[bid_em_up]

Scoring: IMP

---

1♦-(1♠)-2♦-(2♠)-
?

Please give an explanation for your next bid.

Thanks.

(I'm posting this as a favor for somebody else).

[Jlall]

3C because 5D is easily possible and a double game swing is also possible.

[mike777]

I thought my choices were:
pass
2nt
3c

given your list I am forced to bid 3c.

[whereagles]

5♦ because it makes on as little across as

xxxx
xx
AKxxx
xx

(I'm taking 2♦ shows 5 cards...)

[EricK]

This is my take on each of the bids.

Double looks wrong. Once we have found a fit, it is more penalty oriented than this hand.

3♣ looks right. It suggests greater things, pinpoints our outside strength, but doesn't get us too high.

3♦ is an underbid. Partner will never guess we have this much playing strength

3♠ is an overbid, partner would not play us for this weak a hand.

4♦ is about right on values, but is not as descriptive as 3♣ and takes up more space

5♦ is a stab in the dark. Partner has only made a single raise, and could easily have a lot of wasted values in ♠.

[gnasher]

It seems very optimistic to hope to make game. What are we hoping for partner to hold? xxxx xx KQJx Kxx is a very specific maximum, and even that needs trumps 2-2. But maybe everyone else expects more from 2♦ than I do.

I don't understand the suggestion that partner should have five diamonds. A 1♦ opening in SAYC or 2/1 will rarely be a three card-suit when somebody else has a five-card major. Furthermore, partner probably has some spade length of his own, making it even less likely that I have only three. Responder should routinely raise diamonds with a 4x4x shape. (Personally I'd go further and raise on some hands with three diamonds, but I know that most wouldn't.)

I might bid 3♣ anyway, in order to get the right lead against 4♠, and to encourage partner to double 4♠ if that's what they bid and he happens to have a couple of trump tricks. If 3♣ led to a 5♦ call from partner, I wouldn't expect it to make very often, although it might turn out to be a save instead.

[andy_h]

I wouldn't say game is that optimistic, as there are other hands like xxxx xx AJ10x Kxx or xxx Kx KQxx xxxx. We have a good 2-way shot, could be a make or a good sac.

whereagles said:

(I'm taking 2♦ shows 5 cards...)

Does that mean to make a pre-emptive jump to 3♦ you require 6 diamonds? Assuming better minor, having 4432 is pretty rare compare to any other hand with 4+♦'s so even if opener can be 4432 I ain't waiting all day to find a hand with 6♦s that's preventing me to jump 3♦ with xxxx xx AKxxx xx.

[gnasher]

andy_h, on Oct 14 2009, 11:48 AM, said:

I wouldn't say game is that optimistic, as there are other hands like xxxx xx AJ10x Kxx or xxx Kx KQxx xxxx.

Yes, OK, there is more than one perfect maximum, so I probably shouldn't have used the word "specific". I notice, however, that in neither of your examples is game cold.

[andy_h]

gnasher, on Oct 14 2009, 10:49 PM, said:

andy_h, on Oct 14 2009, 11:48 AM, said:

I wouldn't say game is that optimistic, as there are other hands like xxxx xx AJ10x Kxx or xxx Kx KQxx xxxx.

Yes, OK, there is more than one perfect maximum, so I probably shouldn't have used the word "specific". I notice, however, that in neither of your examples is game cold.

I thought we were trying to get to good vul games via 3♣ rather than only cold ones.

[pooltuna]

Jlall, on Oct 14 2009, 12:20 AM, said:

3C because 5D is easily possible and a double game swing is also possible.

yep 3♣ it is. Get your lead director in for their eventual 5♠

[Jlall]

gnasher, on Oct 14 2009, 02:54 AM, said:

It seems very optimistic to hope to make game.  What are we hoping for partner to hold?  xxxx xx KQJx Kxx is a very specific maximum, and even that needs trumps 2-2.  But maybe everyone else expects more from 2♦ than I do.

I don't understand the suggestion that partner should have five diamonds.  A 1♦ opening in SAYC or 2/1 will rarely be a three card-suit when somebody else has a five-card major.  Furthermore, partner probably has some spade length of his own, making it even less likely that I have only three.  Responder should routinely raise diamonds with a 4x4x shape.  (Personally I'd go further and raise on some hands with three diamonds, but I know that most wouldn't.)

I might bid 3♣ anyway, in order to get the right lead against 4♠, and to encourage partner to double 4♠ if that's what they bid and he happens to have a couple of trump tricks.  If 3♣ led to a 5♦ call from partner, I wouldn't expect it to make very often, although it might turn out to be a save instead.

2D doesn't SHOW 5 cards in diamonds, but surely it is some reasonable amount of the time (25%? I dunno, maybe less frequent for you than me because you bid 3D more often?). If partner has 5 diamonds we need much less to make game.

xxx xx Axxxx Txx is quite a reasonable game (much better than 50 % as we make on a spade lead even if the club hook is off assuming 2-1 diamonds).

Ok that hand is pretty specific, but it is a 4 count.

Anyways I don't understand your point, there are some hands where partner has a maximum where game is extremely good. There are some hands where partner has a minimum where game is extremely good. There are also a lot of hands where we're going to be on some kind of finesse. That's a good game as far as I know. Doesn't this mean we should make a game try? Partner will be able to evaluate that 5 trumps is better than 4, and that the CK is good, and that spade wastage is bad. We are still not above 3D yet (though no doubt the opps are strong favorites to bid at least 3S).

