[jdonn]

R/W, imps, RHO deals

xx Axxx xx QTxxx

1♦ - P - 1NT - 2♠
3♦ - P - P - DBL
P - ???

3♥? 3♠? 4♣? 4♦? something even higher?

[Fluffy]

given hand has 14 cards. So my call woud be to call director.

[jdonn]

Edited: Meant to be 2425.

[pclayton]

If 4♦ is a Choice of Games Cue, thats my call. Otherwise a tentative 4♥.

[mikeh]

Interesting hand. I think that it is unlikely that partner has 4♥s, unless he has 6♠s, and even then it isn't clear that he'd chance a double, unprepared for clubs (I suppose he could be 6=4=0=3).

I think he is most commonly going to be 6=3=1=3, and I expect that the 3-3 heart break is far more likely than a priori percentages suggest... I'd place the chances of such a break at around 60-70%.

But I am going to have problems with entries to my hand to draw trump in hearts, after dummy gets tapped, and if he has weakish hearts, maybe he can pitch his heart losers on my clubs: picture AKxxxx Kxx x Axx... with the club King onside, and spades 3-2, he avoids the heart loser playing in spades. While in hearts, even with a 3-3 break, I have handling problems.

So I opt for 4♠. No guarantees.. he doesn't need the hand I gave him, not to mention that even opposite that hand, clubs may sit foul... but he could have an even better hand (imagine AKxxxx Kxx x AJx), so I can hardly not bid game at imps, red.

[ArtK78]

Why does everyone assume that this hand, with an Ace and a Queen, is going to produce a game?

Partner's first bid was a nonforcing 2♠ overcall. You certainly did not envision game when he overcalled 2♠.

Now the opps have settled in 3♦ and partner balances with a double. So you are going to hang partner for assuming that you had some values?

Yes, this is IMPs, and yes, you are red against white. Still, a double part score swing is 6 IMPs. Nothing to be ignored. Partner should have a good hand with diamond shortness - 6313 is certainly a possibility, but I would not rule out 5413 or 6412.

A simple 3♠ bid is certainly sufficient on this auction. Second choice - 3♥ (partner did not deny holding 4 hearts when he overcalled 2♠).

[mikeh]

ArtK78, on Dec 4 2007, 12:44 PM, said:

Why does everyone assume that this hand, with an Ace and a Queen, is going to produce a game?

Partner's first bid was a nonforcing 2♠ overcall.  You certainly did not envision game when he overcalled 2♠.

Now the opps have settled in 3♦ and partner balances with a double.  So you are going to hang partner for assuming that you had some values?

Yes, this is IMPs, and yes, you are red against white.  Still, a double part score swing is 6 IMPs.  Nothing to be ignored.  Partner should have a good hand with diamond shortness - 6313 is certainly a possibility, but I would not rule out 5413 or 6412.

A simple 3♠ bid is certainly sufficient on this auction.  Second choice - 3♥ (partner did not deny holding 4 hearts when he overcalled 2♠).

Of course I did not envision game when he bid 2♠, but I did envision that we might make 170 if it went all pass. The point is that 2♠ is wide range... I want my partners bidding it on 6 chunky spades and a side card, since I might well be passing 1♦ with a scattered 10-11 count and shortish spades, and be cold for game.. not to mention preempting, getting me to a good lead, etc.

Passing over 3♦ (and over 2♠ had rho passed) would be the percentage action because partner was so wide range.

Now, however, partner has indicated a GOOD hand in context. Thus the odds of the 170 I envisioned as a possibility when he bid 2♠ have significantly increased: not to the point of being more likely than not, but certainly (in my view) to the point of being close to even.

As for 5413, if he held that hand with a mere opener, he should double 1N, not bid 2♠ and then hope to back into hearts later. And if he has a GOOD hand with 5413, again, he should usually double and then decide to raise hearts, if I bid the suit, or introduce spades if feasible. Neither life nor bridge is perfect, but I think bidding game here is reasonable.... and I am a notoriously conservative bidder

[keylime]

Good bidding problem.

Red at IMPs - a major tease here and I do have some empathy for the 3M crowd, but pard has doubled back into this auction, and an Ace and a five card suit are upgrades. I'll bid 4♠ - the 4-3 heart fit potential is a brute and want to get it into our "known" fit.

