doubtful at favorable, bad bridge at equal, and barking mad at unfavorable.

[Codo]

These are the positives for 2 Spade:
1.Support with support
2. if they bid and make 3 Heart there is no difference but if they bid 3 Heart and fail, I earn + 50 against -110, quite a difference.
3. Pd knows, that his possible spade honours won´t count much at defence.
4. If he has a game try, I have nothing to be ashamed of.
Can he have less then KJxxx,xx,KJx,KJx? And even with this weak hand, which surey is no game try, you are just -1.
5.In which case can his spade lead be a disaster? With something like KJxxx leading towards the queen? With AQxxx leading the ace giving the King an undeserved trick? So which other lead do I prefer? A suit, where he finesses my queen of ♥/♦ or ♣ for declarer? Not really an improvement.

[inquiry]

Codo, on Jan 3 2007, 09:55 AM, said:

These are the positives for 2 Spade:
1.Support with support
2. if they bid and make 3 Heart there is no difference but if they bid 3 Heart and fail, I earn + 50 against -110, quite a difference.
3. Pd knows, that his possible spade honours won´t count much at defence.
4. If he has a game try, I have nothing to be ashamed of.
Can he have less then KJxxx,xx,KJx,KJx? And even with this weak hand, which surey is no game try, you are just -1.
5.In which case can his spade lead be a disaster? With something like KJxxx leading towards the queen? With AQxxx leading the ace giving the King an undeserved trick? So which other lead do I prefer? A suit, where he finesses my queen of ♥/♦ or ♣ for declarer? Not really an improvement.

I expressed my view on this hand early, and I am in complete agreement with Winston. I simply left it to him to carry the arguments up until now. Having read the Lott based - support with support replies, I remain totally unconvinced, particularily about if partner were to make a game try that I would have nothing to be ashamed of...

Opposite your proposed hand (KJxxx xx KJx KJx) even if the spade queen in onside, you may well lack an entry to take the spade hook (give both minor aces ot the opener). It is not impossible you could lose 1C, 1C ruff, 2 spades, three aces and the AK of hearts (or 1D, 1D ruff, two more spades, and three other aces and the King of hearts). That is down three in two spades. And if they can master two club ruffs (if leader is xx Axxx xxxxxx x) you are down four.

Pessimistic? Well sure, but if EAST has doubleton in either minor, they will be able to find and get a ruff. The real problem is, however, a partner who is not in on the joke. You are vul and this is imps. Partner will make a game try or (blush) occassionally jump to game. I would surely hate to put down this dummy on those occassions after bidding 2♠.

[Winstonm]

Quote

I expressed my view on this hand early, and I am in complete agreement with Winston.

Thanks, Ben. I was feeling somewhat lonely until now.

I understand the desire to compete with the 98% likely 9-card fit and the equally empty feeling that if I don't compete I am in for a poor result; however, I still have to place this hand for me in the "disciplined" pass category.

As Ben pointed out, 2S may already be way too high and the opponents don't even have to double to earn imps, while I don't wish to encourage partner to compete past the 2-level. What I would be most content with, looking at my hand alone, is to defend 3H, but I have no convenient way to push the opponents to 3H without substantial risk of going set 2 or 3, maybe doubled.

While it is certainly right at imps to fight hard for the partscore, it also pays to have some bullets in your gun before you start shooting - and this hand is shooting nothing but blanks.

[pclayton]

If you want to take a one trick deduction for LOTT, thats fine. But the passers are effective deducting two off the LOTT.

I can't bring myself to pass with a 9 card fit (and its a lot more likely we have a 10 card fit than a 8 card fit). I hate my quacks, but passing 2♥ is a guaranteed average minus.

[Winstonm]

Quote

passing 2♥ is a guaranteed average minus.

An average minus at imp scoring?

[pclayton]

LOL; thought it was MPs. I still bid.

Passing = push or lose 5

[inquiry]

pclayton, on Jan 3 2007, 07:37 PM, said:

If you want to take a one trick deduction for LOTT, thats fine. But the passers are effective deducting two off the LOTT.

I can't bring myself to pass with a 9 card fit (and its a lot more likely we have a 10 card fit than a 8 card fit). I hate my quacks, but passing 2♥ is a guaranteed average minus.

Bridge just has to be something more than counting to 9, closing our eyes and bidding in blind trust of LOTT. Ok, you subtract one from LOTT and bid a "tame" 2♠ and say subtract two is too much. I suggest it is not. No distribution (4-3-3-3), no spade honor, QTx of THEIR suit, no Ace, no king, no quick tricks, no supporting honors for out two minor suit queens, the only side suit TEN in THEIR suit. That is too many "no's", so I add another one to it... No bid.

[glen]

Partner could have something like:

Scoring: IMPs

---

or

Scoring: IMPs

---

or

Scoring: IMPs

---

or with the minor suits flipped, and we could have decent play for game. These hands are not that uncommon.

[000002]

1♥ 1♠ 2♥ 2♠？

is it really frequent that we have a game in here ?
i think we are recreant to give up.

to Inquiry:"if they can master two club ruffs (if leader is xx Axxx xxxxxx x) you are down four."
i don't believe anyone will penalize 2♠--- with this hand ---in the living world.

regards 000002