[Jlall]

gnasher, on Oct 26 2009, 09:26 AM, said:

With the two bad balanced hands posted by billw55 you bid 2♥.  With the much better hand in the original post you bid 3♥ or 4♥, depending upon how aggressive you are.

If the double shows extra values, I think you should bid 4♥.  Partner can't be much worse than KQxxx Kxx AQxx x or KQxxx Kxx AQx Ax.

Does the double show extras? It would be nice to be able to show one's shape with a minimum 5(43)1.  If double doesn't show extras, 3♥ is enough.

I don't think double shows extras, but why does it matter? If he has a minimum they have 10 clubs and 26 HCP or whatever lol.

I think it shows significant extras if it has a doubleton club though.

4H is the same as 3H since partner is "always" going to bid 4H, and even if he has a pass we want to bid 4H as a preempt. The only difference is 3H doesnt preempt LHO as much. Something really weird is happening if RHO has a pass, LHO should have a strong hand with long clubs, bidding 4H might well get him to bid 5C.

I think the 2H bidders are playing a different game than me though Oo.

[ONEferBRID]

billw55, on Oct 26 2009, 09:01 AM, said:

OK.

So, from opener's point of view, responder's sequence shows perhaps 0-8?  For that matter, the 1NT call by itself shows maybe 0-10?  Won't such wide ranges make it hard for opener to make a good decision?

Sorry for the silly questions, I am trying to learn something here.

Bill... your questioning isn't silly... the 1NT was insane ( or at least LOL ) .

[hatchett]

Quote

the 1NT was insane ( or at least LOL )

LOL

[lamford]

I bid 2NT, which is a pre-emptive 3D or 3H bid, and partner puppets with 3C to find out which; is this not completely standard methods in the modern world?

[gwnn]

maybe we should make two threads lol

anyway i bid 4♥, i think id have bid 4♥ anyway. partner had a nice 6331 and i made 5. I would have made 6 if we had bid it actually.

axxxxx
akx
aqx
k

of course i dont think he'd have passed 2♥ or something

[nigel_k]

I'd bid 3♥ and would not regard 2♥ as a logical alternative that is suggested by the UI.

[jdonn]

I bid 4♥, partner has a singleton club or extra values. Also I'm not particularly sure what the hesitation suggests I do, but it certainly doesn't suggest I bid 4♥ so I should be safe.

[Jlall]

gwnn, on Oct 26 2009, 01:31 PM, said:

axxxxx
akx
aqx
k

This is an excellent slam. Good luck finding it, 2H bidders!

If you were a 2H bidder I really think you should construct some hands for partner and see how well your hand plays.

[Codo]

Very interesting hand.
You bid 1 NT with this hand, not fearing partners raise to 3 NT with
AKQxx,xx,Qxx,AKx

You do not fear his 4 spade bid on AKQJxxx,xx,AK,xx, expecting one trick from you.

You play opps who have 18 HCPS and 10 clubs between them and just 3 hearts, but all they could do was to bid 2 Club.

So what to do in this situation?

Abstain.


For the actual hand: Had I missed anything if I had passed first round? No.

[helene_t]

Sorry my 2♥ bid was retarded (except that maybe I would suspect partner's double was meant as penalties). I should bid 3♥ regardless of partner tanking.

Off-topic: I think if you don't open 1NT with a 5cM, the double is better used as something like a 15-17 5332.

[Jlall]

Codo, on Oct 27 2009, 03:12 AM, said:

Very interesting hand.
You bid 1 NT with this hand, not fearing partners raise to 3 NT with
AKQxx,xx,Qxx,AKx

Why would partner ever bid 3N with a balanced 18 count? That is what 2N shows.

Heres a fun question: If you knew partner had a balanced 18 count would you rather bid 1N or pass 1S? The answer is easily that you'd rather bid 1N since 3H or 4H will be much better on average than 1S. Even with your example which gave extremely strong spades, and the "wrong" AK of a minor for hearts, and the "right" AK of a minor for spades, 3H is better than 1S.

[billw55]

Jlall, on Oct 27 2009, 09:31 AM, said:

Why would partner ever bid 3N with a balanced 18 count? That is what 2N shows.

Heres a fun question: If you knew partner had a balanced 18 count would you rather bid 1N or pass 1S? The answer is easily that you'd rather bid 1N since 3H or 4H will be much better on average than 1S. Even with your example which gave extremely strong spades, and the "wrong" AK of a minor for hearts, and the "right" AK of a minor for spades, 3H is better than 1S.

This is why I prefer weak jump shifts always. I can bid 3♥ over 1♠ and reach the (usually) better contract. If partner moves over that, it is without any expectation of values in my hand.

But if I bid 1NT and partner bids 2NT? Presumably you will want me to bid 3♥ next. But, won't partner often go on to 4♥ when he shouldn't, because he expects me to have more than a queen for my 1NT call?

