[kgr]

Scoring: MP

---

1♣-1♠
3♣-??
 
Matchpoints
Club tournament with good and bad pairs. Opps are average in the field.
 
Pass or 3NT? Would it be different at IMP's?

[hotShot]

Pass, the ♥ are unknown and my ♠ are wide open.
Opps will usually lead a major.

IMPs don't change anything.

[pooltuna]

kgr, on Jan 6 2010, 09:40 AM, said:

Scoring: MP

---

1♣-1♠
3♣-??
 
Matchpoints
Club tournament with good and bad pairs. Opps are average in the field.
 
Pass or 3NT? Would it be different at IMP's?

yes take a shot partners don't jump in their suits with peanuts especially if you have a big filler card like the K plus either major could break evenly if it is wide open

[andy_h]

3d

[Fluffy]

I find it close, but I'd lean towards 3NT, it will often make when it shouldn't.

I don't like 3♦ this time, our alternative of 4♣ is ugly anyway, partner with ♥xx and we can still make 3NT and fail in 4♣.

[billw55]

Minor suit partials at matchpoints are not allowed especially in forums

Yes 3NT for me. Excellent chance for 6 (or 7!) cashing clubs. To go down, there has to (a.) be an unstopped major and (b.) they lead it and (c.) it doesn't block and (d.) it doesn't break and (e.) they don't switch when I falsecard and ... etc

Definitely 3NT at IMPs also.

[Codo]

Easy 3 NT, no mater vul. and form of scoring.

My partner has major values. He did bid strong, not me. And if he has say A,xx,KQx,AQJxxxx and they take the first 5 hearts- oh well... so what?

To me any other bid is horrible.

[jdonn]

3♦. But whatever you do don't pass! You don't have 7 points, you have the king of clubs with 3 card support and an ace!!!

Food for thought. xx Ax xx Axxxxxx is about half of what he has shown so far. 3NT is a favorite. Hmmmm....

[billw55]

Codo, on Jan 6 2010, 10:45 AM, said:

And if he has say A,xx,KQx,AQJxxxx and they take the first 5 hearts- oh well... so what?

Also partner is not barred from pulling to 5♣ with that hand.

[Fluffy]

I wouldn't play very long with partners who pull my 3NT with that hand

[mikeh]

I would never bid 3♦ because there is far too much risk of telling the opps too much and no real chance of improving the score.

What if he bids 3♠? Surely 4♣ by me is forcing? Actually, I am not sure whether it is, but it sounds like is....I mean, how else would I bid KQxx xxx Axxx Kx?

What if he bids 3♥?

It seems to me that 3♦ works only when he will respond specifically with 3N AND we need the contract played from his side.

This is entirely possible: Ax Kx Kxx AQJxxx is one quick example (tho not opposite me...I'd probably rebid 2N with that at mps).

But I agree that I cannot pass, so 3N is foisted upon me. All I need is 2 winners in his hand outside the club suit (and he will surely hold cards that offer reasonable play for that) and that the opps can't run 5 tricks. In essence...give him a major suit Ace and hope that their running major either blocks (as it may do in spades) or is 4=4. I think the odds are good. Anyone who passes should find a partner holding Ax Axx xx AQJxxx.

Finally, anyone who argues that we hold only a 7 count and partner has only promised a good 15-17, doesn't understand hand valuation. Even absent the location of the club K...which is worth both a trick and a tempo because it is a club....the 4321 count undervalues A's and K's. This is a great 7 count in context.

If we go down, we'll have company.

[Hanoi5]

I also thought about 3♦ but I think that will take us too often to 3NT when it can't be made.That's what I bid over 3♣ if I choose not to pass but I don't like my choices if partner bids 3♠.

[kgr]

The bidding was slightly different. RHO DBL'ed. See:
http://forums.bridge...showtopic=36417

[whereagles]

3♦ is a silly bid, but so it bidding 3NT and find opener with a sing heart...

I bet 3NT is the winner though.. lol.

[eyhung]

Codo, on Jan 6 2010, 08:45 AM, said:

Easy 3 NT, no mater vul. and form of scoring.

My partner has major values. He did bid strong, not me. And if he has say A,xx,KQx,AQJxxxx and they take the first 5 hearts- oh well... so what?

So what? By any chance are you playing a different game? To use your own example, if partner has A xx KQx AQJxxxx and you hold T9xx xxx Axx Kxx I can think of a much, much better contract than 3NT at any form of vul or scoring. And this contract is easy to reach after 3♦. Partner will think : "hm, he has a diamond card (the ace) and didn't bid 3NT, so he probably doesn't have a heart card. Gee, should I bid 3NT? No way, but 5♣ is probably on a finesse at worst."

It boggles my mind that the vast majority of posters in this thread want to shoot out 3NT with almost no positional values and two prime cards that work well in a club contract. What on earth is wrong with the flexible 3♦ call? Remember, you can still reach 3NT (with a heart stopper, no less!) after you bid 3♦. It's hard to reach 5♣ when that's right after you bid 3NT -- for every time partner is right to pull, he'll be wrong approximately as often. 3♦ isn't even clearly lead-directing -- partner will now only bid 3NT with a heart card, so it feels even money whether spades or hearts are the best suit for the defense.

Sometimes in bridge you have to guess. Sometimes you don't. I think it's good bridge to avoid guessing when you don't have to.

[Fluffy]

eyhung I think we (the 3NT poster)s have raised the reasons, mine is that lack of heart stopper doesn't mean that 3NT cannot be made, and much less that it won't make (nobody has bid hearts!), I would hate to play 4♣ -1 when 3NT makes.

Also telling the opponents what is the right lead might not be a brilliant idea.

[eyhung]

I think the problem of wrong-siding 3NT is far worse than pinpointing the heart weakness...especially since we also have spade weakness!

[Fluffy]

the spade weakness is a reason to declare, making the switch far from obvious for them

[eyhung]

Fluffy, on Jan 6 2010, 04:30 PM, said:

the spade weakness is a reason to declare, making the switch far from obvious for them

My experience tells me that they often won't be in a position to "switch".

If partner declares, I expect the most common sequence of play will be: RHO leads a non-winner, partner wins, and rattles off at least 9 fast ones : 6 clubs, the trick from the opening lead, the diamond ace, and either an ace or the DK or a D finesse.

If I declare, a frequent sequence of play is : LHO leads through partner's tenace, and they get an extra trick relative to the tables who declare from the other side. (Remember, this is matchpoints, so even if we make, we get a bad board any time we wrong-side the majors and they lead through a vulnerable stopper.)

Even if they do get into a "switch" position later in the play, a good opponent will frequently be able to use information from signals, their hand, and declarer's line of play to work out my spade weakness. So concealing the spades has far less upside than you might think, and frequent downside via losing an extra trick by force when they lead through a tenace.

[Codo]

Mikeh wrotes some good reasons why 3 ♦ may fail. Did you read them? Do you care to discuss them?

That partner may have a positional stopper which you do not have is a great advantage of 3 Diamond.

That they may lead a wrong suit (including diamonds) if a suit is wide open is a big advantage of a quick 3 NT. That there are hands where 3 NT is better then 5 club even with them cashing the first 4 heart tricks against NT is another.
That the bidding does not lead to misunderstandings is a third.