[ibraves]

---

---

Unless I can magic 9 top tricks from somewhere 3NT doesnt look like it's going to make which IMO leaves 4m and pass. Do you agree? Which would you choose?

IMPS, opposition seem good

[fromageGB]

Partner has to have something good on this hand. 4m seems a bit committal, not helpful to partner. I pass and lead an obvious top spade for a probable penalty, as a minor game may be too risky.

[gszes]

Partner "borrows" 7 HCP from your hand when they bid/make a tox
well guess what! we don't have anything close to the 7 they borrowed.
This bodes ill for our side and damage control at imps is a heck of
a lot more important (this means don't get slaughtered) than worrying
about possibly scoring a tiny amount of imps hoping to set 3h. In this case

4c

is the way to go. We have zero reason to suspect we can beat 3h and
4c is a fair warning to p we do not want to defend. Whatever P wants to
do at this point we will be happy to let them do it but our hand is just
plain too putrid to take a chnce on getting slaughtered. we are chooing
4c not because the suit is slightly better but because 4c is the most
flexible bid in dangerous circumstances. At MP its only 1 board go for it
and pass the x if you want but IMPS letting the opps score up an easy
game bonus is bad for partnership morale and it takes a lot to make up
for it.

[diana_eva]

Why does p borrow points for this x? It's not a balancing situation, is it?

[gszes]

diana_eva, on 2013-May-27, 08:44, said:

Why does p borrow points for this x? It's not a balancing situation, is it?

BIG subject but the concept of 7 is around almost everywhere. It is a
rare circumstance when we overcall that we actually have 7 tricks we
usually need help from p and 7 normal hcp usually makes our overcall
worthwhile. we are all too familiar with the bidding going 1h 1s (overcall)
p p x pass out (oooops) and the overcall gets slaughtered a ton because
overcallers partner did not have the 7 needed to keep this from happening.
Lho opens 1d x p generally speaking with 7 hcp (balanced hand) we
will make a minimum noise and if we are stronger we avoid the minimum
bids because we want p to know we have more than 7.

If the bidding goes 1d p 1s and we have xx AKxx xxx AKxx we have a very
reasonable tox if the bidding goes 1d p 2n (10/11) now a tox appears to
be much less reasonable because we KNOW p cannot have much more
a side ace so we do not try to borrow and pass. The tox ovr 1d 1s is very
reasonable since we have no strong reason to be sure p cannot have the
7 we need to make our bid work. A tox over 1d 2n however will generally
have significantly less chance of success and will end up in a lot more
doubled horrors than the first tox will.

Note that none of the bidders involved here are in po seat. A PO seat
bid is based mostly on expectations of p strength based on the bidding
rather than a number like 7. Lets say you hold vul xx Axxxxxx xx xx and lho
opens 1n and it goes p p to you. You have an easy 2h bid not because
of your hand power alone but because your partner is marked with
at least 12 hcp (opps max 24 leaves p with 16 - your 4 for the heart A)
and possibly stronger. Will 2h always work? heck no, opener will sometimes
have a max and KQJx of hearts behind you (OUCHIES) but this wil not
happen often.

[Codo]

My partner did not borrow points from me.
He will expect some, but I have some, so my hand is not the biggest disappointement for him.

At mps I would surely pass, at imps I guess I will sit too.

[biggerclub]

I am not passing. Seems like the Ah is at least 40% behind me and maybe more. Seems more likely that OPPs make 4 than 2. If P has perfect cards (AKxx,x, Axxx, Axxx) AND the AH is well placed, then 3H is down, true. (Opener is unlimited 11+ (or a very good 10+) w/5-6 Hearts, Responder is 10-11 with 4-5 hearts; Partner has 15 in three suits minimum -- since I have 5 HCP it seems like everyone is minimum for their bid. If I have to choose a player most likely to be light, it's . . . sorry P . . . P. Hope it's NV v NV.)

3NT is only good if partner takes it out. In which case 4c is just as good.

There is no slam here and we are just trying to get out alive now.

Unless P has AKxxx(x), -(x), Axxx, Axx, with which she might have tried 3s, we are going to get killed. Best hope is down 2 x'd vs. a heart game that makes.

The good news is that we are going to win the post mortem. Although in fairness to P, our K rated to be more likely in a minor than in H's. 4c it is. Although it's going down at least 2.

[aguahombre]

diana_eva, on 2013-May-27, 08:44, said:

Why does p borrow points for this x? It's not a balancing situation, is it?

Vs preempts, when choosing a direct action, we assume x points in partner's hand. The nuances of "borrowing" a King in balancing situations versus "assuming" a certain minimum from partner when we act directly is --IMO--a distinction without a difference, and the terminology is interchangeable.

