[Foxx]

Matchpoints, E/W vul, North dealer. You're South and you pick up:

Scoring: MP

---

Partner opens 1♦ and you're thinking of all sorts of fun things you can bid with this hand, when RHO jumps to 3♣. What do you do? Scroll down after you pick your call.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

This was the last board of an evening club duplicate last night in which we had gotten dinged up. At the table, I went into a huddle for a while before raising to 3♦. LHO passed and partner, evidently conflicted, went into the tank for what seemed like all night before she finally passed. When RHO led a top club and I put my dummy down, she showed a strong expression of displeasure before proceeding to take eleven tricks, turning up with four spades along the way. This deal put the capper on a subpar session.

This was the hand:

Scoring: MP

---

Partner stated that I should have gone ahead and bid 3♠ to show my major suit with the diamond fit available as a fallback. I agreed, but maintained that I feared 3♠ could get us too high, and I didn't think I could make a negative double with a singleton heart. Even after the post-mortem, I'm still not convinced that 3♠ is clear-cut. LHO is unpassed, and 3♠ could conceivably put us out on a limb opposite a 2-4-4-3 minimum.

[Phil]

I'd bid 3♠.

[helene_t]

I would have bid 3♠. Not sure if it's clear-cut but I really think 3♦ is an underbid, although it's true that 3♠ could take us too high.

[jjbrr]

3♠

[Jlall]

helene_t, on Jul 10 2009, 05:14 PM, said:

I would have bid 3♠. Not sure if it's clear-cut but I really think 3♦ is an underbid, although it's true that 3♠ could take us too high.

It is clear cut.

[jdonn]

3♠ is a wtp. I would bid 3♦ if the ace of spades were the deuce of hearts (J9xx xx KQxxx Tx).

[Jlall]

jdonn, on Jul 10 2009, 05:36 PM, said:

3♠ is a wtp. I would bid 3♦ if the ace of spades were the deuce of hearts (J9xx xx KQxxx Tx).

lol

[mtvesuvius]

Agree with Jlall, Jdown etc... 3♠ wtp

[mikeh]

When under pressure, consider that your options are restricted.... so a simple 3♦ bid might be the best action on a hand that ordinarily would be only a full-value single raise after a 2♣ overcall... especially if you hold 5 diamonds.

So the minimum that you may have for 3♦ is lower, after the annoying overcall, than it would be had you been able to make a limit raise.

You can't bid this way, successfully, while preserving the integrity of the stronger calls... you make the range for 3♦ so wide that partner is guessing too much and too often.

The way that we resolve this issue, which arises in many competitive auctions, is to lower the minimum range for what would otherwise be a very strong call.

Thus, when playing 2/1... say partner opens 1♥ and rho overcalls 2♣.... had rho passed, 2♦ would be gf and based on opening values. But very few players assign that meaning in competition... 2♦ is forcing one round, by an unpassed hand, and doesn't deny an opening hand (or better) but no longer promises it. While the analogy is imperfect, the reasoning behind the adjustment is much the same here.

Accordingly, when we have a hand that is at the heavy end of limit values, we treat it as a game force. Yes, we will now sometimes be too high.... but that's why the opps preempt... because by robbing us of bidding space, they impair our ability to bid accurately. This 'overbid on close hands' has been shown to be better than preserving the integrity of the strong bids by widening the range of the competitive bids.

Having said all of that, in truth I don't see this as a close decision anyway... you have a huge hand... I am not the least bit stressed by the prospect of establishing a gf over 3♣. You have a hand that is very close to an opener... and I do not play and despise the rule of 20... this is an opener because it has its points in the long suits (a factor the rule of 20 completely ignores....if it were incorporated, the rule would lose a lot of its silliness) and it has 3 controls and a LTC of 6. And, on this auction, the diamond fit is another reason to upgrade.

heck, opposite a useful but non-freakish opener, slam is cold... imagine partner with KQx xxx Axxx Axx.... she'll probably pass 3♦... I know I would. Now, reaching slam after 3♠ is not clear, and avoiding spades is also unclear, but you will be embarrassed by your score for 3♦. Yes, 3♠ will reach an unmakeable game on occasion, but that's life in the big city... where opps preempt.

[PFormaini]

3♠. No second choice.

Who cares if partner has a 2-3-4-4 minimum'. Can you possibly construct such a hand where at least 4♦ would not be laydown?

It's MATCHPOINTS. I would bud 3♠ with only a good 4-card suit - let alone 5.

[mikeh]

PFormaini, on Jul 10 2009, 07:07 PM, said:

It's MATCHPOINTS. I would bud 3♠ with only a good 4-card suit - let alone 5.

That would be insane, imo. with that type of hand, assuming fewer than 4 hearts, but diamond length, double, then pull hearts to diamonds.

[Foxx]

My goodness, I didn't expect the commentary to run the table.

I acknowledge that 3♠ is the right call to make and now I will give the reasons why I didn't bid 3♠.

Our session had featured, among other things, the following:

* A hand where the bidding went 3♣-3♥-4♠ to me and I had an automatic bid of 5♥. We had an 11-card heart fit and there were 19 total tricks. However, 5♥ was down one, and 4♠ was also down because the opponents' hearts were 1-1 and their diamonds 4-3 (a 31% chance).

* A hand where I opened 3♠ and partner pushed to 5♠ over the opponents' 5♣ which was doubled and I went down three (on the defense I received, I could have held it to down two). We were white versus red, and their 5♣ only went down because their diamonds split 3-3.

* A hand where partner opened 1♠ on ♠Q10xxx ♥KJ ♦x ♣A9xxx (funny, I think someone in this thread mentioned the Rule of 20) and I responded with a game-forcing 2♦ on ♠x ♥AQxxx ♦KJxxxx ♣x. We settled in 4♥, a decent resting place given the horrendous misfit. I ended up down two (with best play, I could get out for down one).

Needless to say, at the time of the last hand I was in the mindset of making sure we went plus. I was also afraid of bidding 3♠ mainly because of the likelihood partner would rebid 3NT and I would be put on the slick. Opposite ♠Qx ♥KJxx ♦Axxx ♣Q9x, East could lead a heart to put 3NT down four, but if partner had ♠Qx ♥KJ9x ♦A10xx ♣KJx, 3NT is cold while even 4♦ goes down.

But the majority of the time, I would indeed bid 3♠ and I was simply affected by the past of the session influencing my perception of the odds. Thanks for the feedback everyone.

[Free]

Every call you make "may get you too high", but there's nothing wrong with just bidding your hand... This is a 3♠ WTP.

Whatever happened in other deals is irrelevant for the odds Just do the right thing and the odds will be on your side most of the time.

[NickRW]

Foxx, on Jul 11 2009, 01:54 AM, said:

But the majority of the time, I would indeed bid 3♠ and I was simply affected by the past of the session influencing my perception of the odds. Thanks for the feedback everyone.

I think it is really really important to play each hand one at a time. What happened on a previous hand should have no bearing whatsoever on the next one and it is important to have your full attention on the current hand.

Even well meaning comments or a good natured postmortem serve to put attention on the old previous hand and should be kept to a minimum or avoided altogether if possible. The time for putting attention on what happened in a session is after it is over.

Nick