[jillybean]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     1♠    Pass  2♥
 Pass  3♦    Pass  3♠
 Pass  4♣    Pass  4♥
 5♣    5♦    Pass  5♠
 Pass  Pass  Pass  

This didnt look like an ideal hand for NT to me (♣KQ, ♦Qxxx) and to bid 4sf at the 4th level I thought took up too much room.

[Echognome]

Why did South not support diamonds? Seems a 4♦ call at South's second turn seems appropriate.

What is West smoking? I'll wait for the opponents to exchange information and then guess to come in at the 5-level after 3 rounds of bidding... 5♣ deserved to be punished.

If I had to pick the two bids I hated most it would have to be 5♦ (since that took West off the hook when he should have been severely punished) and 3♠ (for not supporting diamonds).

[mikeh]

This is a truly tough hand, hitting the seams in most standard-type methods.

1♠ 2♥

You don't say if this is 2/1GF or standard: I will assume standard.

Either way, 2♥ is clear.

3♦: a real issue.

In standard, 3♦ shows extras: we have seen a lot of discussion about this in this forum, and not everyone agrees, but I will go out on a limb and say that the great bulk of the stronger players, amongst the posters, agree that it shows extras. The technical name for the bid is 'high-level reverse'. (BTW, many and maybe most expert 2/1 players also require extra values, altho there are some fine players who do not... and players who use a big club frequently do not require much extra, beyond shape, because they are limited in hcp by not opening 1♣)

In standard, it is a game force... and bear in mind that, in standard, the 2♥ bid only promised 5+♥s, 10+ hcp and a hand that will not be embarrassed to take another bid (it promises a rebid in SA). So the question is whether the North hand is strong enough to bid 3♦.

Make it KQ10xx x AKJxx Jx and I'd have no problem saying NO! But the partial fit for ♥s and the texture of the two suits (including the 5th ♦) argue Yes!

It is close, and tough not to let the reality of the two hands influence me, but I think that I would vote for 3♦, while not criticizing 2♠ very severely.

Now, S has a tough bid .S should expect a good hand from partner, and has Ax Qxxx in partner's suits.

But that KQ is an ugly, ugly holding.. because it suggests that partner can't bid 3N and, if partner can, it may be because of a holding of Ax or AJ tight... so, on all views of the hand, the KQ have to be devalued.. and that ♥ suit is a menace.

I personally like 3♠ here: it is ambiguous, so partner shouldn't go nuts in ♠s and Ax (opposite a high-level reverse) is adequate support.

Now for North: 4♣ is HORRIBLE!

North has a minimum hand for the auction to date. This is a factor many improving players forget: they get a good(ish) hand and bid it like crazy.... repeating the 'good news', which should actually describe a good hand that is getting better or hasn't finished telling the story yet. Having SAID 'I hold extra values', opener now holds a minimum for the auction so far and should NOT make slam moves.

My advice: clarify the 5-5 hand and bid 4♦.

Now S has a good hand in terms of hcp but a horrible hand in terms of controls, so has a relatively easy 5♦ bid. Altho I wouldn't criticize 4♠ either.

I don't mind cue-bidding 2nd round controls, but only start the cue-bidding when you have interest beyond what you have shown (or where it cannot hurt). Cue-ing 4♣ said: I told you I have a good hand, but it's better than that: let's go slamming, if you're interested. North should be saying: I told you I had a good hand: it's because I'm 5-5, and I'm not exactly strong for my bidding so far.

[mike777]

I am one those nonexpert players who plays 3d does not promise extra's. In any case I bid 4D not 3s in any style.
The rest of the bidding seems well insane

[jdonn]

jillybean2, on Jun 15 2007, 05:51 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     1♠    Pass  2♥
 Pass  3♦    Pass  3♠
 Pass  4♣    Pass  4♥
 5♣    5♦    Pass  5♠
 Pass  Pass  Pass  

This didnt look like an ideal hand for NT to me (♣KQ, ♦Qxxx) and to bid 4sf at the 4th level I thought took up too much room.

3♠ should have been 4♦
4♣ should have been 4♦
4♥ should have been 4♦ (I'm on a roll now)
5♦ should have been pass, letting south lay the shmack down
5♠, well I have no idea by that point but I'm sure I would pass having made this many misbids and finally being in our only sure fit.

[foo]

Nice post mikeh

Particularly if you are playing a system where a 2/1 is not GF, it is very important that Opener have extras to cross 2N. Otherwise, a minimal Responder for this sequence gets "hung by CHO".

W/o a fit, N can not justify upgrading their hand beyond the working HCP in it.
That means that N does not have extras. They have a minimum and should bid it accordingly. W/o a stop in ♣'s, that means N has to rebid their suit as the minimum showing bid.

[jillybean]

It was ugly

I don't play 2/1 so 2♥ was standard not GF. I was not happy choosing a bid over 3♦ and made the wrong choice, minor games hold little appeal.

Most souths bid 3nt on their 2nd turn and made 3N+2,3. A few bid 5♦ -1
Noone here is suggesting south bid 3nt, what are the flaws for nt?

[whereagles]

Agree that 3♦ should show extras. But I belive this hand has extras, in terms of shape, so I'd bid that too.

I don't like 3♠ without a fit. I would bid either 3NT or 4♦, but probably 4♦. Now it should be simple to stop in 5♦. Not optimal, but playable at least.

[inquiry]

I think this hand would be a lot easier to bid at matchpoints than at imps.

