[Phil]

IMPs, long matches

1. KJxxx x Ax Qxxxx

(1♥) - 1♠ - (pass) - 3N;
(pass) - ?

Note: Opponents play a version of Blue Club, so 1♥ is 4+ and could include a longer side suit.

2. void, KTxxx, xxx, A9xxx (w/r)

1♣ - (2♠) - ?

[Echognome]

The first one seems an easy pass.

On the second one, I'd probably double to get hearts in, but wouldn't object to 3♣.

[jjbrr]

pass and double. I'll correct 2NT to 3♣, bid 4♣ over 3♣, and bid game over anything else.

[awm]

pass and 3♣

I'm concerned on the second hand that my LHO is very unlikely to pass. I really don't want to see an auction like 1♣-2♠-X-4♠-Pass-Pass, or 1♣-2♠-X-4♠-X-Pass-Pass, because in both cases it seems unclear whether to try 5♣ or pass. Raising clubs directly seems to give partner more help, and he may find the 5♣ bid himself when it's right (plus I'm more confident in passing his double if he makes one, having better shown my values and club length).

[mohitz]

jjbrr, on Apr 12 2010, 09:20 PM, said:

pass and double. I'll correct 2NT to 3♣, bid 4♣ over 3♣, and bid game over anything else.

I guess the real question on the second one is what one does if the bidding comes back at 4♠?

[jdonn]

First one is a very easy pass. Does it sound like partner cares much for us to pull this? And our suits aren't even good.

Second one I double, fully prepared to bid 5♣ next if 4♠ comes back to me. Aside from having the hearts this is more playing strength than I want for 3♣ anyway.

[pooltuna]

Phil, on Apr 12 2010, 10:32 AM, said:

IMPs, long matches

1. KJxxx x Ax Qxxxx

(1♥) - 1♠ - (pass) - 3N;
(pass) - ?

Note: Opponents play a version of Blue Club, so 1♥ is 4+ and could include a longer side suit.

2. void, KTxxx, xxx, A9xxx (w/r)

1♣ - (2♠) - ?

1. Presummably partner knows you can hold this type of hand thus making 3NT a unilateral action. It is my strong recommendation that when partner makes a unilateral action passing is almost always the right choice.

2. I would venture a negative X here with some trepidation since I need to alert partner to our ♥ situation in case and before LHO bids 4♠

[kfay]

Same as Josh.

[aguahombre]

jdonn, on Apr 12 2010, 10:09 AM, said:

(2) Aside from having the hearts this is more playing strength than I want for 3♣ anyway.

That is the real problem with bidding 3C, IMO. If 3C showed anywhere near this much playing strength it would be more attractive, even with the Hearts.

[mikeh]

The first one seems to be an easy pass: partner had lots of ways of involving me, and I don't have a great offensive hand.

The second one is far more interesting.

I would bid 2♥ over a 1♠ overcall: the risk of being preempted makes the textbook negative double unappealing.

Over 2♠...heck...I still bid 3♥...may as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb.

Double loses when partner converts, and doesn't solve all of our potential problems on other, more likely auctions

3♣ loses the heart suit, and partner may be 3=4=3=3 amongst other shapes where hearts plays as well or better than clubs.

3♥ looks silly and may be silly...it is essentially a bet that we can profitably play game in one of my two suits....even if as a save. I hope partner doesn't bid 3N, but since I expect a raise on my left, partner won't often bid 3N. If he does, I pull to 4♣, losing big time to 4=3=3=3 but otherwise maybe surviving.

[Jlall]

I'm with you mike, 3H on the 2nd one. If it goes p 3N I will be very sad

[Fluffy]

first one pass

second one I play rubenshol here, so I'd bid 3♦ transfer to hearts to bid 4♣ if possible, but most likelly 5♣.

barring that I think I lean towards take out double.

[Phil]

1. The 3N bidder held AQ KQT8xx Qxx Jx. I'm surprised no one mentions a Michael's call with the 5-5. ATT I bid 4♣ and got to a pretty hopeless 4♠. 3N is kind of interesting - your RHO has xx AJxxx KJx Axx.

