[han]

From now on we'll follow Harald's example and refer to you as "the elder". Is that ok with you Mike?

[jdonn]

We should have a thread where we give everyone nicknames. I shudder to think what would be assigned to me. I already suggested Big Dog for Justin. "The Elder" sounds good for Mike, but it's important to include the "the".

[mikeh]

Hannie, on Sep 30 2007, 02:23 PM, said:

From now on we'll follow Harald's example and refer to you as "the elder". Is that ok with you Mike?

I would have given that name to Roland

[kenrexford]

I think this is a clear 3DNT rebid. The only other plausible option is 3NTD.

[Fluffy]

I think 3NT is fully obvious, I wonder what people expect for a 3NT rebid if its not that.

[mikeh]

Fluffy, on Sep 30 2007, 02:53 PM, said:

I think 3NT is fully obvious, I wonder what people expect for a 3NT rebid if its not that.

a club stopper.

Ask this: with x Axx AKQxxxx Kx, what is your rebid over a 1♠ response to 1♦.

Then ask how partner is supposed to know to run to 4♦ with AQxxx Kxx xxx xx and not with AQxxx xx xxx Kxx?

[whereagles]

I must always disagree with mikeh so I agree with 3NT.

[jdonn]

mikeh, on Sep 30 2007, 03:01 PM, said:

Then ask how partner is supposed to know to run to 4♦ with AQxxx Kxx xxx xx and not with AQxxx xx xxx Kxx?

He doesn't. Same as when you open 1NT and he holds xx xxx Kxx AQxxx vs. Kxx xxx xx AQxxx.

Why should he want to run on the first hand anyway. He wouldn't want to run minus the king either. The leader is always leading a club from AQxx after the 3NT rebid, as opposed to say a heart from KJxx?

[mikeh]

Jlall, on Sep 30 2007, 03:55 PM, said:

Mike you realize that your style of 3N bids is very exploitable then (as they should ALWAYS lead a spade) I suppose. One time against someone who knows your game well you should rebid 3N with AQ xx AKQJxxx xx and not be surprised to see the SK lead

Well, I guess my habit of always holding 5-10 hcp and 5-6 cards in spades when I open a weak 2♠ makes my bidding style exploitable. Heck, I have been known to telegraph shortness with a good hand and a fit by using splinter bids. And my 1N bids are apallingly easy to decipher.... 15-17 balanced!

I will stop making normal, descriptive bids when I stop viewing the game as a partnership game... last time I checked, partner was permitted to know what 3N meant... not just the opps. Besides which, last time I checked, I don't actually deny a spade card by 3N. If I held Qx Ax AKQxxxx Kx, I'd still bid 3N. So go ahead and make your brilliant leads against me 3N denies a fit, promises round suit stoppers and a running suit. It doesn't promise a stiff small spade. If the opps want to blow a tempo by leading spades, I welcome them I don't always have 9 tricks in my own hand.

I remain bewildered for the support for a call that is virtually assured to get us to the wrong spot almost anytime the choice is relevant.

Don't we think that partner will usually move over 3♦ when we make game? Don't we think that maybe the hand with Kx in clubs should be on play? etc.

[jdonn]

mikeh, on Sep 30 2007, 04:08 PM, said:

Don't we think that partner will usually move over 3♦ when we make game?

No. Not even close to usually. My feeling is that of the times 3♦ would have been passed, 3NT is cold 30% and will make when it could be beaten double dummy 40%. So I guess that is where the disagreement arises, oh well.

Edit: I mean to say will make when it could be beaten 40% of the times that it could be beaten, not 40% of all hands. So I guess I'm saying 30% + (100-30)*.4 = 58%, but eh it's just an estimate anyway.

[jtfanclub]

jdonn, on Sep 30 2007, 05:24 PM, said:

mikeh, on Sep 30 2007, 04:08 PM, said:

Don't we think that partner will usually move over 3♦ when we make game?

No. Not even close to usually. My feeling is that of the times 3♦ would have been passed, 3NT is cold 30% and will make when it could be beaten double dummy 40%. So I guess that is where the disagreement arises, oh well.

Edit: I mean to say will make when it could be beaten 40% of the times that it could be beaten, not 40% of all hands. So I guess I'm saying 30% + (100-30)*.4 = 58%, but eh it's just an estimate anyway.

Well, that completely cleared it up.

I don't understand why people playing SAYC pass 3♦ so much. To me, a 3♦ bid shows a hand as strong offensively as a 2NT rebid, or even stronger. And yet...

My feeling is that I don't have a single suit where it's important that the lead go around to me instead of through me. Furthermore, if they lead an ace to take a look at dummy, it'll be a lot easier for them to misplay if they can see my hand instead of my partner's. So I bid 3♦ and hope he says 3NT.

But it's not a strength thing...

x
QTx
AKQJT98
Qx

Now I'd bid 3NT.

[Fluffy]

partner will undervalue his diamond holding after 3♦ whatever he's got.

[pclayton]

mikeh, on Sep 30 2007, 11:39 AM, said:

Hannie, on Sep 30 2007, 02:23 PM, said:

From now on we'll follow Harald's example and refer to you as "the elder". Is that ok with you Mike? 

I would have given that name to Roland

Roland has already labeled Richie Reisig with that.

3N from the middle-aged guy.

[gwnn]

Mike, how will pard know to bid 3NT over our 3♦ rebid with ♣Jxx and nothing else outside?

[skjaeran]

gwnn, on Oct 1 2007, 10:45 PM, said:

Mike, how will pard know to bid 3NT over our 3♦ rebid with ♣Jxx and nothing else outside?

Jxx isn't much of a stopper vs our xx, if you're referring to the OP hand.

[neilkaz]

3NT shows a hand that expects to make 3NT based on a running minor and hopes for stopping the other 3 suits. It is a gamble here, with ♣ unstopped, but perhaps the wrong suit is lead or perhaps PD can stop ♣.

The pull to 4♥ is not good, and is likely based on thinking that 3NT shows lots of HCP rather than the running minor with at least one side stopper (ie too good for a normal gambling 3NT opening)

.. neilkaz ..

[gwnn]

skaeran, on Oct 2 2007, 08:11 PM, said:

gwnn, on Oct 1 2007, 10:45 PM, said:

Mike, how will pard know to bid 3NT over our 3♦ rebid with ♣Jxx and nothing else outside?

Jxx isn't much of a stopper vs our xx, if you're referring to the OP hand.

i need glasses, oops.

[jonottawa]

4 Hearts is sick.

3NT is pushy, but let him play it there and go minus before he has to apologize for anything.

[helene_t]

matmat, on Sep 30 2007, 12:51 PM, said:

3n is reasonable. shows a solidish minor and stopper in the unbid suits. in this case clubs are wide open, so not the best of choices, but still a reasonable gamble.

S is opener opposite an unpassed p, and p just made a 1-level shift.

S is not supposed to gamble, he's supposed to show his hand, so 3♦ it is.

N should probably pass 3N, especially if 4♥ shows slam interest, which I think it does. After all, the 3N bid shows a hand that can make 3N opposite most minimal responders, so there will rarely be a reason to correct to 4♥. 4♠ would probably be to play, though, maybe depending on the kind of jumpshifts played.