[Cascade]

Scoring: MP

(Pass) Pass (1♠) Dbl
(Pass) ?

---

1. Does anyone think we are worth more than 2♥?

2. Say you bid 2♥ ...

... the auction continues

(Pass) Pass (1♠) Dbl
(Pass) 2♥ (Pass) 4♥
(Pass) ?

Do we bid some more now?

[kfay]

Double Negative

[jdonn]

Maximum 2♥ bid, and I don't think bidding over 4♥ is possible unless you are inconsistent. Partner could have cuebid before raising if he wanted, this 4♥ bid is often taking a bit of a chance.

[helene_t]

I think I would bid 3♥ although it's close. Having bid 2♥, only Futile Willy would bid over 4♥.

[655321]

I would have bid 3♥, but 2♥ is not terrible.

No, I would not go to the 5 level now, so pass. I don't like to force partner to choose between playing 2♥ and playing 6♥ on these auctions.

[han]

Ditto Josh.

[rogerclee]

I would bid 3♥, and bidding over 4♥ is wow-bad.

I am a little paranoid about my stiff spade though, but if partner is strong and balanced, he can just bid 3N. If he has a strong 1-suiter, my hand is definitely good enough to this this way.

From 4♥, I assume partner is something like 19-20 balanced with 4 hearts.

[neilkaz]

2♥ or 3♥ is fine with me but bidding over 4♥ is not since opener may be stretching a bit.

[pclayton]

2♥ for starters.

What's so inconsistent about bidding only 2♥ and making a move past 4♥?

Pard has made a value bid and we have an absolute max.

[Apollo81]

No/No

[jdonn]

pclayton, on Apr 22 2008, 06:50 PM, said:

2♥ for starters.

What's so inconsistent about bidding only 2♥ and making a move past 4♥?

Pard has made a value bid and we have an absolute max.

His value bid is not supposed to be enough for slam opposite our max. There was plenty of room to explore if he thought slam was possible opposite a maximum 2♥ bid. Your comment could be applied to the auction 1♥ 2♥ 4♥ as well.

[ArtK78]

Maximum 2♥ bid. 3♥ is an overbid, but not a large one.

Clear pass over 4♥. Any bid over 4♥ would be a breach of partnership discipline.

[pclayton]

jdonn, on Apr 22 2008, 04:04 PM, said:

pclayton, on Apr 22 2008, 06:50 PM, said:

2♥ for starters.

What's so inconsistent about bidding only 2♥ and making a move past 4♥?

Pard has made a value bid and we have an absolute max.

His value bid is not supposed to be enough for slam opposite our max. There was plenty of room to explore if he thought slam was possible opposite a maximum 2♥ bid. Your comment could be applied to the auction 1♥ 2♥ 4♥ as well.

Construct a hand suitable for 4♥ please Josh.

[jdonn]

Everyone agrees with me but I take the flak as usual

Kx AKJxxx AK Qxx

I actually don't think it need be quite that good, as I said before it's usually taking a chance that partner isn't 100% broke.

Can I ask what part of my last post you dispute?

[kenrexford]

2♥, and then bidding after 4♥, has no meaning. So, it seems to me that the only sane question is whether 2♥ was the right bid. To think of anything but passing 4♥ means that you disagree with 2♥, which is fine -- stand by that -- or that that you think partner lacks vision for his 4♥ call.

What about 2♥? It would have been nice to play mini-lebensohl here (1NT as "lebensohl," or herbert negative). That would make a 2♥ call include this hand. Instead, we are playing an approach where we have two calls, eac of which has to carry too much water. In that scenario, it is good to have a general approach.

It would also be nice to have a two-way takeout approach, such as 1NT as a weak takeout, such that a double shows real values. But, that's another discussion. We are stuck with what we have.

It is also worth noting that problems like this are more easily solved if the takeout double requires sound values, especially in relation to the degree to which the double forces the two-level. When making light takeout doubles, these hands are sacrificed, or at least negatively impacted.

At IMP scoring, this would be easy for me -- 3♥. Doubling 1♠ opposite a passed hand at IMP scoring serves up too little potential gain if the double is weak, and it sacrifices too much in potential gain if Advancer can rely on actual values.

My love for IMP bidding may have untoward impact on my thinking here, or at least my twisted opinion of effective IMP bidding (LOL), but my opinion is that one should not double a third-seat 1♠ opening unless one is prepared to have partner bid 3♥, specifically hearts, with a hand like this. "Prepared" could mean "prepared to laugh it off if sawed off." But, prepared. So, I would bid 3♥ with this hand.

Having failed to bid what I consider to be the correct bid, I'm not rescuing myself. The harm from insanity late in the auction is too costly on the partnership.

[Cascade]

Scoring: MP

(Pass) Pass (1♠) Dbl
(Pass) 2♥ (Pass) 4♥
(Pass) Pass (Pass)

---

As you can see slam is pretty reasonable. Trumps 4-0 or diamonds 4-1 will break it. Actually you will survive some of the 4-1 diamond breaks - stiff ace or singleton in the hand not on lead.

So who didn't bid enough? Does this convince you to not bid 2♥ or that bidding on over 4♥ might be reasonable or should North do something other than 4♥?

[mike777]

Cascade, on Apr 22 2008, 09:15 PM, said:

Scoring: MP

(Pass) Pass (1♠) Dbl
(Pass) 2♥ (Pass) 4♥
(Pass) Pass (Pass)

---

As you can see slam is pretty reasonable.  Trumps 4-0 or diamonds 4-1 will break it.  Actually you will survive some of the 4-1 diamond breaks - stiff ace or singleton in the hand not on lead.

So who didn't bid enough?  Does this convince you to not bid 2♥ or that bidding on over 4♥ might be reasonable or should North do something other than 4♥?

Why not 2s over 2h? Does it not show a bigger hand than 4h?

[jdonn]

Cascade, on Apr 22 2008, 09:15 PM, said:

So who didn't bid enough?  Does this convince you to not bid 2♥ or that bidding on over 4♥ might be reasonable or should North do something other than 4♥?

I think north should cuebid but 4♥ is not the worst bid ever. It's not hard to imagine though that Qxxxx and an ace and you are getting veeeeeery close to slam, so 4♥ is a bit lazy.

Another reason to cuebid - maybe find 6♦ if south has xx Qxxxx Axxx xx or so?

[kenrexford]

3♥ by South would do it.

That said, Josh has provided a clear 2♥ call where slam makes. Plus, if your style is such that the South hand is possible, slam is real likely. A 2♠ call should do the trick.

Question, though.

P-P-1♠-X-
P-2♥-P-2♠-
P-3♠?

This seems right to me, but I'm not sure. Any thoughts?

[pclayton]

I don't particularly take issue with it Josh, except that it seems odd that a hand that wants to bid game opposite a near bust can't cooperate in a slam try.

Since our 2♥ call can be made on a yarborough, I tend to think that a 4♥ call by pard really shows the goods. I think some examples would be hands like:

1. AQxx, AKxxx, Ax, Kx
2. KQxx, AKxxx, Axx, x
3. KJx, AKxxx, AQ, Kxx

Would you be making a slam try over a 2♥ call with any of these hands? On #2, they need to find the spade duck to break 6, but otherwise slam is pretty good on the others.

By the way, with your example, the opponents are mighty quiet with 10 spades.