[jdonn]

billw55, on Oct 27 2009, 11:16 AM, said:

Jlall, on Oct 27 2009, 09:31 AM, said:

Why would partner ever bid 3N with a balanced 18 count? That is what 2N shows.

Heres a fun question: If you knew partner had a balanced 18 count would you rather bid 1N or pass 1S? The answer is easily that you'd rather bid 1N since 3H or 4H will be much better on average than 1S. Even with your example which gave extremely strong spades, and the "wrong" AK of a minor for hearts, and the "right" AK of a minor for spades, 3H is better than 1S.

This is why I prefer weak jump shifts always. I can bid 3♥ over 1♠ and reach the (usually) better contract. If partner moves over that, it is without any expectation of values in my hand.

But if I bid 1NT and partner bids 2NT? Presumably you will want me to bid 3♥ next. But, won't partner often go on to 4♥ when he shouldn't, because he expects me to have more than a queen for my 1NT call?

You might want to be in 4♥ anyway if partner didn't have the worst example ever for your hand like Codo gave. For example, we could give him the best example ever for your hand instead.

Axxxx KJ KQT AQT

And then you easily want to be in game.

But that's beside the point, since most of us play systems that let you stop in 3♥ (ie transfers) over the 2NT rebid.

[Jlall]

billw55, on Oct 27 2009, 11:16 AM, said:

Jlall, on Oct 27 2009, 09:31 AM, said:

Why would partner ever bid 3N with a balanced 18 count? That is what 2N shows.

Heres a fun question: If you knew partner had a balanced 18 count would you rather bid 1N or pass 1S? The answer is easily that you'd rather bid 1N since 3H or 4H will be much better on average than 1S. Even with your example which gave extremely strong spades, and the "wrong" AK of a minor for hearts, and the "right" AK of a minor for spades, 3H is better than 1S.

This is why I prefer weak jump shifts always. I can bid 3♥ over 1♠ and reach the (usually) better contract. If partner moves over that, it is without any expectation of values in my hand.

But if I bid 1NT and partner bids 2NT? Presumably you will want me to bid 3♥ next. But, won't partner often go on to 4♥ when he shouldn't, because he expects me to have more than a queen for my 1NT call?

I was assuming I had some way to stop in 3H. If you play 3H as non forcing, partner needs a really exceptional hand to go to 4H. If I bid 3H NF and partner bid 4H I would be happy. He probably has something like AKxxx AKx Ax xxx.

If I had no methods over a 2N rebid to enable me to stop in 3H, I would still rather play 4H than 1S on average opposite 18-19 bal.

[billw55]

jdonn, on Oct 27 2009, 11:20 AM, said:

You might want to be in 4♥ anyway if partner didn't have the worst example ever for your hand like Codo gave. For example, we could give him the best example ever for your hand instead.

Axxxx KJ KQT AQT

And then you easily want to be in game.

But that's beside the point, since most of us play systems that let you stop in 3♥ (ie transfers) over the 2NT rebid.

True, I might want to be in game if partner has the right hand. Since partner is the one who can see his hand, I expect he is better equipped to make that decision than I am.

Playing WJSA, is the loss of 3♥ as a strong bid directly over 1♠ that big a deal?

[jdonn]

If your point is that playing a bid which shows this hand works very well when you hold this hand, then that doesn't seem like a particularly daring assertion but sure I agree.

[Jlall]

Weak jump shifts are fine, but if you play them as THIS weak they probably don't come up that often. Sure they will work well when they do come up though. Personally when I play weak jump shifts I prefer to play it as something like KQxxxxx and out which comes up much more often.

[billw55]

jdonn, on Oct 27 2009, 11:30 AM, said:

If your point is that playing a bid which shows this hand works very well when you hold this hand, then that doesn't seem like a particularly daring assertion but sure I agree.

Well it works this time. At the table, I call that my lucky day

Of course a different day partner will have a minimum opener, and 3♥ will go for 800 when lefty was about to balance over 1♠. But would 1NT gain much in that case?

[jdonn]

billw55, on Oct 27 2009, 11:34 AM, said:

jdonn, on Oct 27 2009, 11:30 AM, said:

If your point is that playing a bid which shows this hand works very well when you hold this hand, then that doesn't seem like a particularly daring assertion but sure I agree.

Well it works this time. At the table, I call that my lucky day

Of course a different day partner will have a minimum opener, and 3♥ will go for 800 when lefty was about to balance over 1♠. But would 1NT gain much in that case?

LHO would bid over it and you would be off the hook? Partner would rebid a minor and you would bid 2♥?

[billw55]

Jlall, on Oct 27 2009, 11:31 AM, said:

Weak jump shifts are fine, but if you play them as THIS weak they probably don't come up that often. Sure they will work well when they do come up though. Personally when I play weak jump shifts I prefer to play it as something like KQxxxxx and out which comes up much more often.

I define a WJS as a hand that, in repsonder's judgement, isn't good enough to bid 1NT followed by the suit. I think your example is good enough to do that.

It seems you reverse this procedure, which is interesting; I never thought of that.