[lisengerg]

Scoring: IMP

Bidding:
(1♦) 1♠ (3♦)* P
(P) 3♥ 4♦ 4♠
(X)

*weak
-300, -5 IMPS

We play North's sequence to show an intermediate hand, but I expected more playing strength for the 3♥ bid, especially shorter ♦s on the bidding. I know I am 4-3-3-3, but I felt my support for both suits and lack of waisted values improved my hand. Please help my thinking on this hand.

Thanks all.

---

[pooltuna]

lisengerg, on Oct 16 2010, 01:55 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

Bidding:
(1♦) 1♠ (3♦)* P
(P) 3♥ 4♦ 4♠
(X)

*weak
-300, -5 IMPS

We play North's sequence to show an intermediate hand, but I expected more playing strength for the 3♥ bid, especially shorter ♦s on the bidding. I know I am 4-3-3-3, but I felt my support for both suits and lack of waisted values improved my hand. Please help my thinking on this hand.

Thanks all.

---

Welcome the Plllory Forum where both the poster and his partner are frequently drawn and quartered. Based on the hand presented I suspect you are both candidates

[Grommet1]

This is the beginner forum, right?

[lisengerg]

That's fine, as long as I learn something.

Thank you all in advance for the abuse.

Laurie

[NickRW]

I'll have a go at saying something constructive without the "pillory" business.

1. I suspect by "intermediate" you mean that (1♦)-2♦ would have been weak or strong... If so, then North's hand is intermediate - but - (1♦)-2♦ would normally show a 5/5 or better shape. So why would 1♠ followed by 3♥ be OK on a 5=4=2=2? A 5=4=1=3 would have been better - but still only 4 card ♥.

2. I think 4♠ is putting your neck on the block - yes you just might make it - there again you may very well not - and partner has pushed them a level higher than they clearly wanted to be - I'd prefer the higher chance of a plus by defending personally You say you have nothing wasted - well it is true that you have nothing apart from the ♦J wasted - but there again you don't have a lot at all to waste - and - as you point out, no ruffing opportunity to go with your support.

Nick

[aguahombre]

Nice attempt, Nick. Poster was obviously South, and is wondering where the hand went, that North showed on the auction.

Welcome to the Fora. And just because you made the last mistake, don't give up on us. You might want to have North reconsider, however.

A lot of "what do you call?" type questions here are based on faulty previous action and difficult to discuss because of that.

[Cascade]

Both north and south bid too much.

[the hog]

3H is an overbid and 4S is an overbid. Whoops, Wayne said that in the post above.

[lisengerg]

I see. Overbid + overbid = too high. OK. Not such a complicated game after all, I guess. Next time, I won't overbid.

Thanks all. Until my next mistake,

Laurie

[TylerE]

n.

[lmilne]

lisengerg, on Oct 16 2010, 01:55 PM, said:

I know I am 4-3-3-3, but I felt my support for both suits and lack of waisted values improved my hand. Please help my thinking on this hand.

Your values aren't wasted, because you don't have any.

[billw55]

If I was north, at favorable vul, and heard this sequence with 3♦ described as weak, I would definitely balance with 3♥, and would not think it the least bit pushy or close.

The south hand is worth a simple correction to 3♠, no more. Since that was not available, pass.

IMO 100% south here.

(No offense intended, lisengerg. Just giving my honest opinion.)

[NickRW]

billw55, on Oct 18 2010, 12:24 PM, said:

If I was north, at favorable vul, and heard this sequence with 3♦ described as weak, I would definitely balance with 3♥, and would not think it the least bit pushy or close.

The south hand is worth a simple correction to 3♠, no more. Since that was not available, pass.

IMO 100% south here.

(No offense intended, lisengerg. Just giving my honest opinion.)

Yeah, 3♥ is not without merit and achieved the effect on the actual hand of driving them up a level. My problem with 3♥ is the apparent interpretation placed on it by South (and, due to the "intermediate" description, presumably the agreement North was probably operating under) that is suggestive of a 5=5=1=2 shape. If that were North's shape with the same honours, 4♠ is - well - one can argue it is still wrong - but it would certainly be a lot closer to being right.

Nick

[billw55]

As a side note, I am curious to see the hand held by east, who makes a weak preemptive raise, but then bids again at the four level in direct seat, red on white. It sure sounds like one of his two bids must be wrong.

[bucky]

Cascade, on Oct 16 2010, 06:18 PM, said:

Both north and south bid too much.

I'd add that East probably made the same mistake.

North made a bad bid which probably was saved by East, and then un-saved by South. North made the first mistake, and South made the last. If I am to ATB, I would say, 100% north and 100% south.

[Fluffy]

North should reopen with a double rather.

4♠ is still an overbid.

[bucky]

Even a reopening double is questionable (but probably better than the 3♥ call). When partner cannot make a responsive double, does North have to compete at 3-level with this hand?

[billw55]

bucky, on 2010-October-20, 12:21, said:

Even a reopening double is questionable (but probably better than the 3♥ call). When partner cannot make a responsive double, does North have to compete at 3-level with this hand?

I guess I am the maverick in this thread.

I just don't want to robbed this easily at favorable vul. Who says partner can't have four hearts? Or three hearts, or honor doubleton of spades - a seven card fit might play ok here. Oh well, I guess I just like to play aggressively.

As for balancing with a double - certainly with 1-3 minors. But here I have 2-2; what if partner bids clubs?

[gwnn]

Partner is also there if he has something he does something so because he didn't do anything he has nothing.

[bucky]

billw55, on 2010-October-20, 13:37, said:

I guess I am the maverick in this thread.

I just don't want to robbed this easily at favorable vul. Who says partner can't have four hearts? Or three hearts, or honor doubleton of spades - a seven card fit might play ok here. Oh well, I guess I just like to play aggressively.

As for balancing with a double - certainly with 1-3 minors. But here I have 2-2; what if partner bids clubs?

In general I don't want to play in 7-card fit at 3-level. I have good defense. Even if we make the contract, it will be very likely that 3♦ will go down, and +50/100/150 is not a disaster in IMP, but turning a plus to minus is.