[jdonn]

To 4♠ bidders, why that over 4♦? Won't partner choose spades anyway with 6-3?

[Halo]

3H

I imagine I've got no more than partner is hoping for.

Did it mean anything that partner didn't bid 2D? Would that show 54 majors? So he is now 64?

Is partner permitted to cater for me passing with his double if I have diamonds and the 1NT oppo has some of my clubs?

Anyway, I seem to have a 3H bid followed by pass over 3S.

[FrancesHinden]

I also think that, red at imps, we are just worth game (we weren't far off a 3S bid over 3D). But I agree that 4D is best.

Yes, partner is not so likely to be 5413. But he might be 5314, and where do you want to play opposite AKJxx QJx x Axxx? (actually the answer to that is probably 4C, but 5C is hardly playless).

I don't fully agree with mikeh about the prospects of making game being 50-50, but with the upside of getting to the right strain, I think we are worth 4D.

[pclayton]

ArtK78, on Dec 4 2007, 09:44 AM, said:

Why does everyone assume that this hand, with an Ace and a Queen, is going to produce a game?

Partner's first bid was a nonforcing 2♠ overcall. You certainly did not envision game when he overcalled 2♠.

Now the opps have settled in 3♦ and partner balances with a double. So you are going to hang partner for assuming that you had some values?

Yes, this is IMPs, and yes, you are red against white. Still, a double part score swing is 6 IMPs. Nothing to be ignored. Partner should have a good hand with diamond shortness - 6313 is certainly a possibility, but I would not rule out 5413 or 6412.

A simple 3♠ bid is certainly sufficient on this auction. Second choice - 3♥ (partner did not deny holding 4 hearts when he overcalled 2♠).

We have two huge cards and a double / triple fit. We also have zero duplication in the diamond suit.

I agree with Mike that 6=3=1=3 is very likely here, but I also think 5=4=1=3 and 5=3=1=4' s are very possible too.

[keylime]

Frances,

Wouldn't you double 1NT with 5-3-1-4 and 5-4-1-3 to show some clubs by implication?

[Fluffy]

I would bid 3♠ at any other vulnerability, but here partner must be a bit more strong, enough to make 4♠ attractive, won't be surprised if this gets doubled for a number

[whereagles]

Pard probably has something like a 5413 or 5314. I'm bidding 4♣ since this virtually guarantees a fit (and if pd has 6412, he'll correct to hearts and I pass).

I suppose I could also bid 3♥ and hope for a fit at a lower level, but 4♣ seems safer.

Finally, I'm not worried of missing out on 4♥ because it's not certain we have a fit there and the diamond doubleton plus pard's honors behind opener warn game might not be there, even if we values are.

[mikeh]

FrancesHinden, on Dec 4 2007, 01:18 PM, said:

I also think that, red at imps, we are just worth game (we weren't far off a 3S bid over 3D). But I agree that 4D is best.

Yes, partner is not so likely to be 5413. But he might be 5314, and where do you want to play opposite AKJxx QJx x Axxx? (actually the answer to that is probably 4C, but 5C is hardly playless).

I don't fully agree with mikeh about the prospects of making game being 50-50, but with the upside of getting to the right strain, I think we are worth 4D.

I didn't say game was 50-50.. I said it was close to even... I'd place it at between 40 and 50 %... good enough for a red game at imps.

I have been convinced that 4♦ is better than 4♠..

As for whereagle's 4♣... I am left (almost) speechless by the idea that partner can correct this call with 6412

[Apollo81]

I'll also vote 4♦

[keylime]

Yeah, 4D does keep the 4-4 in view...change my vote too.

[whereagles]

mikeh, on Dec 4 2007, 07:17 PM, said:

As for whereagle's 4♣... I am left (almost) speechless by the idea that partner can correct this call with 6412

Well, some people like to dbl on any hand that has a singleton in opps' suit, hoping that pard has stuff stacked over declarer. I'm sure you know what type of player I mean

Pard may not be of this kind, of course. But since I wasn't told of pard's tendencies, I have to cater for him being bloodlusty.. lol.

[kenrexford]

This seems so easy a 4♦ call that I was surprised that any discussion would occur.