[rogerclee]

r/r IMPs

9xxxx x ATxx KQx

1D 1H 1S 2D
P 2H ?

(x by partner would be 3♠)

[karlson]

3d

[jjbrr]

eh we're missing a game. 3♦ but I suspect 4 will work not infrequently.

[ArtK78]

3♦. I am not worried about missing a game. If there is one here, partner is likely to bid again. But since he passed over the opponents' 2♦ bid, and since the opponents seem to have some values, game is unlikely.

[Of more concern is whether 3♦ is too high. Partner could be 3433, in which case we are likely to wind up in a very shaky 3♠. C'est la vie.]

EDIT: Missed the failure to make a support double. So it is impossible for partner to be 3433. Ignore the bracketed text in my original post.

[jjbrr]

According to the OP, partner does not have 3♦, do you see why?

[jdonn]

ArtK78, on Feb 11 2010, 10:28 AM, said:

Partner could be 3433, in which case we are likely to wind up in a very shaky 3♠. C'est la vie.

LOL for the first reason, then lol for the second reason.

Anyway 3♦ is wtp why is this problem here?

[Rodney26]

jdonn, on Feb 11 2010, 11:19 AM, said:

ArtK78, on Feb 11 2010, 10:28 AM, said:

Partner could be 3433, in which case we are likely to wind up in a very shaky 3♠.  C'est la vie.

LOL for the first reason, then lol for the second reason.

Anyway 3♦ is wtp why is this problem here?

Maybe he's curious to see if anyone passes and squelches the diamond fit, hoping for -170? 1S might have convinced righty to downgrade his spade honors. I'd bid 3D myself, but I'd feel a little queasy about it.

[matmat]

what is double on this auction?

[Cascade]

matmat, on Feb 12 2010, 06:08 AM, said:

what is double on this auction?

I don't care. I am never doubling with undisclosed diamond support.

[jdonn]

Rodney26, on Feb 11 2010, 12:06 PM, said:

jdonn, on Feb 11 2010, 11:19 AM, said:

ArtK78, on Feb 11 2010, 10:28 AM, said:

Partner could be 3433, in which case we are likely to wind up in a very shaky 3♠.  C'est la vie.

LOL for the first reason, then lol for the second reason.

Anyway 3♦ is wtp why is this problem here?

Maybe he's curious to see if anyone passes and squelches the diamond fit, hoping for -170? 1S might have convinced righty to downgrade his spade honors. I'd bid 3D myself, but I'd feel a little queasy about it.

We do have over half the strength, and top tricks (meaning good defense). It's like saying you don't raise hearts after 1♥ (1♠) because you are worried the opponents will find 4♠ more easily.

[aguahombre]

3D..we could easily have a nine or 10-card fit.

P.S., since we needed a support double available, I guess 1S didn't show five. But knowing partner has 2 or fewer makes this hand really good for diamonds --almost good enough to find an invite in Diamonds, if I can invent one without creating a game force.

[Pict]

Partner can't bid (can he?) with something like:

Kx, xxx, KQxxx,Axx (or even the spade Ace instead of King?)

Seems a good probability for an IMPs game.

[matmat]

Cascade, on Feb 11 2010, 12:26 PM, said:

matmat, on Feb 12 2010, 06:08 AM, said:

what is double on this auction?

I don't care. I am never doubling with undisclosed diamond support.

I don't care, i'm asking what the double means.

[jdonn]

matmat, on Feb 11 2010, 01:41 PM, said:

Cascade, on Feb 11 2010, 12:26 PM, said:

matmat, on Feb 12 2010, 06:08 AM, said:

what is double on this auction?

I don't care. I am never doubling with undisclosed diamond support.

I don't care, i'm asking what the double means.

This hand or better with a diamond moved to hearts is perfect.

[PhantomSac]

jdonn, on Feb 11 2010, 11:19 AM, said:

ArtK78, on Feb 11 2010, 10:28 AM, said:

Partner could be 3433, in which case we are likely to wind up in a very shaky 3♠.  C'est la vie.

