[kgr]

Scoring: IMPs

---

1♣-(1♠)-DBL-(2♠)
3♠-(p)-3NT-All Pass
 
South could have opened 2♣ GF, No semi-GF available.
How should the bidding have gone?

[1eyedjack]

I would bid 2D rather than double.
Absolutely I would not bid 3N with such a huge undisclosed hand after 3S from p

[MFA]

What on earth was north thinking when he bid 3NT?

A possible continuation would have been 4♠ from north, 4NT keycards from south, reply, 7NT.

[whereagles]

I wouldn't pass 3NT with South's hand. Would bid 5♣ instead. Not because I fear 3NT is a bad contract, but because 5♣ is very descriptive.

Over 5♣, North has a clear raise to 6. Getting to 7 is too tough for me.

[jdonn]

North was (new line needed to make space)
WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
too good for 3NT. If I had to place it at some level of notrump as north at that point I would be torn between 6NT and 7NT.
I also prefer 2♦ instead of double, but that point dwarfs in comparison to the 3NT bid.

[jdonn]

whereagles, on Jan 17 2009, 04:38 PM, said:

I wouldn't pass 3NT with South's hand. Would bid 5♣ instead. Not because I fear 3NT is a bad contract, but because 5♣ is very descriptive.

Over 5♣, North has a clear raise to 6. Getting to 7 is too tough for me.

You want south to cuebid, then pull the 3NT with a jump to the 5 level, and you have trouble reaching 7? If north has trouble with A A AK just bidding at least 7♣ at that point, something is desperately wrong. He hasn't remotely come close to showing how good his hand is for slam and his partner has shown a solid suit and forced to the 5 level off all the outside aces. I think north is worth about 9♣ (seriously) over the 5♣ bid on that auction.

[nige1]

kgr, on Jan 17 2009, 03:32 PM, said:

Scoring: IMPs

+
1♣-(1♠)-DBL-(2♠)
3♠-(p)-3NT-All Pass##
South could have opened 2♣ GF, No semi-GF available.
How should the bidding have gone?

---

IMO EW 90% N 7% S 3%
North and South each had a bit to spare but East-West gave them a tough problem.

[mike777]

I think the confusion came about when North got confused over:
1) how little his negative dbl promised.
2) he forgot that 3s forced to game across from him possibly having very very little.
3) he assumed south was bidding both the south hand and north hand values with his 3s bid.

I think this thread illustrates a common bidding issue among nonexperts. When everyone is bidding, is partner just bidding his values or some of mine also?

I think if you frame the question.....3s shows a huge hand, 4 loser hand...what do you do now North, nonexperts stop rebidding 3nt.

[MFA]

nige1, on Jan 17 2009, 05:16 PM, said:

kgr, on Jan 17 2009, 03:32 PM, said:

Scoring: IMPs

+
1♣-(1♠)-DBL-(2♠)
3♠-(p)-3NT-All Pass##
South could have opened 2♣ GF, No semi-GF available.
How should the bidding have gone?

---

IMO EW 90% N 7% S 3%
North and South each had a bit to spare but East-West gave them a tough problem.

Uhh, come on, we can't be that helpless just because of a 1M overcall raised to 2. Some opps might even be in 3♠ because of their 9 card fit! Yes I can see they have nothing, but some players like to bid.

[whereagles]

jdonn, on Jan 17 2009, 10:03 PM, said:

You want south to cuebid, then pull the 3NT with a jump to the 5 level, and you have trouble reaching 7? If north has trouble with A A AK just bidding at least 7♣ at that point, something is desperately wrong.

I said 7 is hard because the 5♣ bid may persuade North that South may not have a solid club suit (with a solid suit, he'd normally let 3NT on). Since there's no more blackwood over 5♣, North has no way to know the clubs are rock solid.

Of course, you can argue that 5♣ is therefore not a good bid. Indeed. Perhaps 4♣ would have been better, but hey, it's not easy anyway. Maybe 5NT over 5♣?

[jdonn]

whereagles, on Jan 17 2009, 05:34 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jan 17 2009, 10:03 PM, said:

You want south to cuebid, then pull the 3NT with a jump to the 5 level, and you have trouble reaching 7? If north has trouble with A A AK just bidding at least 7♣ at that point, something is desperately wrong.

I said 7 is hard because the 5♣ bid may persuade North that South may not have a solid club suit (with a solid suit, he'd normally let 3NT on). Since there's no more blackwood over 5♣, North has no way to know the clubs are rock solid.

Of course, you can argue that 5♣ is therefore not a good bid. Indeed. Perhaps 4♣ would have been better, but hey, it's not easy anyway. Maybe 5NT over 5♣?

So south has no aces, and not solid clubs, and has essentially bid to the 5 level in strong fashion on his own. Ok.

[jdonn]

nige1, on Jan 17 2009, 05:16 PM, said:

North and South each had a bit to spare but East-West gave them a tough problem.

Saying north had a bit to spare is like saying a person or two is short on money right now.

[whereagles]

jdonn, on Jan 17 2009, 11:17 PM, said:

So south has no aces, and not solid clubs, and has essentially bid to the 5 level in strong fashion on his own. Ok.

I was thinking more like the same hand, without ♣K and with a couple queens more.

[Codo]

South forces to game opposite a typical 1444 with 8 HCPS. (And many would double with less. So North is too strong for 3 NT.

But south chickend out too. Opposite Ax,Qxxx,Axxxx,Tx slam is laydown and there are many more holding, so he should hive it another try with 4 Club.

[kgr]

Codo, on Jan 19 2009, 12:38 PM, said:

South forces to game opposite a typical 1444 with 8 HCPS. (And many would double with less. So North is too strong for 3 NT.

But south chickend out too. Opposite Ax,Qxxx,Axxxx,Tx slam is laydown and there are many more holding, so he should hive it another try with 4 Club.

This were my thoughts as well. After reading the other posts I'm however less sure that South should move over 3NT

[kgr]

This hand was bid in teams at other table. At our table the bidding of the enemy was :
2C (GF) - 3♥ (7 Italian controls)
7NT
 
Sitting over 2♣ bidder I had:
♠QJTxx
♥QJTx
♦xx
♣J9
Playing all natural, do you bid something over 2♣? I almost did bid 2♠, but I think we were vulnerable.

[Phil]

kgr, on Jan 19 2009, 12:49 PM, said:

This hand was bid in teams at other table. At our table the bidding of the enemy was :
2C (GF) - 3♥ (7 Italian controls)
7NT
 
Sitting over 2♣ bidder I had:
♠QJTxx
♥QJTx
♦xx
♣J9
Playing all natural, do you bid something over 2♣? I almost did bid 2♠, but I think we were vulnerable.

No I don't bid over 2♣ and if they are playing controls, they probably have a DOP1 method over the interference anyway.