[jillybean]

Scoring: MP

1♦:3♦ -2

---

ATB, if any?

[Phil]

North gets it.

A balanced hand with 4 trump is unsuitable for a preemptive raise of a minor. 1N is preferable.

[gwnn]

well South didn't do anything so he gets 0%

North raised with a dull balanced hand. It is bad bridge, he gets 100%.

[mgoetze]

South of course, I'm sure North wouldn't bid this way unless 1♦ promised 4 and usually had 5 diamonds. So it seems South forgot the system...

(Or maybe South just made the standard systematic opening bid and North a totally silly raise but, in that case, why are you asking?)

[rogerclee]

One of the sacrifices of playing inverted raises is that you have to bid 1N with normal minor raises, not 3m.

[neilkaz]

Blame 100% to north who has a routine 1NT bid playing INVM. For me to make a preemptive raise of 1♦ I want a 5th trump and a weaker hand.

[quiddity]

*shrug* - North tried a pressure bid and partner came down with the worst possible hand. It happens. I tend to think that a balanced raise should bid notrump at matchpoints, but if you have the agreement that 3♦ shows a mixed raise then I don't think North's hand is far off. Partner will usually have at least 4 diamonds for his bid and North's hand is weak in the majors.

The fact that the opps are red makes the 3♦ bid less attractive though. If they were white I'd be worried about them effectively competing to 3M. They're less likely to do that when vulnerable, so we can bid 1N and then compete to 3♦ over anything they bid and hope to buy it.

[ONEferBRID]

mgoetze, on Sep 11 2010, 04:31 AM, said:

South of course, I'm sure North wouldn't bid this way unless 1♦ promised 4 and usually had 5 diamonds. So it seems South forgot the system...

(Or maybe South just made the standard systematic opening bid and North a totally silly raise but, in that case, why are you asking?)

North must have forgotten that there is only one case where partner will not have at least 4 cards Diam for his 1D open: when he is 4 4 3 2 .

[mgoetze]

ONEferBRID, on Sep 11 2010, 08:21 PM, said:

mgoetze, on Sep 11 2010, 04:31 AM, said:

South of course, I'm sure North wouldn't bid this way unless 1♦ promised 4 and usually had 5 diamonds. So it seems South forgot the system...

(Or maybe South just made the standard systematic opening bid and North a totally silly raise but, in that case, why are you asking?)

North must have forgotten that there is only one case where partner will not have at least 4 cards Diam for his 1D open: when he is 4 4 3 2 .

I'm glad at least one of us knows whether they open 1♣ or 1♦ with KQxx xx AKx xxx. I hope, however, that you realize that some people open 1♣ even with 3=3=5=2 shape.

[jillybean]

I tried to convince this partner that pass was the only option if he couldn't stomach 1N, he preferred 3♦.

[neilkaz]

jillybean, on Sep 11 2010, 08:25 PM, said:

I tried to convince this partner that pass was the only option if he couldn't stomach 1N, he preferred 3♦.

LOL at your partner. I suggest that you don't play INVM with this partner.

[1eyedjack]

3D is a bid which on another day could work very well. He just has to accept that this was not one of them.

[jillybean]

1eyedjack, on Sep 12 2010, 03:18 AM, said:

3D is a bid which on another day could work very well. He just has to accept that this was not one of them.

I don't understand this, it sounds like you are suggesing 3♦ was indeed a good bid with this hand.

[cherdanno]

jillybean, on Sep 12 2010, 07:27 AM, said:

1eyedjack, on Sep 12 2010, 03:18 AM, said:

3D is a bid which on another day could work very well.  He just has to accept that this was not one of them.

I don't understand this, it sounds like you are suggesing 3♦ was indeed a good bid with this hand.

3D was not a good bid but I don't think it's terrible either. I would rather bid 3D instead of passing.

[pooltuna]

jillybean, on Sep 12 2010, 07:27 AM, said:

1eyedjack, on Sep 12 2010, 03:18 AM, said:

3D is a bid which on another day could work very well.  He just has to accept that this was not one of them.

I don't understand this, it sounds like you are suggesing 3♦ was indeed a good bid with this hand.

It was a tactical call that didn't work out. I would have called 1NT instead but 3♦ is not the worst bid I've seen

[1eyedjack]

jillybean, on Sep 12 2010, 01:27 PM, said:

1eyedjack, on Sep 12 2010, 03:18 AM, said:

3D is a bid which on another day could work very well.  He just has to accept that this was not one of them.

I don't understand this, it sounds like you are suggesing 3♦ was indeed a good bid with this hand.

I did not intend to imply that it is the optimal bid. In my opinion 1N stands to gain in the long term. On an individual case a departure from the long term optimal strategy can work out better on a minority of hands. I would suggest that a 3D bid has quite a high variance in the expected results. State of the match might determine whether you want to bid down the middle.

One of the advantages of NOT bidding 3D on a hand such as this is that it provides greater definition to the 3D bid when you make it (in accordance with agreements, that is).

[gwnn]

BTW it's nice to be able to bid 2♦ natural 6-9. You should think of keeping it that way (and me too).

[jillybean]

gwnn, on Sep 12 2010, 08:52 AM, said:

BTW it's nice to be able to bid 2♦ natural 6-9. You should think of keeping it that way (and me too).

If you do use 2♦ as natural does 3♦ become your gf raise?

[bucky]

jillybean, on Sep 12 2010, 10:57 AM, said:

If you do use 2♦ as natural does 3♦ become your gf raise?

No, 3♦ will be limit raise, 10-11. With gf hand you respond with a new suit first (which is forcing for 1 round at least).

[vuroth]

Bleh I wouldn't go dropping InvMinor over this hand alone. Esp if you play SAYC, as forcing with support for a minor can be messy.