[pclayton]

White / White, MP's

Pard opens 1♣ in 4th seat and RHO overcalls 1♠. You play a 12-14 NT. 2♣ is standard and 3♣ is weak.

---

[pbleighton]

3C seems pretty clear.

I'd like a singleton, but NV I'm not letting them buy it for 2S, so I bid 3 now.

Peter

[whereagles]

I'm bidding 2♣ + 3♣. Pard prolly has the 15-17 hand and might get happy if I bid a straight 3♣. I'm not afraid them bidding 3♠ because that will probably go down.

[Apollo81]

3♣

[Echognome]

3♣. We can hardly have a higher ODR. The only defensive card we have is the ♦Q. The two small doubletons in the majors rate to be poor assets on defense.

[mike777]

whereagles, on Feb 14 2007, 02:19 PM, said:

I'm bidding 2♣ + 3♣. Pard prolly has the 15-17 hand and might get happy if I bid a straight 3♣. I'm not afraid them bidding 3♠ because that will probably go down.

ditto.

[mikeh]

If we don't bid 3♣, when do we???? If partner has the 15-17, we are still almost certainly wanting to play 3♣, and when he doesn't, he has shape and let's let him in on our general hand type so that he can make the save-no save decision himself (it would help if we had agreements that allowed him, if there is room, to suggest a save, which we would decline due to our lack of stiffs/voids).

Bidding 2♣ will always fool partner: if we follow with 3♣, are we not sounding like a player with an 8 count or so, perhaps xx Kx Qxxx QJxxx? Isn't 2♣ the call that will get him to overbid the 15-17 or to misread our combined defensive prospects?

[whereagles]

mikeh, on Feb 14 2007, 10:03 PM, said:

If we don't bid 3♣, when do we????

Maybe when the hand is..?

x
xxx
Qxxx
QJTxx

[gwnn]

they shan't be left alone in exploring spade possibilities.

3♣

[mikeh]

whereagles, on Feb 14 2007, 05:11 PM, said:

mikeh, on Feb 14 2007, 10:03 PM, said:

If we don't bid 3♣, when do we????

Maybe when the hand is..?

x
xxx
Qxxx
QJTxx

then you are going to be waiting a long, long time before troubling the opps with preemptive raise. Not to mention the harm done to partner's image of the hand should you bid a (misleading) 2♣... whether or not you intend to bid again: see my earlier post.

[BebopKid]

3♣ and don't bid again.

[inquiry]

3♣

[cherdano]

whereagles, on Feb 14 2007, 01:19 PM, said:

I'm bidding 2♣ + 3♣. Pard prolly has the 15-17 hand and might get happy if I bid a straight 3♣. I'm not afraid them bidding 3♠ because that will probably go down.

If you are playing weak NT, then IMO you should have clear agreements which bids are constructive, possibly game-interested opposite the strong NT hand.

If you have the agreement 3♣=preemptive, 0-8, then clearly the agreement must be that partner is not allowed to bid again with a strong NT.

Arend

[whereagles]

mikeh, on Feb 14 2007, 11:09 PM, said:

whether or not you intend to bid again: see my earlier post.

Seems like we have different ideas as to what 2♣ + 3♣ shows. Guess that explains our different opinions.

[whereagles]

cherdano, on Feb 14 2007, 11:56 PM, said:

If you have the agreement 3♣=preemptive, 0-8, then clearly the agreement must be that partner is not allowed to bid again with a strong NT.

I firmily believe it is a strategic ERROR to bar a strong hand from bidding after 3♣. I surely want pard to bid 3NT over 3♣ with

AQxx
JTx
Ax
AKxx

[pclayton]

Echognome, on Feb 14 2007, 12:24 PM, said:

3♣. We can hardly have a higher ODR. The only defensive card we have is the ♦Q. The two small doubletons in the majors rate to be poor assets on defense.

Quacks and doubletons represent a low ODR.

[pclayton]

We are sort of fixed by a 12-14 NT on this hand. I bid 3♣ like most of you.

Pard held: ♠QJxx, ♥Jxx, ♦AKJ, ♣Axx. RHO holds a 5332, and won't come in over a strong NT. No one balanced with the 2=5=3=3 on my left either.

Making 2♠ would have been a challenge. They need to double hook I think.

At all other tables, our side played 1N, usually making 8 tricks since diamonds are 3-3 and the ♣K is onside.

I guess this is pretty unlucky, but at the time I rued my 3♣ call. I was thinking that pard is either a 15-17 or unbalanced with 5♣. With the latter, pard will compete himself, and with the former we can decide to compete or not.

I still like 3♣

[mikeh]

whereagles, on Feb 14 2007, 07:16 PM, said:

cherdano, on Feb 14 2007, 11:56 PM, said:

If you have the agreement 3♣=preemptive, 0-8, then clearly the agreement must be that partner is not allowed to bid again with a strong NT.

I firmily believe it is a strategic ERROR to bar a strong hand from bidding after 3♣. I surely want pard to bid 3NT over 3♣ with

AQxx
JTx
Ax
AKxx

Your point is??? You post an prime, control laden 18 point hand in reply to a comment about 15-17 point hands????

[Echognome]

pclayton, on Feb 14 2007, 06:22 PM, said:

Echognome, on Feb 14 2007, 12:24 PM, said:

3♣.  We can hardly have a higher ODR.  The only defensive card we have is the ♦Q.  The two small doubletons in the majors rate to be poor assets on defense.

Quacks and doubletons represent a low ODR.

QJTxx in partner's suit... I expect to take several tricks on offense (including using my small doubletons as ruffing power). I expect to take 0 tricks on defense.

Unless opponents play in diamonds my small doubletons do not rate to take any tricks on defense.

My ♦Q might take a trick or be worth a trick combined with partner's holding.

GIVEN THE AUCTION, I rate my hand to be much more offensive than defensive.

Perhaps that clarifies it?

[whereagles]

mikeh, on Feb 15 2007, 03:49 AM, said:

Your point is??? You post an prime, control laden 18 point hand in reply to a comment about 15-17 point hands????

Hum.. well, since bidding over a weak 3♣ with the bal 15-17 clearly borders on over-exuberancy, I thought cherdano was mentioning the 18-19 hand