[cherdanno]

bigmax, on Aug 23 2009, 11:22 PM, said:

Fluffy, on Aug 23 2009, 08:00 PM, said:

bigmax, on Aug 24 2009, 12:13 AM, said:

My vote is PASS

If partner think that we have game opposite 7-8 random balanced points - he should just have bid it. My hand is not much better than that

So you think partner bid 3♥ to play?, the fact that you have 10 more HCP than you could doesn't make you worth a bid? wow.

So you think that partner 3♥ shows 9 top tricks?

Do not remember where I read it , but this concept of bidding over preempt as if partner have 7-8 bal points worked well for me. Correspondinly responder should know that most of his points are already accounted for.

So pass NV, 3NT Vul

1. You have a King more than 7 hcp. That's a trick. One trick more => let's play 4H not 3H!
2. You are a passed hand. If partner had no hope of making game opposite a nice balanced 10 count, he would have passed.

[benlessard]

Quote

I am so sorry but most of us aren't that good that our meta agreements differ from these 2 sequences.

(3D)-----3H------(P)-------3S
(P)-------???

Here 4D is COG. Slam is possible but COG is simply more important.


(3D)-----3H-------(P)------4D here is its slammish not COG.

Im not inventing anything, these sequence are expert standard. Ask any exp you trust and they will tell you.


Now in our example advancer is a passed hand. So you might have a specific agreement that 4D in 2nd seq is COG and not slammish but i pretty sure its not exp standard.

[gnasher]

It may not be standard, but I much prefer all of these cue-bids to be choice-of-games. After an enemy preempt, it's much more likely that game is tight than that you have both a fit and the values for a slam, especially when they haven't raised the preempt.

If both sequences were choice of game, I think they ought to mean:
  3♥ - 4♦ = 4-2
and
  3♥ - 3♠ - 4♦ = 2-6

[gwnn]

bigmax, on Aug 24 2009, 06:51 AM, said:

Original problem score is IMP. Obviuosly money bridge overcalls ( and preempts for that matter) would be different.

why?? In any textbook you find, imps is assumed to be equivalent to rubber bridge or Chicago.

[Codo]

skaeran, on Aug 24 2009, 05:12 AM, said:

The perfect call now, if it had been legal, would be a double.....

As it is, I think 3♠ is aiming for disaster. Partner might raise on Kx or xxx. I think it's close between 3NT and 4♥, not at all sure which I'd chose at the table.

Hard to construct hands where 4 heart plays better opposite xxx in spade in partners hand. And he won't raise on Kx because we passed already.

Unluckily we have no bid avaiable to show a hand with 5 lousy spades, a diamond stopper and a tolerance for hearts...

[Fluffy]

benlessard, on Aug 24 2009, 05:32 AM, said:

Im not inventing anything, these sequence are expert standard. Ask any exp you trust and they will tell you.

May I ask myself? lol.

Ok, won't go harsh, COG is less standard than you think.

[Cascade]

gnasher, on Aug 24 2009, 06:46 PM, said:

It may not be standard, but I much prefer all of these cue-bids to be choice-of-games. After an enemy preempt, it's much more likely that game is tight than that you have both a fit and the values for a slam, especially when they haven't raised the preempt.

If both sequences were choice of game, I think they ought to mean:
  3♥ - 4♦ = 4-2
and
  3♥ - 3♠ - 4♦ = 2-6

So what are you rules for when choice of games kicks in?

[rd6789]

bigmax, on Aug 23 2009, 07:13 PM, said:

My vote is PASS

If partner think that we have game opposite 7-8 random balanced points - he should just have bid it. My hand is not much better than that

yes me too as I have said - I expect p to have say AQx/AQxxxx/xx/xx

At love all there is less need to big thin games - if rho X's 4H and it goes 3 off I turn -100 into -500 whereas if I bring back 170 to -420 that is less bad

say p has AQx/AQxxxx/xx/xx then rho has KJx/KJxx/xx/Axxx will X 4H I expect

Is the full hand out there somewhere?

[Cascade]

Scoring: IMP

PASS (3♦) 3♥ (PASS)
3♠ (PASS) 3NT (PASS)
PASS (PASS)

---

Down One.

The full hand is not as interesting as the problem IMHO?

[jillybean]

Fluffy, on Aug 24 2009, 02:58 AM, said:

benlessard, on Aug 24 2009, 05:32 AM, said:

Im not inventing anything, these sequence are expert standard. Ask any exp you trust and they will tell you.

May I ask myself? lol.

Ok, won't go harsh, COG is less standard than you think.

