[geofspa]

Scoring: XIMP

1NT X 2♣ P
.P 3♥ AP

1NT = 15-17
X = penalty orientated (15+)
2♣ = 2 suited ♣ and another

---

Sitting South with this I passed partners 3♥ bid and he rattled off 10 tricks.

He afterwards said that I should have bid on to game!

He has bid strongly but should I bid with this garbage?

One of my favourite mentors does say that beginners/inters under bid weak hands and over bid strong hands.

[Apollo81]

double then jump in a new suit is generally a strong, forcing sequence

look at these similar sequences

1. (1♣)-Dbl-(pass)-1♦
(pass)-2♥

2. (1♣)-Dbl-(pass)-1♥
(pass)-3♥

#1 is forcing; you must bid
#2 is strongly invitational, but not forcing; you may pass with a hand like what you had

[jdonn]

I agree with bidding game, to me people are WAY to passive on these auctions. Support (and two doubletons!) may be all he needs.

[mikeh]

I agree, both with the notion of raising on the given hand and with the generality of B/I players tending (as a whole) to overbid good hands and underbid weak ones.

In terms of the raise, I would not play 3♥ as forcing: he could have bid 4♥ if he intended to force to game in that suit, and could have bid 3♣ with a more flexible gf hand.

But the 4 trump are huge, especially coupled with 2, count them, 2 ruffing values. Note that the almost assured ability to reach dummy via a ruff allows declarer to finesse the only other strong hand at the table. Plus the 4th trump will usually solidify a not-yet-solid trump suit... thus AKxxxx in partner's hand will now play (most of the time) as if it were AKQJxx.

As for the general tendency, I think it is because the most difficult part of valuation is to LISTEN to the auction. We all hear or see the auction, but the majority of players are not very good at drawing inferences from it and adjusting their view of the playing values of their hands accordingly.

So when we get a big hand, we tend not to listen to the signals that the big hand may not mesh well with a weak or misfitting dummy, while with a weak hand opposite a strongly bidding partner, we may not recognize the value of our meagre assets.

So, imagine partner had doubled and bid 3♠. We have exactly the same hand, but IN THE CONTEXT OF THE AUCTION, it is a hand of entirely different, and lesser, strength. Realizing the extent to which hands have to be revalued, up or down, during an auction is difficult but essential to becoming a good partner. All too often, non-experts bid as if they are individuals rather than part of a partnership.... in other words, they bid their cards as if their 13 cards were isolated from the rest of the pack until the play begins.

[bid_em_up]

Other than agreeing with what Mike has already said....

The only other issue would be, "Is your partner an expert or a beginner?"

If he is an expert, you should bid 4H. He has basically screamed, I probably have 9 tricks even if you do not have any hearts, do you see another one anywhere?" You have two possibilities of ruffing and unexpected trump support, so you should bid 4♥.

If he is intermediate or lower, however, I would not fault a pass. He has probably overbid his hand already.

[han]

I agree with bidding game, partner's 3H is not forcing but if you have anything that could be useful then you should bid game. Here you have 4-card trump support and possible ruffing value in two suits.

By the way, your mentor's quote is straight from "Why you lose at bridge" by Simon. It is one of the great bridge books of all time, you might enjoy it.

[HeartA]

Yes, should bid game.

[Winstonm]

A helpful thought may be to ask yourself in these situations "how much worse could my hand be?" Partner has invited game and for all he knows you hold a 3244 yarborough - your hand is much better than that with a bonus heart fit and third-round controls in 2 suits.

So if partner expects to be able to make 9 tricks when you have a very poor holding for him, surely your bonus hand must be worth 1 extra trick for him - a ruff he wasn't counting on perhaps or an entry in hearts for a finesse.