[sathyab]

I think overcalling 2s with that hand is understating its defensive potential grossly. You'd overcall 2s with KQTxxx xx Jxx xx, wouldn't you ? Between that hand and AQT632 Tx Axxx x there's a huge difference. Yes, partner has passed, so chances of game are remote, but it being MP, partner may still have a role in deciding what to do if a part-score battle ensues. Say he had xx Axxxx x Kxxxx and opponents competed to 3d, he'd have a tough time bidding 3s with this hand.

As for the choices between 3d and 3s, given that you have shortness in suits where partner is likley to have values, his tricks better be quick or it'll be tough to make use of them in offense. To put it another way, most hands that allow 3s to make would also beat 3d. But there're some hands where 3s will play for 8 tricks where there's no defense against 3d. If that's the reason why the 3s voters chose 3s, I'd agree with you. But if you chose 3s expecting it to make, I'd disagree.

Anyway here's the hand. The Godess of Bridge had a cruel sense of humor when she dealt you this one.

Scoring: MP

---

All those who doubled and led a club, better defend this carefully to hold it to 9 tricks. Declarer wins the first trick in his hand as he tops your partner's Q and leads a trump and another. If you win the second trump, you better guess well to lead a spade and get your club ruff or you'll concede 870

Your LHO was forced to underbid his hand with a 2d bid, over which partner climbed in with a questionable 2h bid. If he passes instead, you can compete to 2s, over which most likely LHO will X showing a maximum for his bid and they will reach 3c or 3d which you defend quietly. And if you led a passive heart vs 3m, declarer has to play it carefully for his contract.

If you bid 3s, your LHO's X card and the 4 of spades will probably hit the table simultaneously.

BTW, if your partner had xx Axxxx x Kxxxx, a trump lead would make 3s quite tough while beating 3d should be reasonably easy whenever either of the black kings is well placed.

[jdonn]

sathyab, on Apr 18 2007, 01:34 PM, said:

Your LHO was forced to underbid his hand with a 2d bid, over which partner climbed in with a questionable 2h bid.

Lol, I think the bidders and doublers alike will agree never to play with this partner again. Using the word "questionable" is the underbid of the year. Suicidal, pointless, idiotic, and non-bridge-like come closer to the mark.

[pclayton]

Sathya: I strongly object to the 2♥ call and think a responsive double is a much better call. The result is not suprising after this aberration.

[skjaeran]

jdonn, on Apr 18 2007, 12:16 AM, said:

skaeran, on Apr 17 2007, 04:19 PM, said:

I'd be very surprised if partner didn't have good support here. No weak 2♥, no responsive double, etc. So 2♥ should be a fnj.

Sigh, I can't take this discussion again!!!

Suffice to say that if it promised a fit in the given partnership, the problem wouldn't be here.

Come off it Josh!
The post said nothing whatsoever about 2-level openings or other agreements.
Anyway, one has to reason logically to infer what partner might have, lacking agreements. At least a couple of logical alternatives are presented by posters. If you don't like such discussions, why not just skip the thread?

[sathyab]

pclayton, on Apr 18 2007, 01:41 PM, said:

Sathya: I strongly object to the 2♥ call and think a responsive double is a much better call. The result is not suprising after this aberration.

I wonder if it's the 2h call or making any bid with that hand that leads to this aberration. It's true that over his double, you'd bid 2s and opponents would probably reach 3m, but I find that somewhat incidental, the auction would have gotten ugly in some other way on a different lay-out.

What do you lose by passing with that hand ? Partner will almost certainly reopen with a semblance of a decent overcall with either X or 2s. Over the X you can bid 2s, or his 2s bid gets X'ed, you can XX it to show an honor. I know it's tough to anticipate all these developments when you're faced with the choice of passing or making a bid with those 13 cards, but is that fundamental choice so hard ?

[Edmunte1]

2♥ is a bad joke

[pclayton]

sathyab, on Apr 18 2007, 11:13 AM, said:

pclayton, on Apr 18 2007, 01:41 PM, said:

Sathya: I strongly object to the 2♥ call and think a responsive double is a much better call. The result is not suprising after this aberration.

I wonder if it's the 2h call or making any bid with that hand that leads to this aberration. It's true that over his double, you'd bid 2s and opponents would probably reach 3m, but I find that somewhat incidental, the auction would have gotten ugly in some other way on a different lay-out.

What do you lose by passing with that hand ? Partner will almost certainly reopen with a semblance of a decent overcall with either X or 2s. Over the X you can bid 2s, or his 2s bid gets X'ed, you can XX it to show an honor. I know it's tough to anticipate all these developments when you're faced with the choice of passing or making a bid with those 13 cards, but is that fundamental choice so hard ?

Well, you imply that double doesn't get you into trouble, so its hard to fault it. I don't see how it can lead to a poor result on other layouts too.

The problem with passing is that pard is marked with diamond length, which makes it tough to reopen.

[whereagles]

2♥ is lolish but that's pretty normal with a pickup pd

[the hog]

I echo the comments of the other posters. 2H was ridiculous.

[sathyab]

pclayton, on Apr 18 2007, 03:11 PM, said:

pclayton, on Apr 18 2007, 01:41 PM, said:

Sathya: I strongly object to the 2♥ call and think a responsive double is a much better call. The result is not suprising after this aberration.

The problem with passing is that pard is marked with diamond length, which makes it tough to reopen.

Opponents finding a fit and stopping at a low-level part score when you have length in their suit are the easiest conditions for balancing. On this hand partner knows that you're short in Diamonds and that you don't have more than a doubleton spade given your failure to raise. Futher he knows you didn't start with a weak 2h, so it looks like the auction tells him a lot about your hand even if you pass.

Several posters found the 2h bid pointless. I find the double misleading as well, in a different way, in that if the auction gets competitive at the 3-level, I'll remember that partner did bid when he could have passed and take some action that will turn out to be inappropriate. The 2d bid by LHO was way too strong, as there was no reasonable alternative, so if you double with those light cards, partner is likely to misplace some of the missing strength in your hand.

[the hog]

I agree that I would pass with your partner's hand rather than X or bid the ridiculous 2H. If on the other hand your partner held xx Axxxx x Kxxxx, he would X and not bid 2H. Why bid this empty H suit?

You also seem to ignore the comment made by a number of posters that the 2H bid here shows S support in a fnj. For many of us this would clearly be the case. The bidding is not logical otherwise.

[Halo]

I have read the discussion of the actual hand with interest.

I would say North bids 2♠ on that hand 100% of the time. Double, no thank you, 2♥ - looking at my watch for the end of the evening already.

[jdonn]

Ugh, another of my least favorite bids. The raise on the doubleton.

I can't understand this desire to find a bid on that pitiful north hand. The best thing you can say about double is it's not 2♥. Phil wondered how double could lead to a poor result. Well if the next player bid 3♦ and I had the original problem hand, I'd sure as heck double that. It's not hard to imagine how bidding with a pile of garbage can lead to a bad result.

[Winstonm]

Quote

I can't understand this desire to find a bid on that pitiful north hand.

Obviously, the point is to endplay partner into an impossible bidding decision.

[Fluffy]

Winstonm, on Apr 19 2007, 02:59 AM, said:

Quote

I can't understand this desire to find a bid on that pitiful north hand.

Obviously, the point is to endplay partner into an impossible bidding decision.

Wow, he is very good!, is it the reason why he is selfrated an expert?