I guess put another way, if I bid 3C and partner bids 5D I like my chances a lot, and if I go down maybe it's a good save anyways. If I bid 3C and partner doubles spades I like my chances a lot. If I bid 3C and partner passes spades I am not tempted to bid again.

I don't think it's like we're going to get majorly overboard because I bid 3C.

Also I don't think an 8-9 count with 4 diamonds is a max, I would expect partner to bid 2D with many soft 10 counts that had 4 diamonds and a balanced shape, and also 8 with 5 diamonds or many 9s with 5 diamonds.

[Phil]

Agree with Justin, but I want to get to take the push to 5♦ anytime partner doesn't have some spade coverage and fitting cards or club length. 3♣ helps pard evaluate. I'm not looking for perfectos. but there's a big difference between xx xx Axxx Kxxxx and QJx xx Axxxx xxx

I doubt pard has more than one spade card with no 1N call, but its possible if 1N actually shows something.

I have no idea what the limit of the hand is. You can construct holdings where both sides are cold for game and when the total tricks are 18.

If pard passes 4♠ I loathe getting a diamond lead but !h a club lead.

[jdonn]

I've been totally talked into 3♣ on this hand, where I would have bid 3♦ without even thinking hard just based on the weak trumps and minimum.

[whereagles]

andy_h, on Oct 14 2009, 10:48 AM, said:

whereagles said:

(I'm taking 2♦ shows 5 cards...)

Does that mean to make a pre-emptive jump to 3♦ you require 6 diamonds?

No. It means when people support pard, they usually have that support

[aguahombre]

whereagles, on Oct 14 2009, 02:13 PM, said:

andy_h, on Oct 14 2009, 10:48 AM, said:

whereagles said:

(I'm taking 2♦ shows 5 cards...)

Does that mean to make a pre-emptive jump to 3♦ you require 6 diamonds?

No, but both 2D and 3D should not be the same weak hand, so if you don't use inverted in comp (and apparently OP does not), then I guess 2D=4 and 3D=5. Seems wasteful, but that is apparently the context of the post, so we are supposed to live with it.
3c still feels right for most of the reasons given.

[gnasher]

andy_h, on Oct 14 2009, 01:57 PM, said:

I thought we were trying to get to good vul games via 3♣ rather than only cold ones.

Funny, I thought we were discussing whether it was optimistic to hope to make game. If it takes a perfect maximum to produce a game that isn't cold, it is optimistic to hope to make game.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2009-October-14, 15:42

[gnasher]

Jlall, on Oct 14 2009, 05:42 PM, said:

[Stuff that could only have been written on another continent]

It sounds as though our expectations from 2♦ are very different. If xxx xx Axxxx Txx is a 2♦ bid, what does 3♦ show?

[Jlall]

gnasher, on Oct 14 2009, 04:49 PM, said:

Jlall, on Oct 14 2009, 05:42 PM, said:

[Stuff that could only have been written on another continent]

It sounds as though our expectations from 2♦ are very different. If xxx xx Axxxx Txx is a 2♦ bid, what does 3♦ show?

Heh, maybe it's just me and not my fellow countrymen? I just wouldn't bid 3D with that vulnerable, I prefer some shape or something more, and don't like Axxxx. Even KQxxx would be much more desirable to me, or a stiff.

Maybe this is similar but I wouldn't bid 3H after 1H 1S with Axxx of hearts and out and a balanced hand (balanced defined as one doubleton).

It is not that I'm so scared of getting doubled though it's possible, more that I would be scared of partner saving incorrectly if he's expecting more playing strength.

I would also be bidding 3D with x xxx KQJxx xxxx which is a much different (and better) hand obviously.

In general I am more conservative than most people preempting with no singleton and not 2 doubletons, and I am also conservative about A empty suits.

[bid_em_up]

aguahombre, on Oct 14 2009, 03:06 PM, said:

No, but both 2D and 3D should not be the same weak hand, so if you don't use inverted in comp (and apparently OP does not)......

As I stated in the original post, I was posting this for someone else. I did so because they were unfamiliar with how to make a poll on BBO forums. I don't know what their methods are, or if there is any distinction between 2♦ and 3♦. From what little I was told, I have to assume it was undiscussed.

At the point in the poll given, the person in question made a choice of calls that I did not feel was a reasonable choice. I told them I would post the auction, give their hand, and see what bids got what votes and the explanations given for choosing those bids.

My choice was 3♣ as well.

I will not state what the person in question chose, as I do not wish to bias the poll just yet. There may be a follow-up thread soon.

mike777, on Oct 14 2009, 12:28 AM, said:

I thought my choices were:
pass
2nt
3c

given your list I am forced to bid 3c.

What part of "other" do you not understand?

[pooltuna]

bid_em_up, on Oct 14 2009, 06:25 PM, said:

aguahombre, on Oct 14 2009, 03:06 PM, said:

No, but both 2D and 3D should not be the same weak hand, so if you don't use inverted in comp (and apparently OP does not)......

As I stated in the original post, I was posting this for someone else. I did so because they were unfamiliar with how to make a poll on BBO forums. I don't know what their methods are, or if there is any distinction between 2♦ and 3♦. From what little I was told, I have to assume it was undiscussed.

At the point in the poll given, the person in question made a choice of calls that I did not feel was a reasonable choice. I told them I would post the auction, give their hand, and see what bids got what votes and the explanations given for choosing those bids.

My choice was 3♣ as well.

I will not state what the person in question chose, as I do not wish to bias the poll just yet. There may be a follow-up thread soon.

mike777, on Oct 14 2009, 12:28 AM, said:

I thought my choices were:
pass
2nt
3c

given your list I am forced to bid 3c.

What part of "other" do you not understand?

the alternate one?