Fourth hand problem Evaluation and reevaluation
#1
Posted 2007-October-23, 11:27
Sitting fourth hand, I held: K863, 94, AQ762, Q7
After three passes (the opponents passed througout),
I opened 1D, partner responded 1S and it was my call.
After the hand, there were two strong opinions:
First, that a sub minimum opener should now pass versus
second, that this is no longer a sub minimum hand and should raise.
What do you think, and what should have guided me to a correct decision?
#2
Posted 2007-October-23, 11:41
As you can see, the right answer has little to do wit point-count or applying rules. It has to do with judgement.
#3
Posted 2007-October-23, 11:43
#4
Posted 2007-October-23, 12:02
Unless you are playing with Roth or Stone, game is unlikely at best.
#5
Posted 2007-October-23, 12:11
i am willing to bid upto 2♠ if they compete and if p decides to double them in their 3 level contract I'll likely sit.
#6
Posted 2007-October-23, 12:12
EITHER 4 spades
OR a non-minimum hand
#7
Posted 2007-October-23, 13:52
FrancesHinden, on Oct 23 2007, 08:12 PM, said:
EITHER 4 spades
OR a non-minimum hand
That's the point. Don't pass with four-card support, even with a minimum. I think most people play that pass shows a minimum and exactly three spades.
Two good reasons for raising with four-card support:
- 1. Even if you have a minimum, you could conceivably have a game on because responder's hand may be worth game, or at least a try, after the support.
- 2. If you pass, you make it too easy for LHO to balance.
Roland
#8
Posted 2007-October-23, 13:59
FrancesHinden, on Oct 23 2007, 01:12 PM, said:
EITHER 4 spades
OR a non-minimum hand
I've always played that 4333 is an exception- a minimum flat doesn't raise across a passed hand. I thought that was standard.
I take it that it isn't?
#9
Posted 2007-October-23, 22:52
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.
#10
Posted 2007-October-23, 23:21
I guess some of us open that hand, but most of us don't. Seems like an easy game across from the opening hand, and it's not unbelievable that opponents have failed to find their club fit (it takes a good hand to overcall at the two-level).
With one less spade and one more club in the opener's hand, you could still make game, but the odds are not nearly as good (you will virtually need both pointy suits 3-2 now).
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#11
Posted 2007-October-24, 00:10
hammberry, on Oct 23 2007, 12:27 PM, said:
Sitting fourth hand, I held: K863, 94, AQ762, Q7
After three passes (the opponents passed througout),
I opened 1D, partner responded 1S and it was my call.
After the hand, there were two strong opinions:
First, that a sub minimum opener should now pass versus
second, that this is no longer a sub minimum hand and should raise.
What do you think, and what should have guided me to a correct decision?
I may have missed some comments but.....the Op said..or seemed to say this is a sub minimum opener in fourth seat? Are we inventing some other system that OP is not playing?
I am lost why open a sub minimum opener in fourth seat?
I do not want to invent words but if this is a sub minimum.....I thought that means PASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
We never open the bidding in the first place??????????????
I do not want to invent words here but...did not OP use the phrase "sub"?
I repeat are we inventing some other system that OP is not playing?
#14
Posted 2007-October-24, 03:06
jtfanclub, on Oct 23 2007, 08:59 PM, said:
FrancesHinden, on Oct 23 2007, 01:12 PM, said:
EITHER 4 spades
OR a non-minimum hand
I've always played that 4333 is an exception- a minimum flat doesn't raise across a passed hand. I thought that was standard.
I take it that it isn't?
I imagine with a 4333 you look at your hand and use your judgement
#15
Posted 2007-October-24, 03:24
If normal: P just expects a minimum when you raise.
If sub-minimum: P could have a hand of similar strength in which case game prospects are good.
So in either case the conclusion seems to be: raise.
If still in doubt, Whereagles' point settles it.
#16
Posted 2007-October-24, 10:19
Harald
#17
Posted 2007-October-26, 18:45
♠AQxxx ♥T ♦Kx ♣J98xx
Partner (me in real life) played comfortably in 1 Spade (astonished
and sad that there was no balancing!)
#18
Posted 2007-October-26, 19:04
- hrothgar
#19
Posted 2007-October-26, 22:00
-P.J. Painter.
#20
Posted 2007-October-26, 22:02
kenrexford, on Oct 26 2007, 11:00 PM, said:
My experience is when you pass the opponents balance you up to 3 anyway almost all the time. You actually have a better chance of stopping in 2 by raising IMO.

Help
