[sathyab]

Scoring: MP

p-(1d)-1h-(1s)
2d-(3c)-3h-(p)-p
(4c)-p-(4d)-X

---

Relatively new partnership. South didn't have a bid for a 4-card LR over partner's overcall whether or not there was intervention as we were playing 3♦ there as a mixed raise. North thought 3♥ was just competitive as he was dealt an additional heart, but South must have expected a better hand for the 3♥ bid considering his double of the eventual contract knowing that West was most likely 6-5 or 5-6 in the minors.

4♥ doubled for -100 appears to be par. 4♦ made comfortably as defense could only take two trumps and a club.

[Echognome]

What would 2NT have meant by South? Not that it really matters.

I don't like 3♥ on the North hand despite the 6th trump. Pretty flattish hand with a secondary honor in each suit (more defensive oriented). South should have bid 2NT with his hand, because then he could have shut up for the rest of the auction having bid his hand.

It's hard to judge more than that without really knowing what 2♦ showed in terms of high cards or what 3♥ showed in terms of offensive and defensive values.

[benlessard]

North had the possibility to bid 3D to invite to 4H and 3H to just compete. South made a gutsy MP double and was a bit unlucky that KQJ of spades are wasted defensive values.

3H by North is a correct bid.

[jdonn]

1♥ 2♦ and 3♥ were fine. WTH was south thinking with double, I will never know.

[pclayton]

jdonn, on Sep 12 2008, 06:37 PM, said:

1♥ 2♦ and 3♥ were fine. WTH was south thinking with double, I will never know.

You noticed its matchpoints didn't you>?

[jdonn]

pclayton, on Sep 12 2008, 11:06 PM, said:

jdonn, on Sep 12 2008, 06:37 PM, said:

1♥ 2♦ and 3♥ were fine. WTH was south thinking with double, I will never know.

You noticed its matchpoints didn't you>?

Yes I see. And....?

[sathyab]

pclayton, on Sep 12 2008, 11:06 PM, said:

jdonn, on Sep 12 2008, 06:37 PM, said:

1♥ 2♦ and 3♥ were fine. WTH was south thinking with double, I will never know.

You noticed its matchpoints didn't you>?

In retrospect if South thinks of the spade distribution around the table he can get a pretty good picture of his partner's distribution. Spades are most likely 1-3-5-4 starting with West. With six hearts and three spades, there's only room for four cards in minor suits in partner's hand and therefore that East will have length in the minors. Another way to look at is that East has five spades and two hearts and so length in minors. Admittedly partner could have had the Ace of hearts instead of the King (you can swap a jack and a queen between W and E so both have their bids) in which case both 4♦ and 4♥ are off a trick.

[cherdano]

benlessard, on Sep 12 2008, 07:50 PM, said:

North had the possibility to bid 3D to invite to 4H and 3H to just compete. South made a gutsy MP double and was a bit unlucky that KQJ of spades are wasted defensive values.

What do you think LHO has? His partner never showed support, and he bids to 4C all by himself. South was very lucky that his partner showed up with two (!) defensive tricks.

[helene_t]

1♥ is ok although I would have bid 2♥.
2♦ is ok although I would have bid 2♥.
3♥ is ok. I might have passed, though.

X is nuts. Even if 3♥ shows some extra general value due to North's failure to preempt (which I don't agree with. N may have competed with 3♥ because if diamonds shortness or he may have failed to preempt because of spade length), there is no reason to expect 4♦ to go down. Also when opps are nonvul you need to set them by two tricks doubled to protect your own partscore.

[FrancesHinden]

North bid 3H over 3C voluntarily, in an auction where partner had only forced to the 2-level, thus it should show something extra. I would have bid game over this on the south hand.

[pclayton]

jdonn, on Sep 12 2008, 08:54 PM, said:

pclayton, on Sep 12 2008, 11:06 PM, said:

jdonn, on Sep 12 2008, 06:37 PM, said:

1♥ 2♦ and 3♥ were fine. WTH was south thinking with double, I will never know.

You noticed its matchpoints didn't you>?

Yes I see. And....?

And: how many matchpoints are you getting for -130? Didn't you think 3♥ was making?

Personally I think that its close between double and 4♥.