LOL for the first reason, then lol for the second reason.

Anyway 3♦ is wtp why is this problem here?

The problem is you could easily miss a game, and possibly miss a slam, if you bid 3D. Having 5 small spades is really often given that partner will have a stiff spade a lot, and even if he has a doubleton spade it could be our hand for game pretty easily if he doesn't have a lot of heart wastage.

I would definitely bid 4D on this hand.

[jdonn]

You could miss a game but 3♦ still seems obvious to me. 11 is a lot of tricks opposite a minimum opener. Also 4♦ seems forcing to me, or maybe you intended it that way?

[PhantomSac]

jdonn, on Feb 11 2010, 04:30 PM, said:

You could miss a game but 3♦ still seems obvious to me. 11 is a lot of tricks opposite a minimum opener. Also 4♦ seems forcing to me, or maybe you intended it that way?

I would bid 3H with a forcing hand. I don't understand all these forcing 4 of a minor jumps when cuebids are available tbh. Similarly I think stuff like 1D 1S 2C 4C or 1D 1S 2D 4D are just shapely invite, not forcing.

In this auction especially we already have no way to invite in diamonds (3D is constructive but not really invite obv), and we can just bid 3H then diamonds with diamonds, so whatever. Sometimes they bid 4H on your left and you'd rather have bid 4D forcing rather than 3H, but I think having a way to invite is more important than that.

[jjbrr]

BBF ♥ Beep Beep

[Rodney26]

jdonn, on Feb 11 2010, 12:31 PM, said:

Rodney26, on Feb 11 2010, 12:06 PM, said:

jdonn, on Feb 11 2010, 11:19 AM, said:

ArtK78, on Feb 11 2010, 10:28 AM, said:

Partner could be 3433, in which case we are likely to wind up in a very shaky 3♠.  C'est la vie.

LOL for the first reason, then lol for the second reason.

Anyway 3♦ is wtp why is this problem here?

Maybe he's curious to see if anyone passes and squelches the diamond fit, hoping for -170? 1S might have convinced righty to downgrade his spade honors. I'd bid 3D myself, but I'd feel a little queasy about it.

We do have over half the strength, and top tricks (meaning good defense). It's like saying you don't raise hearts after 1♥ (1♠) because you are worried the opponents will find 4♠ more easily.

It's not the same Josh. It's a different type of auction because of the spade situation. If partner has a stiff, we might be in -620/+600 territory or certainly where we want to bid on over 4H. The main problem here is the 1S spade bid has sent the opposite message to partner in terms of whether to defend or bid one more, and we have some idea that maybe we lack wastage in spades given partner's subsequent pass. In thinking about it though, pass is absurd. Too many minimums give partner decent play for game or no hope of beating 4H. x KTx KQxxx ATxx is a scary hand.

If it goes 4H-p-p to you, I assume x, CK?

[jdonn]

PhantomSac, on Feb 11 2010, 04:39 PM, said:

jdonn, on Feb 11 2010, 04:30 PM, said:

You could miss a game but 3♦ still seems obvious to me. 11 is a lot of tricks opposite a minimum opener. Also 4♦ seems forcing to me, or maybe you intended it that way?

I would bid 3H with a forcing hand. I don't understand all these forcing 4 of a minor jumps when cuebids are available tbh. Similarly I think stuff like 1D 1S 2C 4C or 1D 1S 2D 4D are just shapely invite, not forcing.

In this auction especially we already have no way to invite in diamonds (3D is constructive but not really invite obv), and we can just bid 3H then diamonds with diamonds, so whatever. Sometimes they bid 4H on your left and you'd rather have bid 4D forcing rather than 3H, but I think having a way to invite is more important than that.

Good point, probably it is invitational and therefore a good bid. I didn't really think about more than 3♦ since I assumed the problem was posted with pass and double being the other options and I don't like either one at all.