[jahol]

IMPs, teams, nonvulnerable against vulnerable...

North: ..... KJ-----QJ96542----743----------3
South: .... 753----void---------652----KQJ10962

The bidding was:

West-------North-------East-------South
1NT(1)-----pass-------2H(2)-------3C
pass--------3H----------X(3)-------4C
X(4)--------4H----------X(4)-------pass

(1) - weak NT, 12-14
(2) - transfer to spades, unlimited
(3) - for take out
(4) - for penalty.

5 down, -1100, -450(4 spades with overtrick) at the other table, -12 IMPs.

Who should be blamed? N-S use "usual" defence against weak NT - double
14+, 2C = Landy, rest - "natural".

[jdonn]

Well there may be other things wrong but there is no WAY north should pull 4♣. That has to be the worst decision. That would only be 500 or 800, a small gain or loss.

[mikeh]

jdonn, on Sep 21 2010, 01:15 PM, said:

Well there may be other things wrong but there is no WAY north should pull 4♣. That has to be the worst decision. That would only be 500 or 800, a small gain or loss.

agreed

[quiddity]

North probably wasn't expecting a 6-count for partner's 3-level overcall.. it's not like South was balancing, he bid directly over a transfer.

North's hand is pretty useless in clubs and he can at least take some tricks in hearts. And his first heart bid didn't show 7, did it?

[Gerben42]

Bidding directly over the transfer shows values, that was the start of the problems. After that both insisted on their suit for too long.

Then 4♣ was trying to run before there was a penalty. Similarly 4♥ was stubborn.

[Zelandakh]

I give South the majority of blame since both 3C and 4C are simply dreadful. The first because of the lack of strength, the second because the misfit is now obvious to South but not to West so it is clear to let them play it. North also contributed - so perhaps 75% South, 25% North if you want to get into the blame game.

[neilkaz]

Rather than the first pass as N I might have ventured 3♥ at these colors, but I can't fault passing and it certainly isn't the reason for this telephone number.

S gets the majority of the blame here for loosening the bolts of the wheels that are soon to fall off. S needs more than this to bid directly over the transfer. Agression is nice, but this is pushing it.

South 4♣ over the take out X is simply awful. He's allready over bid once with only a very good 6 count and now must pass.

North's 3♥ is quite reasonable based on the expectations that partner has some values. I would bid 3♥ with reasonable expections of find PD with enough to carry on to game.

North's insisting on this suit at the 4 level is also very bad. He has 1♣ and has to expect PD has a very good suit and can't expect any support.

Blame 75% South as 3♣ is bad and 4♣ horrendous. 25% N as 4♥ is very bad.

.. neilkaz ..

[NickRW]

At w/r I guess South might have considered a 4♣ preempt - rather than 3♣ showing better values than was actually held. Even so, with 3 small in opps suit it is a bit of a gamble.

Nick

[TylerE]

I think N/S deserve each other. Bid ♥ over 1N directly or GTFO out the auciton and STAY out.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

#1 3C is a terrible bid, 2H is transfer, hence one gets another round of bidding,
which means you dont need to get in at once
#2 I dont like the 3H bid, I would have passed, but ok
#3 the rest is just ...

With kind regards
Marlowe

[the hog]

North's first pass rather than 2H is odd.
South's 3C bid is poor and Nth could certainly expect more values.
Pulling 4C to 4H is abysmal.

[cloa513]

I say nothing wrong with South bidding 3C its non-vul against vul but as earlier poster said either North should with this hand bid 3H or pass 3C. A Hand with good hearts and clubs support could bid hearts.

[the hog]

cloa513, on Sep 22 2010, 03:50 PM, said:

I say nothing wrong with South bidding 3C its non-vul against vul but as earlier poster said either North should with this hand bid 3H or pass 3C. A Hand with good hearts and clubs support could bid hearts.

So, you are saying that people who bid nv vs vul do not need to have the values they promise? That is really good for partnership morale!

[hanp]

LOL at people saying that south didn't have his values for the 3C bid. It's a 3-0-3-7 with an incredibly offensive suit, and we are white against red. Those same people would probably be screaming at a south who passed and lost 11 IMPs for not finding the 5C sac over 4S. As they should!

[jdonn]

The_Hog, on Sep 22 2010, 03:59 AM, said:

cloa513, on Sep 22 2010, 03:50 PM, said:

I say nothing wrong with South bidding 3C its non-vul against vul but as earlier poster said either North should with this hand bid 3H or pass 3C. A Hand with good hearts and clubs support could bid hearts.

So, you are saying that people who bid nv vs vul do not need to have the values they promise? That is really good for partnership morale!

That is a clever way to twist someone's words around. It looks to me like what he is saying is closer to "people who bid nv vs vul do not promise the same values that they do at other vuls", in other words that south isn't breaking a promise but is simply making a different promise.

I actually agree with you that 3♣ should show a better hand (I like a preemptive 4♣ though, which is also the bid I would certainly open with at this vul), but if we are to disagree with counter-arguments we should at least state what they are correctly and fairly.

I also will agree in that I think your characterization of the 4♥ bid as abysmal is quite accurate.

[hanp]

In my previous reply I did not see that 1NT was weak, that changes the situation a little.

[Fluffy]

The_Hog, on Sep 22 2010, 08:45 AM, said:

North's first pass rather than 2H is odd.
South's 3C bid is poor and Nth could certainly expect more values.

if my english is correct you state that north passing is not the normal bid, yet you say 3♣ is not correct either, this is very contradictional to me.


North 90% blame

[pooltuna]

I agree with most of the other responders. It appears to me that South confused the auction up 2♥ as though he was playing against a strong NT where 3♣ would mean something much different than the same call against a weak NT. In the weak NT auction South lost sight of the fact that they(NS) have to worry about missing game and cosequently he cannot make the same weak competitive calls that he can make against a strong NT auction.

[quiddity]

I don't understand all the heat North is getting for pulling 4♣. Probably one or more of my assumptions is wrong - could someone please point out the error?

1. South's 3♣ overcall (direct 3-level overcall after a weak-NT/transfer sequence) should show at least an opening hand with a good club suit.

2. North's 3-over-3 bid is forcing and shows a 5-card suit.

3. South might well go back to clubs with a singleton or even doubleton heart and 6 good clubs. Maybe this is wrong - maybe he would always bid 3♠ or 3NT with only 6 clubs?

4. North has the option of sitting for 4♣, which has been penalized, with a singleton club or pull to what could be a 7-2 fit and a major suit game. Usually it's best to play in the weak hand's long suit because the weak hand can only take trump tricks and the strong hand can take tricks in either contract.

[jahol]

quiddity, on Sep 22 2010, 10:23 AM, said:

I don't understand all the heat North is getting for pulling 4♣.  Probably one or more of my assumptions is wrong - could someone please point out the error? 

1. South's 3♣ overcall (direct 3-level overcall after a weak-NT/transfer sequence) should show at least an opening hand with a good club suit.

2. North's 3-over-3 bid is forcing and shows a 5-card suit.

3. South might well go back to clubs with a singleton or even doubleton heart and 6 good clubs.  Maybe this is wrong - maybe he would always bid 3♠ or 3NT with only 6 clubs?

4. North has the option of sitting for 4♣, which has been penalized, with a singleton club or pull to what could be a 7-2 fit and a major suit game.  Usually it's best to play in the weak hand's long suit because the weak hand can only take trump tricks and the strong hand can take tricks in either contract.

Thank you very much. I was sitting north. And your reasoning was exactly that I made myself.