[mikegill]

Scoring: IMP

3♦ ?

---

Your RHO is an aggressive junior if that matters to you. Choose your poison.

[ArtK78]

I bid what I think I can make - 3NT.

Hearts might be a better contract, but I am not willing to bid 3♥ and be passed there when 3NT might be a claim. Partner will not have a diamond stop so I am the one who must bid notrump.

I can hope that we can still get to slam when it is right to be there, but I can see the possibility of missing a slam when I overcall 3NT. Preempts do make life difficult.

[FrancesHinden]

Double, and 3NT over 3S from partner.

[y66]

Same as FH.

[neilkaz]

FrancesHinden, on Mar 17 2009, 09:55 AM, said:

Double, and 3NT over 3S from partner.

Me too and seems clear to me.

[quiddity]

What are you going to bid over 4S from partner?

[quiddity]

Or what if LHO bids 4D and partner bids 4S?

[ArtK78]

The problem that I see with double is that partner might bid 4♠ on a 4 card suit, and you will not know whether it makes sense to bid again. There are a lot of hands where partner might bid 4♠ over a double which could lead to a silly contract - mostly hands with mediocre 4 card spade holdings but substantial values. For example, Axxx Kx xxx Qxxx (perhaps not everyone's idea of a 4♠ call, but not unreasonable). You will probably lose 3 spade tricks and a club trick in 4♠, while 3NT, 4♥ and 5♣ are all likely to be trivial.

Even if partner has a stronger hand: ATxxx Kx xx Qxxx, for example, 4♠ could easily be the wrong spot.

Doubling first is fine if partner bids 3♠ or 4♥ or even something stronger other than 4♠. But my partners have this annoying habit of making the bid that leaves me badly placed - in this case, 4♠. Given the diamond preempt and my spade holding, 4♠ is not an unlikely response.

I don't mean to imply that bidding 3NT over 3♦ solves all of the problems on this hand. But it seems to me to be the most practical call.

[jdonn]

Partner will rarely respond to the double with 4♠ on a four card suit. That's not what bothers me. But I bid 3NT instead of doubling because I don't want him pulling my next-round 3NT on a five card spade suit, which he will be apt to do.

[FrancesHinden]

jdonn, on Mar 17 2009, 04:31 PM, said:

Partner will rarely respond to the double with 4♠ on a four card suit. That's not what bothers me. But I bid 3NT instead of doubling because I don't want him pulling my next-round 3NT on a five card spade suit, which he will be apt to do.

Yes, I agree that's the risk.

The upside is getting to a slam. We're actually a bit good for 3NT. Doubling then bidding 3NT doesn't get our extra values over particularly well, but it does at least tell partner we have some suitability for suit play.

I dunno. 3NT is a perfectly sensible call. Last time I bid 3NT on a hand like this they cashed the first five spade tricks, so maybe I've been biased by experience, because that shouldn't be a major reason not to bid 3NT!

[whereagles]

3♥, and 3NT over 3♠ from partner.

Following Robson/Segal approach: when you have a suit, bid it, even if you're loaded. Don't dbl.

[FrancesHinden]

whereagles, on Mar 17 2009, 04:41 PM, said:

3♥, and 3NT over 3♠ from partner.

Following Robson/Segal approach: when you have a suit, bid it, even if you're loaded. Don't dbl.

Poor Andy!
I doubt he'd be as happy as you to be playing in 3H opposite 10xxxx Kx xxx Qxx
Would you also overcall 3♥ with Ax AQJ10x AK KJxx? After all, you have a suit, so bid it...

[gnasher]

ArtK78, on Mar 17 2009, 05:30 PM, said:

Axxx Kx xxx Qxxx (perhaps not everyone's idea of a 4♠ call, but not unreasonable).

That's a very unreasonable 4♠ bid. If partner decides to bid game, he should bid 4♦ and then convert 4♥ to 4♠, showing only four spades and a willingness to hear 5♣. Similarly, if they raise to 4♦ he should make a responsive double and follow with 4♠.

[gnasher]

FrancesHinden, on Mar 17 2009, 05:39 PM, said:

The upside is getting to a slam.

Which auctions will get you to slam?

[FrancesHinden]

gnasher, on Mar 17 2009, 04:54 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Mar 17 2009, 05:39 PM, said:

The upside is getting to a slam.

Which auctions will get you to slam?

3NT won't.

Double might (in particular, double may get you to slam in clubs. Or hearts, of course.). Just think of a very slightly mutated hand Axx Kx xxx Axxxx where 6C (or 7C) is the spot. Is this more likely that having to play 4S/5C instead of 3NT? I'm not prepared to promise that it is, but it's part of the equation.

Although 5C is playable opposite Axxx Kx xxx Qxxx we'd all much rather be in 3NT

[whereagles]

FrancesHinden, on Mar 17 2009, 04:45 PM, said:

whereagles, on Mar 17 2009, 04:41 PM, said:

3♥, and 3NT over 3♠ from partner.

Following Robson/Segal approach: when you have a suit, bid it, even if you're loaded. Don't dbl.

Poor Andy!
I doubt he'd be as happy as you to be playing in 3H opposite 10xxxx Kx xxx Qxx
Would you also overcall 3♥ with Ax AQJ10x AK KJxx? After all, you have a suit, so bid it...

You like cherry-picking hands? It's a preempt, for heaven's sake. You can't get the decisions right all of the time.

With Ax AQJTx AK KJxx you either bid 3NT or FOUR hears.

[gnasher]

FrancesHinden, on Mar 17 2009, 06:02 PM, said:

Double might (in particular, double may get you to slam in clubs. Or hearts, of course.). Just think of a very slightly mutated hand Axx Kx xxx Axxxx where 6C (or 7C) is the spot.

So partner will bid 5♣ and you'll raise to six? Or are you hoping partner will do something stronger?

[mikeh]

Why won't 3N get you to (some) good slams?

Doesn't every expert partnership play some form of asking mechanism over the wide range 3N overcall?

Partner needs a decent hand to make slam, and such hands, if balanced, will often offer safety at 4N, so he can afford to ask on the majority of slam hands.. and we can show a power overcall.. if we have decent methods.

Alternatively, if he has a long spade suit with slam interest, he can show that conventionally. And so on.

It is not as if we promise 20 hcp for a double, let alone shortness in spades.

Indeed, the minimum for 3N is significantly higher, in terms of hcp, than the minimum for double, plus this hand is, for me at least, in the range of 3N.. maximum, yes, but still in the forseeable range, so partner is allowed/required to bear this in mind. He will be far more encouraged, on many hands, by 3n than by double, especially if he holds xx in diamonds, where he would immediately fear two fast losers in a suit contract.

[quiddity]

This hand reminds me of a similar hand in Lawrence's balancing book. He preferred a jump to 4H (in the balancing seat) and said something like "definitely swayed by the HT". The reasoning was that this bid would help partner recognize the importance of the HK for possible slams.

He also said something like "the shape rules out a double", but then again the book was published 30-odd years ago...

[Free]

I would also bid 3♥, but I'm not entirely happy about it.