[Codo]

biggerclub, on 2013-May-27, 12:38, said:

I am not passing. Seems like the Ah is at least 40% behind me and maybe more. Seems more likely that OPPs make 4 than 2. If P has perfect cards (AKxx,x, Axxx, Axxx) AND the AH is well placed, then 3H is down, true. (Opener is unlimited 11+ (or a very good 10+) w/5-6 Hearts, Responder is 10-11 with 4-5 hearts; Partner has 15 in three suits minimum -- since I have 5 HCP it seems like everyone is minimum for their bid. If I have to choose a player most likely to be light, it's . . . sorry P . . . P. Hope it's NV v NV.)

3NT is only good if partner takes it out. In which case 4c is just as good.

There is no slam here and we are just trying to get out alive now.

Unless P has AKxxx(x), -(x), Axxx, Axx, with which she might have tried 3s, we are going to get killed. Best hope is down 2 x'd vs. a heart game that makes.

The good news is that we are going to win the post mortem. Although in fairness to P, our K rated to be more likely in a minor than in H's. 4c it is. Although it's going down at least 2.

"We" will not win the post mortem after this thoughts, because "we" missed the explanation of 3 ♥, which is shown if "we" click on the bid itself.

[biggerclub]

Codo, on 2013-May-27, 15:21, said:

"We" will not win the post mortem after this thoughts, because "we" missed the explanation of 3 ♥, which is shown if "we" click on the bid itself.

Well, perhaps you can forgive me for being a bit new to BBO and the conventions (by conventions, I mean clicking on the bid to ascertain its meaning -- not bridge conventions) around here. Even if a bit cocksure otherwise. Both pass and 3N are more reasonable given the meaning of the bid.

[madongjun]

I prefer bid 4 clubs.

[Codo]

biggerclub, on 2013-May-27, 17:45, said:

Well, perhaps you can forgive me for being a bit new to BBO and the conventions (by conventions, I mean clicking on the bid to ascertain its meaning -- not bridge conventions) around here. Even if a bit cocksure otherwise. Both pass and 3N are more reasonable given the meaning of the bid.

I was well aware of the fact that the number of your posts is still limited. I tried to tell you about the missing detail in your analysis in a little humorous way. If I failed and insult you, please take my apologize.

[fromageGB]

I'm sure I had over a thousand posts before I learned to click on the yellowed bids

[rmnka447]

I'm bidding 4 ♣ as the double is clearly for T/O.

IMO, passing and bidding 3 NT are taking a big view on the hand.

Passing risks yielding a game swing on a part score hand which is not good at IMPs.

Bidding 3 NT probably requires your side to have 8 running tricks after the opponents knock out your ♥ stopper. On the actual bidding, partner can't have more than a stiff ♥. So the opponents will be able to cash 4 ♥ as soon as they get in. You'd have to be clairvoyant to know that partner has the right hand for you to make 3 NT.

Partner may also be making a double with several types of big hands. They may include:

- a hand with 4 ♠ and a long minor where bidding 4 of the minor may preclude finding a perfectly good ♠ game,

- a big single minor hand too good for a direct 4 of a minor, or,

- a big 2 suiter where partner is hoping your response hits one of his suits.

In the end, I can defend my 4 ♣ bid easily in any post mortem. That's a lot easier than trying to explain away a -530/-730 for passing or bidding an unmakeable 3 NT game to my teammates.

It's in line with some great advice received years ago from a long gone Detroit area expert. "Especially at IMPs", he said, " I never try to do anything in the bid or play that I can be criticized for in the post mortem." It's an insight that has served well over the years.

[Winstonm]

Although I would expect 3H to go down more frequently than it will make, it is imps and doubling them into game can be a match changer/loser. I take the conservative road and bid 4C.

At MPs, I'm defending.

[Fluffy]

I had a big loss for bidding 4♦ here instead of 4♣ on an international tournament (I think Ostende European's champinship), not that one was clearly beteer, but one hit RHO's suit and the other didn't.

[ArtK78]

I would bid 4♣.

It might be right to pass 3♥x, but sometimes partner REALLY wants you to takeout his takeout double, and this might be one of those times.

4♣ is better than 4♦, since partner can bid 4♦ over 4♣ but not the reverse.

[rogerclee]

Pass, odds seem at least decent that I can score the HK and a spade ruff, and with no attractive alternative I'm just going to go for it.

[bigbenvic]

rogerclee, on 2013-May-28, 14:07, said:

Pass, odds seem at least decent that I can score the HK and a spade ruff, and with no attractive alternative I'm just going to go for it.

I am absolutely not passing. Lefty is 0-7 with 4 hearts typically, he wont have a 3433 so there is an entry to hook up my king so I am getting 1 trick as a ruff, the Qs is unlikely though it may promote a trick in combo with partners hand but I just don't have enough to sit a t/o double.

4♣ and ready an apology to partner for not having a better hand!

[the hog]

4C. Not pass.