[gnasher]

Cascade, on Aug 24 2009, 11:36 AM, said:

So what are you rules for when choice of games kicks in?

I think a four-level cue bid should always be choice of game unless either
a) A trump suit is already agreed, or
b) RHO has bid, so that there's a takeout double available, or

Sadly, none of my regular partners would agree with this.

Edit: and possibly also
c) A choice-of-games interpretation doesn't make any sense (but I can't think of any of these).

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2009-August-24, 05:27

[rd6789]

Cascade, on Aug 24 2009, 06:15 AM, said:

Down One.

The full hand is not as interesting as the problem IMHO?

at least those of us that passed aren't feeling too embarrassed

yes good problem

[WesleyC]

The_Hog, on Aug 23 2009, 09:08 PM, said:

IMO 3S = 0; it is a worse call than Pass.

Can you list a couple of sample hands that are a clear 3S bid?

[rd6789]

WesleyC, on Aug 24 2009, 07:58 AM, said:

The_Hog, on Aug 23 2009, 09:08 PM, said:

IMO 3S = 0; it is a worse call than Pass.

Can you list a couple of sample hands that are a clear 3S bid?

I would say a hand with a good 5 card spade suit (as partner may have to support on Hx) , no diamond stop (with that bid 3NT), no primary heart support and 10 or so points, so KQxxx/Jx/xx/Axxx or even Kxxxxx/Jx/xx/Axx if that is too weak for a 2S opener in your style

[the hog]

rd6789, on Aug 25 2009, 05:23 PM, said:

WesleyC, on Aug 24 2009, 07:58 AM, said:

The_Hog, on Aug 23 2009, 09:08 PM, said:

IMO 3S = 0; it is a worse call than Pass.

Can you list a couple of sample hands that are a clear 3S bid?

I would say a hand with a good 5 card spade suit (as partner may have to support on Hx) , no diamond stop (with that bid 3NT), no primary heart support and 10 or so points, so KQxxx/Jx/xx/Axxx or even Kxxxxx/Jx/xx/Axx if that is too weak for a 2S opener in your style

Those examples are fair enough; others would be 5S to say KJ.
Sorry, but to bid 3S on the given hand shows a serious lack of hand evaluation.

[Codo]

The_Hog, on Aug 25 2009, 08:16 PM, said:

Those examples are fair enough; others would be 5S to say KJ.
Sorry, but to bid 3S on the given hand shows a serious lack of hand evaluation.

My dear Ron,

you have a strong opinion, but no facts to convince me.

Sure, if you play with a partner who is willin g to raise on Jx or similar, you better hold strong spades. But why should he, if he knows that we just introduce a 5 card suit? And when he just raises with three, there is no need to have the honours in your suit.
Of course we all would like to have our honours in the long suits, but sometimes the big dealer don't give us suitable cards.

[Winstonm]

The "usual suspects" who are all for bidding here seem to me to be the same ones who on another thread couldn't wait to bid after a 3-level preempt with Kxx, AKxxx, xx, Kxx.

That should be the hand in this thread, and all the bidders should be forced to play with themselves with this hand as responder.

[655321]

The_Hog, on Aug 23 2009, 09:08 PM, said:

IMO 3S = 0; it is a worse call than Pass.

The_Hog, on Aug 25 2009, 06:16 AM, said:

Sorry, but to bid 3S on the given hand shows a serious lack of hand evaluation.

I don't agree with this. I am not a 3♠ bidder, but at least 3♠ is on the menu, whereas Pass is from another planet.

[WesleyC]

Passing on this hand shows a lack of understanding of IMP odds. Game will often go down (sometimes with no play at all) but nevertheless, passing is a big loser in the long run.

Regarding 3S vs 4H:

Its possible to use 3S to show a maximum passed hand with 5 strong spades, no stopper in diamonds and no tolerance for hearts. This is an extension of how 3S is played by an unpassed hand (without the chance for responder to have 6+S). Simple, useful, but infrequent.

I'd rather stretch to open with a good suit on the first round and then to use new suits by a passed hand in competition to show values in a flexible hand. Introducing a 987xx suit isn't ideal but at these colours partner won't expect a suit playable opposite Hx. 3S keeps alive the chance to reach a good 4S or 3NT while still allowing us to play hearts when partner has a good 6c suit.

[wclass___]

WesleyC, on Aug 26 2009, 01:55 AM, said:

Passing on this hand shows a lack of understanding of IMP odds. Game will often go down (sometimes with no play at all) but nevertheless, passing is a big loser in the long run.

You definetly know approximate IMP odds for this particular situation.
Could you, please, elaborate?