[ewj]

Scoring: IMP

---

1♦ from P, 1♠ overcall, raised to 2 by LHO, partner doubles and RHO raises to 3. This is passed back to partner who doubles again, do you pass or bid 4♣?
Is it close? Would it make any difference if your opponents are weak players?

[pclayton]

4♣. I don't think its close really.

[mikeh]

I'd need to be able to lead trump at least twice, early, in order to sit, and I probably can't, so 4♣ it is.

[Codo]

Can pd have much less then -,Akxx,Akxxx,Akxx?
The good news is: With this hand you make slam,so bidding on is still correct, even if 3 Spade may be bloody.
But if he bid his -,Kxxx,AKxxx,AKxx hand this way, you may not beat 3 Spade but make 4 Club.

So I guess that 4 Club is the much better call.

[P_Marlowe]

4C.

We are dead.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[ewj]

Oh dear, seems like I was a bit of a fish then, as I passed. Opinion was a bit mixed over here about what to do but even I'm feeling like 4C was probably right.

For your information, partner had

-
AKxx
QTxxx
AKJx

And the 3S bidder had a monster

AKQxxx
QTxxx
A
x

Thanks
Ed

[gnasher]

Codo, on Feb 29 2008, 11:55 AM, said:

Can pd have much less then -,Akxx,Akxxx,Akxx?
The good news is: With this hand you make slam,

Really? Which 12 tricks do you expect to take?

Quote

But if he bid his -,Kxxx,AKxxx,AKxx hand this way, you may not beat 3 Spade but make 4 Club.

If 3S is making, that means that clubs are 4-1, or diamonds are 5-1, or ♥A is offside. Also, diamonds aren't 3-3 - otherwise we could beat 3S with a diamond ruff. In that case, it's unlikely that 4C is makeable.

I don't, in fact, think that these control-rich hands with empty suits are particularly likely. If partner wants us to bid at the four level, he probably has better playing strength. I would bid 4C, expecting something like - AKJx KQJ10x A10xx. However, if he turns out to be 1=4=5=3 I'll probably regret it.

[gnasher]

ewj, on Feb 29 2008, 12:49 PM, said:

For your information, partner had
-
AKxx
QTxxx
AKJx

I think he overdid it.

[Codo]

Jlall, on Feb 29 2008, 08:18 PM, said:

Codo, on Feb 29 2008, 05:55 AM, said:

Can pd have much less then -,Akxx,Akxxx,Akxx?

are you serious?

I gave another example for a weaker hand which I had taken as a minimum for his calls and which happens to be quite close to his actual holding- besides that the values in diamonds and heart are switched.

[Codo]

gnasher, on Feb 29 2008, 09:28 PM, said:

Codo, on Feb 29 2008, 11:55 AM, said:

Can pd have much less then -,Akxx,Akxxx,Akxx?
The good news is: With this hand you make slam,

Really? Which 12 tricks do you expect to take?

Quote

But if he bid his -,Kxxx,AKxxx,AKxx hand this way, you may not beat 3 Spade but make 4 Club.

If 3S is making, that means that clubs are 4-1, or diamonds are 5-1, or ♥A is offside. Also, diamonds aren't 3-3 - otherwise we could beat 3S with a diamond ruff. In that case, it's unlikely that 4C is makeable.

I don't, in fact, think that these control-rich hands with empty suits are particularly likely. If partner wants us to bid at the four level, he probably has better playing strength. I would bid 4C, expecting something like - AKJx KQJ10x A10xx. However, if he turns out to be 1=4=5=3 I'll probably regret it.

I tried to say that even with a very control rich hand, where 3 Spade is no fun for them, bidding on is still good because in this case you will make at least game. But you are right, my example was bad and needs too much to make slam a good idea.

And yes in the second example, I may lose 3 Hearts or two hearts and a minor suit trick. I may lose even more this Is why I say, that I may make 4 Club.

And with Diamonds 4-2 and clubs 3-2 they may still make 3 Spade if the Heart finesse is good for them. With a better shape for them in a minor, 3 Spade isn´t too bad anyway.

[Apollo81]

pclayton, on Feb 28 2008, 07:21 PM, said:

4♣. I don't think its close really.

yes, clear 4♣

[gwnn]

I'd bid 4♣ even if it were Gerber.

[han]

Csaba, the rule "4C is always gerber" does not apply in competition.

[skjaeran]

gwnn, on Feb 29 2008, 05:21 PM, said:

I'd bid 4♣ even if it were Gerber.

Or even playing with Gerben...

[whereagles]

han, on Feb 29 2008, 04:25 PM, said:

Csaba, the rule "4C is always gerber" does not apply in competition.

it should be: "4C is always gerber" does not apply in bridge

[Cascade]

han, on Mar 1 2008, 05:25 AM, said:

Csaba, the rule "4C is always gerber" does not apply in competition.

What's wrong with Gerber on this hand?

[han]

whereagles, on Feb 29 2008, 03:30 PM, said:

han, on Feb 29 2008, 04:25 PM, said:

Csaba, the rule "4C is always gerber" does not apply in competition.

it should be: "4C is always gerber" does not apply in bridge

True, I gave a special case of this general rule.