[jules101]

NS are vulnerable

Auction

N E S W
P [1S] ??

You are South holding

Txxx
KQ87
AJT87
---

What's your call and why?

[plaur]

Pass. Not good enough for a vul 2♦. I would not consider a takeout x with a void in an unbid suit.

[babalu1997]

PASS
THEY MIGHT BID 4 SPADES

[Winstonm]

Pass.

BTW, If they do bid 4S I have no reason to believe they won't make it.

[jdonn]

2♦, this is my best chance to get in so I'm taking it. I don't think this call is particularly risky since you did give good diamond spots, at least relative to lots of other calls that we would all make.

[kfay]

I'm bidding. I have a great hand. 2♦.

[rogerclee]

Pass, didn't think this was very close. Would bid if it was hearts, since we can just be on for 4♥ opposite a good fit, but there is much less incentive to get in with diamonds, especially since

1) the probability that LHO has a penalty pass goes up a lot when we have 4 cards in RHO's suit, and with this vulnerability, LHO will pass on a lot of hands that are routine 2N/3N bids at other colors
2) it is unlikely that we have a good save against 4♠, and even if we do, it is unlikely we will find it

[the hog]

Pass. Ds are not good enough to overcall and I won't x with a C void.

[helene_t]

Pass. 2♦ cannot win that much with a passed partner.

[Codo]

pass 2 ♦ is my second choice and had been my clear first choice not vul.

[neilkaz]

PD is passed so overcalling here at this vul is too dangerous for me vs good opps who actually may convert a penalty pass and whom will realize that 2♦x making is not game.

Now if you reverse the red suits, it is more possible that PD could hold the proper cards for 4♥, and I wouldn't criticize anyone who'd try 2♥ then, which also is more dangerous for the opps to take a shot at leaving in a double.

Pass here for me.

[Winstonm]

jdonn, on Jan 3 2009, 05:54 PM, said:

2♦, this is my best chance to get in so I'm taking it. I don't think this call is particularly risky since you did give good diamond spots, at least relative to lots of other calls that we would all make.

I see two risks: I agree with the diamond suit and the spots, but IMO the 4 losing spades are a huge negative on this hand - partner will need to have lots of trumps to ruff all those losers. The next problem is only a potential problem and that is partner is likely to play me for a much better hand if I bid 2D - that may or may not work out.

It could get real ugly real fast if partner raised to 3D with a small doubleton spade and 3-card diamond support.

However, I am sure Josh considered these risks when he chose to bid - he obviously felt the risks worthwhile.

[jdonn]

The answers are a bit surprising to me. I still don't find bidding all that risky! The spade length not only increases the chance of a diamond stack on our left, but also diamond support with partner or a heart suit with partner. And of course their most likely fit is clubs so I'm happy to preempt that. But so be it.

BTW I will not be penalty passed in 2♦ since if it goes P P X I will bid 2♥ (and be thankful for the chance to do so cheaply.) Could work well or badly but I'm pretty confident that it's more likely to work well.

[Winstonm]

jdonn, on Jan 4 2009, 01:51 AM, said:

The answers are a bit surprising to me. I still don't find bidding all that risky! The spade length not only increases the chance of a diamond stack on our left, but also diamond support with partner or a heart suit with partner. And of course their most likely fit is clubs so I'm happy to preempt that. But so be it.

BTW I will not be penalty passed in 2♦ since if it goes P P X I will bid 2♥ (and be thankful for the chance to do so cheaply.) Could work well or badly but I'm pretty confident that it's more likely to work well.

Josh, you could be right. I simply refer you to what Larry Cohen wrote on the risks of bidding with loser-length in the opponent's suit - and also his thinking about standard expert thinking that length increases the chances for a fit with partner.

I think he explained his views in Law of Total Tricks but it may have been the sequel, which I think was called More Law.

[kfay]

rogerclee, on Jan 3 2009, 08:08 PM, said:

Pass, didn't think this was very close. Would bid if it was hearts, since we can just be on for 4♥ opposite a good fit, but there is much less incentive to get in with diamonds, especially since

1) the probability that LHO has a penalty pass goes up a lot when we have 4 cards in RHO's suit, and with this vulnerability, LHO will pass on a lot of hands that are routine 2N/3N bids at other colors
2) it is unlikely that we have a good save against 4♠, and even if we do, it is unlikely we will find it

woah woah. the way i learned this is that there's an increased chance that partner has a fit.....

glass half empty?

[vang]

there is an increased chance for both partner and LHO to have a fit (with you) ;-)