[jschafer]

---

IMP scoring, 2♣ is nat GF. Is this an obvious pass?

[Phil]

I'd bid 4♥ unless I'm playing with a lunatic who likes to donate 800 by preempting in 2/1 sequences. I'm sure they have a game and we have a possible double fit, so 4♥ looks OK. It does not accomplish much but it wakes away their cue bid, although it provides them with a forcing pass.

[TimG]

I think the 3343 distribution makes it an easy pass.

[jschafer]

Phil, on 2010-December-04, 16:31, said:

I'd bid 4♥ unless I'm playing with a lunatic who likes to donate 800 by preempting in 2/1 sequences. I'm sure they have a game and we have a possible double fit, so 4♥ looks OK. It does not accomplish much but it wakes away their cue bid, although it provides them with a forcing pass.

Well you were playing with me, so I'm in not much of a position to comment on whether I am a lunatic For the purpose of answering this assume you were playing with a good player who has his bids

[nige1]

jschafer, on 2010-December-04, 15:11, said:

IMP scoring, 2♣ is nat GF. Is this an obvious pass?

---

IMO 4♦ = 10, 4♥ = 9, _P = 5. IMO Passing is a vote of no-confidence in partner. Reminds me of another thread

[Phil]

4♦ = lead director (out of turn).

[the hog]

This is an obvious 4H bid.

[andy_h]

At first I thought it was an easy 4H bid considering partner is bidding at r/w in a game forcing auction but then I thought that because we have the hearts we will never buy the contract and our bid is only going to help the opponents judge their heart holdings as we've announced a most-likely 10 card fit. But then I thought it's possible that partner has a freak and will push onto 5H so it's now back to an easy 4H bid. This may give the opponents information about the heart suit but it's worth it by taking away a whole level of bidding - just imagine LHO not knowing what to do if he needs to set clubs or spades as trumps.

[Free]

Imo a really easy pass.

[mtvesuvius]

I know I'd pass at the table without much thought, however if I took some time to consider it: Bidding 4♥ risks 800 (at worst), and when it is 800, they usually will have a slam. When it is 500, we may lose a few IMPs, but that's not too bad). Given more thought, I think 4♥ is best. I don't like 4♦ because it leaves them a 4♥ cuebid. I especially like 4♥ if the opponents are not a regular partnership or are inexperienced. Removing their cue, and making it harder to set trumps is worth the occasional 500 or 800.

[the hog]

To the passers. You must play with some strange partners. Your partner bids 3H vulnerable, you hold this hand and you pass? What do you think partner has for his bid, air?

[rduran1216]

the hog, on 2010-December-06, 20:08, said:

To the passers. You must play with some strange partners. Your partner bids 3H vulnerable, you hold this hand and you pass? What do you think partner has for his bid, air?

agreed, if partner is 2722 with AK of hearts and out, then we take our bad 500 and tell partner about R/W bids.

4H is obvious IMO

[655321]

I would always bid 4♥, in my experience more good things happen when you support partner and take away some room from the opponents.

the hog, on 2010-December-06, 20:08, said:

To the passers. You must play with some strange partners. Your partner bids 3H vulnerable, you hold this hand and you pass? What do you think partner has for his bid, air?

Well, partner has a lot of hearts and not many points. The opponents have helped you by making a 2/1 and telling you they have most of the points. A further clue is that partner has preempted. The gains from raising come from interfering with the opponents auction , they don't come from scoring up 620 in 4♥. The downside of raising is that on a bad day partner takes 7 heart tricks and nothing else, for -800, bidding is not risk free.

[Free]

1310642

[jschafer]

---

This was the full hand. As South I bid 3♥ thinking that I would either have to show a 5-5 hand in the reds with 2NT or show a lot of ♥ length by preempting in ♥s, as it didn't seem likely I would get another bid to show my 6-5 shape at this vul. I went for 3♥ because it consumes a lot more space from their 2/1 auction and partner will almost always raise when he has some cards and ♥ support. An additional factor was that if we do have a double fit, I might have just drawn the opps a roadmap to slam. Thoughts on 3♥?

[gwnn]

Free, on 2010-December-07, 03:44, said:

1310642

You can't be 1310642, but perhaps 982981.5 - he is not a passer.

[mgoetze]

2♣ should be alerted as "forces us to game, but doesn't necessarily show the strength for doing so", LOL.

[andy_h]

I don't like 3H, I very much prefer to start off with 2NT assuming you don't use any other cue-bids to show specific 6-5s of course. The reason is that the opponents are already one(two) step(s) ahead in the auction: They have created a game forcing auction and RHO may already be looking at spade support so our 3H doesn't do much damage. If I hope to disrupt them or potentially wanting to find a (making) 'sac' against either black suit game, then bringing our two suits into play makes more sense (for example partner having 1-4 in the reds) as well as letting partner on the info too. The 3H certainly does preempt the auction a bit but remember that they have forcing passes at their arsenal - and not only that but potentially a penalty double too. For a heart suit headed by the AJ1087 I would always expect that to be a 7card suit when bidding 3H in a game forcing auction.

[Free]

gwnn, on 2010-December-07, 07:03, said:

You can't be 1310642, but perhaps 982981.5 - he is not a passer.

Hmmm didn't see his first line of text, or the post was edited.
No idea what 982981.5 means though...

[the hog]

I prefer to show the 2 suiter, but your partner clearly erred by not raising to 4H. Phil pointed out the possibility of the double fit. It seems that some here play with someone who bids 3H on AK to 7 an out in a 2/1 auction. I don't. It also appears that some like to trust the opponents more than their own partner. Again, I don't.