[CSGibson]

Scoring: IMP

---

Playing with a pickup partner, and the bidding goes as follows:

1♦ - (2♥) - X - (pass)
3♣ - (pass) - 3♥ - (pass)
4♣ - (pass) - 5♣ - All pass
Obviously in imps you should be in 4 spades with a decent try at game. Who screwed this up?

[nick_s]

I think North needs to bid 3♠ instead of 4♣. This pretty much has to be a 3 card suit. After this, I think South should pass. 4♠ is a lucky make.

4♠ could go down if E has Ax of trumps. After three rounds of hearts, ruffed and overruffed, E wins the ace on the 2nd round of trumps and leads a 4th heart.

[dicklont]

I voted no blame.
I agree that North should have bid 3♠ and an inspired South could have tried 4♠ after that. South would know that game would come with no garantees at all, his holding in hearts suggest there are 2 or 3 fast losers.

I say no to blaming a difficult hand like this that needs good judgement in a pick-up situation. It is difficult enough in an established partnership.

[Trinidad]

I voted no blame. I don't think North should bid 3♠ on 9xx. This means that I don't think that the bad result was due to bidding error by North or South.

Nevertheless, I think South should have bid 5♦, rather than 5♣. But this would have led to the same result.

Rik

[helene_t]

I think North should have bid 3♠ or maybe 4♥ (choice-of-game) over 4♥. But the bidding was not terrible. S bid normaly although he could also have tried 4♠ over 4♣.

[pclayton]

Jlall, on Dec 9 2007, 04:45 AM, said:

North has a completely automatic 3S bid over 3H.

Agree.

You might back into the excellent spade game, but at least you'd find a nice partial.

[foo]

Jlall, on Dec 9 2007, 07:45 AM, said:

North has a completely automatic 3S bid over 3H.

Emphasis on this.

1D-(2H)-X -(pa);
3C-(pa)-3H!-(pa);
3S-(pass)-??

S will play N to be =3154 or =3244 w/o a ♥ stop on this auction.

Holding GF values, and given
a= the known ruffing value in the N hand and
b= that there are very few wasted values in ♥'s between NS,
S can now bid the Moysian 4S game with reasonable chances that it will make.

Best of all, the overcaller is on lead in a board where their partner rates to be nearly busted:

♠9xx ♥xx ♦AKQx ♣QJxx (Declarer)
+
♠KQJT ♥Jxx ♦Txx ♣AKx (Dummy)

It's a reasonable bet that the vast majority, if not all, of
the SA, HA, HK, and HQ are in E's hand.

Even a good start for the defense such as HA, HK, SA, Sx does not look like it rates to set 4S.

The defence starting off by playing more than 2 rounds of ♥'s does not help them much because Declarer can ruff ♥'s in the short hand.

[neilkaz]

pclayton, on Dec 9 2007, 09:26 AM, said:

Jlall, on Dec 9 2007, 04:45 AM, said:

North has a completely automatic 3S bid over 3H.

Agree.

You might back into the excellent spade game, but at least you'd find a nice partial.

Yes..I voted 100% North as he should pattern out with 3♠ rather than implying more distribution than 4-4 in the minors.

[CSGibson]

Quote

It's a reasonable bet that the vast majority, if not all, of
the SA, HA, HK, and HQ are in E's hand.

I apparantly should have noted that 2♥ was a weak jump overcall, not an intermediate or strong call. Non-vulnerable at that.