[mike777]

sathyab, on Sep 12 2008, 08:35 PM, said:

Scoring: MP

p-(1d)-1h-(1s)
2d-(3c)-3h-(p)-p
(4c)-p-(4d)-X

---

Relatively new partnership. South didn't have a bid for a 4-card LR over partner's overcall whether or not there was intervention as we were playing 3♦ there as a mixed raise. North thought 3♥ was just competitive as he was dealt an additional heart, but South must have expected a better hand for the 3♥ bid considering his double of the eventual contract knowing that West was most likely 6-5 or 5-6 in the minors.

4♥ doubled for -100 appears to be par. 4♦ made comfortably as defense could only take two trumps and a club.

1) prefer 2h rather than 2d
2) Now when partner bids 3h over 3c that is just competing and promises 6h, not a game try.
3) now when lho shows a bunch of minor cards I can compete to 4h in known ten card fit and know partner promises little defense.

As a side note I would open this hand 1d first seat nv...if playing we had an agreement to open lite.

[jdonn]

pclayton, on Sep 13 2008, 10:09 AM, said:

jdonn, on Sep 12 2008, 08:54 PM, said:

pclayton, on Sep 12 2008, 11:06 PM, said:

jdonn, on Sep 12 2008, 06:37 PM, said:

1♥ 2♦ and 3♥ were fine. WTH was south thinking with double, I will never know.

You noticed its matchpoints didn't you>?

Yes I see. And....?

And: how many matchpoints are you getting for -130? Didn't you think 3♥ was making?

Personally I think that its close between double and 4♥.

I don't let the fact I think I'm potentially in a lousy position allow me to shoot for bottoms. I would have truly been SHOCKED as south if 4♦ was going down! I would give it about a 10% chance on the auction holding this hand. Partner had, in context, a defensive powerhouse.

Meanwhile, why are you so sure you are in a lousy position? Have you considered they might have game? As it is they were essentially on either of two finesses for game! Quite honestly I never consider myself in that bad of a position when the opponents are in a non-ridiculous contract, because I will salvage 35% or something from the geniuses who think they have to double on every board that didn't go the way they wanted.

[sathyab]

helene_t, on Sep 13 2008, 03:39 AM, said:

1♥ is ok although I would have bid 2♥.
2♦ is ok although I would have bid 2♥.
3♥ is ok. I might have passed, though.

X is nuts. Even if 3♥ shows some extra general value due to North's failure to preempt (which I don't agree with. N may have competed with 3♥ because if diamonds shortness or he may have failed to preempt because of spade length), there is no reason to expect 4♦ to go down. Also when opps are nonvul you need to set them by two tricks doubled to protect your own partscore.

Why would you preempt with North's hand ? It's got all kinds of secondary honors that can be valuable in defense. I know preempts can be made on a wide range of hands especially when partner has already passed, but you have to draw the line somewhere. If you preempt with this hand, partner will be taking/thinking about a lot of phantom saves.

Passing over 3♣ instead of biding 3♥ is very reasonable though. My preference, especially at MP is that all bids except a cue-bid and maximal double are still competitive in a competitive auction, but then again it's just my preference.

[pclayton]

jdonn, on Sep 13 2008, 08:45 AM, said:

pclayton, on Sep 13 2008, 10:09 AM, said:

jdonn, on Sep 12 2008, 08:54 PM, said:

pclayton, on Sep 12 2008, 11:06 PM, said:

jdonn, on Sep 12 2008, 06:37 PM, said:

1♥ 2♦ and 3♥ were fine. WTH was south thinking with double, I will never know.

You noticed its matchpoints didn't you>?

Yes I see. And....?

And: how many matchpoints are you getting for -130? Didn't you think 3♥ was making?

Personally I think that its close between double and 4♥.

I don't let the fact I think I'm potentially in a lousy position allow me to shoot for bottoms. I would have truly been SHOCKED as south if 4♦ was going down! I would give it about a 10% chance on the auction holding this hand. Partner had, in context, a defensive powerhouse.

Meanwhile, why are you so sure you are in a lousy position? Have you considered they might have game? As it is they were essentially on either of two finesses for game! Quite honestly I never consider myself in that bad of a position when the opponents are in a non-ridiculous contract, because I will salvage 35% or something from the geniuses who think they have to double on every board that didn't go the way they wanted.

Or maybe the opponents have slam and -170 will be a good score.

[han]

FrancesHinden, on Sep 13 2008, 07:02 AM, said:

North bid 3H over 3C voluntarily, in an auction where partner had only forced to the 2-level, thus it should show something extra. I would have bid game over this on the south hand.

Disagree with this, 3H is not forward going.