[Free]

Scoring: IMP

---

RHO opens in 1st seat with 4♣, preempt in ♣. Do you feel the need to bid or not in this NV vs V situation?

[Flame]

The way you said it "feel the need" explain something i tried to tell you guys not long ago, i always feel the need because i like to bid, i like to play, but i can controll this need and hopefully so is my partner.
Anyway i think i'll bid 4♦ here.

[luis]

Clear pass to me, specially NV vrs VUL.

[inquiry]

Pass.

[mikestar]

Pass. Not even a close decision. I have a minimum opening bid and the QC is worthless but might snag a trick on defense. It wouldn't occur to me to start this hand at he four level. If partner balances with a double, I'll try 5D.

[Flame]

Good learned a new thing , i will pass it now.

[Fluffy]

Lack an ace to bid anything (and it would be double with this structure)

[pclayton]

My screensaver has kicked on twice since I strated looking at this hand, so I've certainly barred partner from acting on his balanced 15. Obviously this is a close decision, but I'm a bidder because:

1. I have the shortness in the preempt, so its incumbent for me to act with any excuse to bid.
2. I have a decent suit.
3. If pard trots 4 of a major, he won't be disappointed with this dummy.

Toughest problem I've seen on here since I've started posting again. Its a close decision, and I won't stand up for this call, and wouldn't be the least bit surprised if 4♦ is a bloodbath. But I also won't be surprised if this call gets us to a nice game or slam.

[Chamaco]

Pass, any vulnerabilty.
Expecting partner with more than 7-8hcop (average) is not bridge, it is gambling.

In direct seat this hand is barely enough to bid over a weak 2, not enough at 3 level, let alone at level 4.

[luke warm]

i voted pass, but it would be much tougher if the vul was reversed... still a pass i think

[Cascade]

Pass.

You need partner to cover 5 of 7 losers to make game in diamonds and 4 of 6 to make game in a major if partner has a five-card major.

Alternatively you have only two or three useful cards for partner plus a ruffing value if he bids a major. He will be able to bid with most hands that make game.

As an aside I would play 4♦ here as (non-)Leaping Michaels showing five diamonds and a five-card major. So I am way short of bidding 5♦! I think this is a much more useful treatment than a natural 4♦. Years ago I did a big simulation on bidding over a pre-empt. Bidding 4minor was a big loser. The main reason was that even when it was right you often didn't gain much +130 is just not worth having. So I am happy to give up these natural bids for something that will help me find the right game where the pay-off is greater.

[EarlPurple]

I voted for pass. If I am going to bid it would have to be Dbl. I have reasonable defence should partner choose to pass, and reasonable offense should partner choose to bid.

[dogsbreath]

Hi..
Pass with a weak p, cos we'll get too high.
Pass with a good p, cos it's a partnership game.

Rgds Dog

Quote

furnulum pani nolo

[whereagles]

I pass. If pard can't bid over 4C, we can't make a thing. Incidently, if he reopens 4M, I pass again

This would be a problem if it were

4C p p ??

but even here I'd probably pass. Certainly at imps.

[Trpltrbl]

Free, on Jul 16 2004, 05:43 AM, said:

Do you feel the need to bid or not in this NV vs V situation?

I feel the need for speed, that's why I fly around at 500+ mph.
But I pass this hand.

Mike