[han]

A friend of mine sends out a monthly list of problems to some bridge players of varying strength. The panel could not agree on the following problem:

Scoring: IMP

---

(p) - p - (3C) - ??


(I deleted the email and forgot the vulnerability and form of scoring, please mention if those factors would influence your decision)

[ArtK78]

3♦ seems like the obvious choice. Good suit, good hand. If partner can bid 3♥ I can raise. If partner can bid 3♠ I will be endplayed into 3NT.

I don't double because partner might bid 4♠.

Pass is my second choice, but I think my hand is good enough to bid 3♦.

The fact that partner is a passed hand should make you be cautious, but the diamond suit is good enough to bid. The chance of going for a number is very small.

This could be a double part score swing type of hand. But the main reason for bidding is to get to game (even opposite a passed hand).

[Echognome]

3♦ seems obvious to me as well. Double is not an option. And the only other calls worth mentioning are pass (I think we're too good) or 3NT (which I think is a wild shot in the dark).

[mikeh]

The vulnerability and form of scoring makes a huge difference to me.

Say they were red ... passing becomes very much more attractive, even if we factor in the likelihood of RHO holding AQJ9xxx of clubs.

If partner has the spade A, we have an excellent chance of 200 or more (2 diamonds, 1♠, a ruff and a natural trump trick and we still have the ♥K and partner rates to hold more than the spade A and out.

If they are white, then passing aims for a narrow target: essentially we are hoping that NS cannot go plus declaring, and that doesn't seem right.

So at mps, if they are red, I pass. If they are white I bid 3♦.

Imps brings in more factors yet. Bidding to score +110 or +130 makes little sense since we rate to go plus on defence even if partner lacks the spade A.. after all, I am getting on lead again while still with a small trump (or 2). If they are red, we may well win imps on defence even if we can make 130. If they are white, then we may give away a couple of imps, but we still win if both sides fail.

But of course, bidding wins big at imps if we can bid and make a game. If our long suit were a major, it would be a no-brainer.. we'd bid our long suit.

Is this hand good enough when the suit is diamonds? My gut says 'probably'

I then did a quick and dirty simulation, which I won't pretend had great constraints, but the results showed that it was a toss-up whether overcalling generated more good results than passing. What it did show was that overcalling, when right, was much better than passing when passing was right... overcalling got to more making games than it got to failing contracts, and the game bonus is king (on hands like these where the risk of a penalty double is relatively low) at imps. My gut, for a change, seems to have it right, at least based on a possibly flawed and certainly small-sample simulation.

So I think: pass at mps, clearer when the opps are red than when they are not, and bid 3♦ at imps, clearer when we are red than when they are not.

[Codo]

Mike convinced me to change my little preference to pass to a preference to 3 Diamond, accept that this will seldom be the contracgt we will play. I believe that we will very often play 3 NT (Needs lot of luck or 4 Heart, which is great.)

[skjaeran]

I'd bid 3♦ at any vulnerability and scoring.

[kenrexford]

It doesn't change my opinion of the correct call (3♦), but I just would note that there is a HUGE difference between P-P-3♣-? and P-3♣-? If you are timid in the latter situation, I understand that somewhat. But, partner's second-seat pass might be heavier than usual, and the 3♣ call might be utter garbage.

[Fluffy]

I'd pass with my regular partner, but 3♦ with anyone else.

[whereagles]

This depends a bit on pard and system opening style. If a moderate 11-count is possible for pard to have, then 3♦. If pard tends to open on any excuse, pass is probably better.

[Foxx]

3♦, calmly and quietly. Yes, a game is less likely than if partner were an unpassed hand, but a modest North hand of ♠A109xx ♥Q10x ♦Qxx ♣Jx makes 3NT a serious favorite, which we would never reach after an introverted pass. I don't think I would pass in any situation. In particular, LHO's initial pass makes it highly unlikely that he has a button to push.

[Halo]

3D. I have to bid this hand because I don't often pick up better ones.

[MickyB]

I'm a passer. I expect a passed partner to reopen aggressively with shortness, if he can't we won't usually be missing anything.

[joshs]

I am a passer. I think its clear in my light opening bid partnerships, and closer in my more standard partnerships....

[cherdano]

kenrexford, on Sep 6 2007, 12:43 PM, said:

It doesn't change my opinion of the correct call (3♦), but I just would note that there is a HUGE difference between P-P-3♣-? and P-3♣-? If you are timid in the latter situation, I understand that somewhat. But, partner's second-seat pass might be heavier than usual, and the 3♣ call might be utter garbage.

I disagree. Except for preempts, I open exactly the same hands in 1st or 2nd seat, and I think this is standard. Yes 3rd seat 3C could be utter garbage but it could also be an opening hand, the average strength doesn't change much.

The only difference is that on the latter auction LHO is unpassed which makes a difference (I am unlikely to get doubled on the first auction but that is not my main worry with this hand anyway) but not a huge one, and it is a far cry from a HUGE difference.