2. Partner bid 3♥ with this. This initially was a reality check for me - at least until I read Justin's and Mike's answers

[jdonn]

Actually I kind of like 3♥ I just didn't really think of it. My vote isn't so much for 'yes double' as it is for 'no 3♣'.

On the first one sorry Phil you made a lousy bid hehe. Partner is probably just worth 2NT though but whatever.

[Phil]

jdonn, on Apr 12 2010, 04:07 PM, said:

On the first one sorry Phil you made a lousy bid hehe.

Don't disagree. Not the only lousy thing I did for sure.

[Jlall]

Phil, on Apr 12 2010, 03:59 PM, said:

1. The 3N bidder held AQ KQT8xx Qxx Jx. I'm surprised no one mentions a Michael's call with the 5-5. ATT I bid 4♣ and got to a pretty hopeless 4♠. 3N is kind of interesting - your RHO has xx AJxxx KJx Axx.

2. Partner bid 3♥ with this. This initially was a reality check for me - at least until I read Justin's and Mike's answers

Hard to argue with michaels either or 1S, but I generally prefer 1S on that type of hand (depends on vul I guess). W/R I might bid michaels.

[jdonn]

I really don't like michaels at all with these suits. But it's preemptive and not horribly dangerous so eh whatever.

[quiddity]

Wow, 3H? I assume this sets up a force over anything LHO might bid. If he bids 4S and partner doubles do you pass or pull to 5C?

[mikeh]

quiddity, on Apr 12 2010, 04:33 PM, said:

Wow, 3H?  I assume this sets up a force over anything LHO might bid.  If he bids 4S and partner doubles do you pass or pull to 5C?

I pull to 5♣, and think it is clear.

When LHO bounces to 4♠, even red/white, it creates a fp for our side, at least in my agreements: 3♥, like it or not, was gf, announcing ownership of the hand. Yes, there are hands on which, even when I have a 'real' 3♥ call, the opps own the hand, but bridge is a game of percentages, and one cannot design one's methods with the expectation of perfection.

So when partner doubles, he is NOT announcing a trump stack: he is denying interest in 5♥. Ok...now he has to have club length: at least 4 and often 5, especially if, as I always do, one opens 1♦ with 4-4 minors.

Now not only is our offence huge, but our defence is reduced. Not only may we not beat 4♠, but we might make 5♣. This hand has many of the characteristics of a double game swing....picture Jxx x AQxx KQJxx where we score 2 diamonds and a club on defence and lose only 2 red tricks on offence.

[Rodney26]

mikeh, on Apr 12 2010, 04:58 PM, said:

quiddity, on Apr 12 2010, 04:33 PM, said:

Wow, 3H?  I assume this sets up a force over anything LHO might bid.  If he bids 4S and partner doubles do you pass or pull to 5C?

I pull to 5♣, and think it is clear.

When LHO bounces to 4♠, even red/white, it creates a fp for our side, at least in my agreements: 3♥, like it or not, was gf, announcing ownership of the hand. Yes, there are hands on which, even when I have a 'real' 3♥ call, the opps own the hand, but bridge is a game of percentages, and one cannot design one's methods with the expectation of perfection.

So when partner doubles, he is NOT announcing a trump stack: he is denying interest in 5♥. Ok...now he has to have club length: at least 4 and often 5, especially if, as I always do, one opens 1♦ with 4-4 minors.

Now not only is our offence huge, but our defence is reduced. Not only may we not beat 4♠, but we might make 5♣. This hand has many of the characteristics of a double game swing....picture Jxx x AQxx KQJxx where we score 2 diamonds and a club on defence and lose only 2 red tricks on offence.

I really like the cut of your jib with these posts Mike. I like your recommended strategy because I think it helps partner make the best pass or defend decision at the five level and it is best to explore all three lower suits battling spades. I'm fairly certain though that a lot of my partners would launch a level or two higher on just about any excuse on the auction below; is 6 down one a frequent problem? Do you have methods/principles to differentiate a more serious slam move here from 5 level competition?