[Hanoi5]

Let's say partner does Michael's or 1NT-4♣ or 1M-(2NT), or any bid which gets you to 'choose' between two suits, and you know both suits to be of the same length in partner's hand. Let's suppose both suits have the same number of cards in your hand in both suits and there's no distinction between the score (both suits are Majors or minors). Which suit do you choose? The best looking or the worst looking? The one with the best quality or the one with the worst quality?

[skjaeran]

There's a lot of factors here.

If I expect we might end up defending with partner on lead, I'd bid the suit with a top honour, to help partner hit the lead.

If I'm pretty sure I'll end up declaring, I tend to chose the suit without the ace as trumps (if that's an option). Normally, that makes it more difficult for opps to get a ruff.

If nothing of the above factors in, I'll normally chose the suit with most potential entries to my hand as trumps.

[JLOL]

Always bid the lower.

[nick_s]

JLOL, on Apr 14 2009, 01:36 PM, said:

Always bid the lower.

Ok, I'll bite.
Why?

[JLOL]

nick_s, on Apr 14 2009, 03:20 PM, said:

JLOL, on Apr 14 2009, 01:36 PM, said:

Always bid the lower.

Ok, I'll bite.
Why?

With 65 you can often start with the 6 then bid the 5. With 56 you can't do that so you always have to show the suits immediately. Thus partner is more likely to have 6 of the lower ranking suit.

Also, if the auction gets competitive or it's a slam hand it's nice for partner to be able to take inference from you bidding one of them (in this case the higher one), that you have more of that suit than the lower suit. If you might be equal to bid the higher suit he can never really take inferences from that.

Also, if the 2 suited hand is strong with 65 they will be able to bid the higher suit when you bid the lower suit (ie 1S 2N p 3C p 3D) and be at a lower level.

There are 2 general principles which this also follows.

1) Make the cheapest bid whenever possible.
2) Don't have 2 bids to show the same hand.

[nick_s]

JLOL, on Apr 14 2009, 04:39 PM, said:

nick_s, on Apr 14 2009, 03:20 PM, said:

JLOL, on Apr 14 2009, 01:36 PM, said:

Always bid the lower.

Ok, I'll bite.
Why?

With 65 you can often start with the 6 then bid the 5. With 56 you can't do that so you always have to show the suits immediately. Thus partner is more likely to have 6 of the lower ranking suit.

Also, if the auction gets competitive or it's a slam hand it's nice for partner to be able to take inference from you bidding one of them (in this case the higher one), that you have more of that suit than the lower suit. If you might be equal to bid the higher suit he can never really take inferences from that.

Also, if the 2 suited hand is strong with 65 they will be able to bid the higher suit when you bid the lower suit (ie 1S 2N p 3C p 3D) and be at a lower level.

There are 2 general principles which this also follows.

1) Make the cheapest bid whenever possible.
2) Don't have 2 bids to show the same hand.

Awesome.
Thanks.

...All this stuff that had never occurred to me before

[gnasher]

JLOL, on Apr 14 2009, 07:36 PM, said:

Always bid the lower.

Always read the question carefully.

Quote

you know both suits to be of the same length in partner's hand

If I really knew that (how?), and I had three cards in each, I'd bid my weaker suit, to reduce the chance of a ruff. With two cards in each, however, it's probably better to play in my Hx rather than my xx, because I might be able to ruff the losers in the weaker suit.

Not knowing that partner had equal length, I'd do what Justin does.

[kenrexford]

Whereas I think that the answers so far are very good, I think part of the question was designed to decide between contract as to viability.

In other words, are you better off playing a contract where our trumps are solid but the side suit weak or the other way around.

Like, suppose you have AKxxx-Qxxxx and know that partner has a fit for each. If the AKxxx suit is trumps, you can pull trumps easily when you get in, but the opponents might be able to beat you to the ruff by playing A-K-x in the side suit. If you play in the Qxxxx suit, then the opponents might be able to play x in the side suit, win the trump King, play another x in the side suit, win the trump Ace, and then get a ruff in the side suit after all.

That kind of issue keeps me up at night, and I don't know any really good answers other than some sort of general feel, given a specific hand.

[Hanoi5]

Quote

Whereas I think that the answers so far are very good, I think part of the question was designed to decide between contract as to viability.

In other words, are you better off playing a contract where our trumps are solid but the side suit weak or the other way around.

Like, suppose you have AKxxx-Qxxxx and know that partner has a fit for each. If the AKxxx suit is trumps, you can pull trumps easily when you get in, but the opponents might be able to beat you to the ruff by playing A-K-x in the side suit. If you play in the Qxxxx suit, then the opponents might be able to play x in the side suit, win the trump King, play another x in the side suit, win the trump Ace, and then get a ruff in the side suit after all.

That kind of issue keeps me up at night, and I don't know any really good answers other than some sort of general feel, given a specific hand.

This is exactly the reason why I posted this question. Any ideas pertaining this?

[JLOL]

my bad. I would always choose my stronger fit even though there are definitely hands where the weaker one plays better.

[kenrexford]

FWIW, the way I handle this sort of problem is definitely case specific and has to do with visualizing the likely play. That's real tough, though. But, sometimes you can just kind of see or smell things.

[whereagles]

JLOL, on Apr 15 2009, 02:10 AM, said:

my bad.

why? A bid may show a 55, but we all know sometimes a 65 does happen.