At matchpoints, if the bidding starts

1S - 2H
3D -

You could bid 3NT as responder and hope for the best, 3NT after all is usually a reasonable alternative at matchpoints. Since this is imps, once partner bids 3D, it is more difficult to get to 3NT, for one thing 6D is in the picture, for another 5D is not a horrible contract on hands if it and 3/4 NT is also making.

For the bidding, I would not make a high reverse with opener's hand -- unless i was playing a limited opening system like precision. So I recommend something like

1S - 2H
2S - 3NT

Where 3NT shows something like a balanced hand with 5♥, no more than 2♠, and 12-14 hcp. Alternatively, responder can rebid 2NT to find out more about openers hand. When opener rebids 3♦ over 2NT, responder can try 3♠ showing a doubleton spade and interest in a club stopper, or shoot out 3NT confident that a club opening lead is coming.

AT imps, if the bidding starts with with an initial 3D rebid, this is my auction

1S - 2H
3D - 4D
5D - pass

Where 5D is a warning that 3D was absolute minimum -- otherwise there would be a cue-bid in here of something.

[neilkaz]

The first three bids are fine, but then the wheels fell off with South failing to support North's second suit and bidding as if she held 3 card ♠ support, and then N making what I think may be a Q bid in ♣ rather than rebidding ♦ to show 5-5.

To me, the opening hand is clearly worth a high reverse after a standard 2/1 repsonse. This type of high reverse is supposed to be GF (at least in my understanding of "standard") The K-R hand evaluator has opener's hand worth 18.7 pt ! http://www.gg.caltech.edu/~jeff/knr.cgi?ha...QT9x+J8+AKJT8+x and clearly there is fine potential with two strong 5 card suits.

I have no idea what South was thinking on his/her second turn by failing to support ♦ or taking a shot at 3NT. Either action is far superior to the delayed raise of ♠ with only 2 card support which (OK I see the ace) may commit the hand to a 5-2 fit in ♠ unnecessarily.

I guess N felt ♠ were trump and was bidding 4♣ as a cue showing 1st or 2nd round control ? I think that is being rather optimistic and prefer 4♦ stressing my distribution and highlighting my wonderful ♦ suit. After 4♣ I think S should end the auction with 4♠ or 5♦ rather than continuing his missbid follies.

West's 5♣ is such a bad bid that I cannot find words to describe it !! But North's awful 5♦ bid takes west off the hook. North and South must realize that this is their hand, and with the clear balance of strength they have a forcing pass situation after the opp's 5♣ intervention ! So North should pass and allow South a chance to whack 5♣ or to carry onward.

After 5♦, I have no clue why S again prefers a 5-2 ♠ to a 4-4 or even 5-4 ♦ fit at the 5 level ? Also 5♠ could result in N (who expects nice 3 card support) carrying onto to 6♠x. Also I'd expect 5♦ to be a clear fav to make.

40% of the blame to N here and 60% to S who really needs to learn to support PD's 2nd suit in GF auctions !

.. neilkaz ..

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

#1 2S instead of 3D, the North hand
is to weak for 3D
3D shows, that North does not believe
he will get another chance to bid again,
I have a looked at the hand a 2nd time,
and I was considering to change my suggestion,
i.e. 3D is reasonable, but I prefer 2S

#2 If you dont like NT, why not show support,
i.e. bid 4D, 3S should deny primary support
for diamonds and also deny a club stopper

#3 why bid 5S over 5D, you know you have a 4-4
fit in diamonds, but only a 5-2 fit in spades

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean2, on Jun 16 2007, 01:07 AM, said:

It was ugly

I don't play 2/1 so 2♥ was standard not GF. I was not happy choosing a bid over 3♦ and made the wrong choice, minor games hold little appeal.

Most souths bid 3nt on their 2nd turn and made 3N+2,3. A few bid 5♦ -1
Noone here is suggesting south bid 3nt, what are the flaws for nt?

Hi,

depending on the meaning of 3D,
you have enough to justify a move
towards 6D.
If you dont want to move towards 6D
than 3NT is certainly an option.
It boils down, what are the min. req.
for 3D.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[vuroth]

jillybean2, on Jun 16 2007, 01:07 AM, said:

I was not happy choosing a bid over 3♦ and made the wrong choice, minor games hold little appeal.

I find that, as a novice, getting lost or confused in the bidding can lead to my brain shutting down, as if for overload. I think it's important to keep thinking even when you know the bidding has gotten tough.

Whether you made the right choice over 3♦ or not, your choice over 5♦ was probably the one you should really be looking to learn from. Unless it was matchpoints, or the bidding doesn't mean what I think it means, the minor suit game held much more appeal than the major suit try after 5♦.

0.02

V

[jillybean]

vuroth, on Jun 17 2007, 04:58 PM, said:

Whether you made the right choice over 3♦ or not, your choice over 5♦ was probably the one you should really be looking to learn from.

My choice over 5♦ was simply continuing what I thought was cue bidding in a ♠ auction.

[cherdano]

I would take the 3♠ bid as setting trumps, so you can't do this with Ax. But as Mike thinks otherwise, this is obviously not universal.

[helene_t]

After 3♦, both players have shown all their values so neither should try for slam. In fact some would say that North is too weak for 3♦.

As North I would just sign off in 4♠. If North bids 4♣, South should sign off in 4♠. I North bids 4♦ it's a natural call (since spades may be only a 5-2 fit there may still be a better fit to be found) so South should bid 5♦.

I think I would bid 3N as South over 3♦. 4♦ second choice, or maybe 5♦ playing fast arival.

After 5♣, North should just pass, leavibng the decision of whether to double to South.