[ArtK78]

This may just be an example of bad bidding, but since it was duplicated at the other table (leading to a different but still silly result) I thought I would bring it up.

Swiss Teams. IMPs, 7 board matches converted to VPs.

You hold, all vul:

JTxxx
-----
KQJTxxx
x

RHO is the dealer. The bidding:

(1♣) - 3♦ - (x) - P
(3♥) - 4♠ - (x) - 5♦
(x) - All Pass

Result: -1100, as partner had a misfitting hand

At the other table, my teammates chose to bid on and wound up in the rather unusual contract of 5NTx, making for 870. Had they sent it back, we would have won IMPs on the board.

Query:

How would you handle my hand? Feel free to insult my bidding judgment (as if I need to prompt you to do so).

[ggwhiz]

ArtK78, on 2013-September-09, 11:48, said:

Feel free to insult my bidding judgment (as if I need to prompt you to do so).

I think 3♠ is enough on this freak and subside for -800, win 2.

[nige1]

ArtK78, on 2013-September-09, 11:48, said:

This may just be an example of bad bidding, but since it was duplicated at the other table (leading to a different but still silly result) I thought I would bring it up. Swiss Teams. IMPs, 7 board matches converted to VPs. You hold, all vul:
♠ J T x x x ♥ - ♦ K Q J T x x x ♣ x
RHO is the dealer. The bidding:
(1♣) - 3♦ - (x) - P
(3♥) - 4♠ - (x) - 5♦
(x) - All Pass
Result: -1100, as partner had a misfitting hand. At the other table, my teammates chose to bid on and wound up in the rather unusual contract of 5NTx, making for 870. Had they sent it back, we would have won IMPs on the board.
Query: How would you handle my hand? Feel free to insult my bidding judgment (as if I need to prompt you to do so).

IMO at green, your bidding would be fine. At amber, I agree with ggwhiz that you might prefer a modest 3♠ over 3♥. I like to play:

• 2N = Unusual 2 lowest unbid suits
• Cue = Modified Michaels: Other unbid suits i.e. (1♠) 2♠ = ♥ and m. Over any other opener, cue = ♠ and an unbid suit.

Using this method, you would overcall 2♣ and then bid ♦ if you had the chance, to show a weak hand with this skew shape

[aguahombre]

The choice to overcall 3D was reasonable. When you make a choice, it is time to stop making choices. If you wanted to bring Spades into the picture, you would have brought spades into the picture the first time.

Too many ways to lose doing it your way, including the possibility partner might break tempo before you get a chance and create a no-win.

[mikeh]

Let me see:

Did you notice the negative double over your 3♦ call?

And you still felt that bidding one of LHO's suits was a good idea? Not to mention jumping in it?

Even if partner held 3 of them, on the likely 4-1 break, precisely how many diamond winners do you think you can establish and run?

Did you notice your heart void? Did it occur to you that maybe partner has the decency to hold 5 of them even if the opps have found a fit?

Your hand maybe warrants the plan of pre-empting in diamonds and then bidding spades, but you forgot an important part of bridge: listening to the auction, so that when the opps tell you that your plan is probably suicidal, you stop bidding.

At least, that's my impression of what happened.

[cherdano]

aguahombre, on 2013-September-09, 13:29, said:

The choice to overcall 3D was reasonable. When you make a choice, it is time to stop making choices. If you wanted to bring Spades into the picture, you would have brought spades into the picture the first time.

That's a silly argument. The choice of bidding 3D was the choice to try to bring spades into the picture, otherwise you would certainly bid more than 3D on the first round!!
But as Mike said, once LHO makes a negative double, you should give up on that plan.

[the hog]

Disagree with the above post. If you wanted to bring S into the picture you would have made a 2 suited overcall. I would subside after 3D.

[dake50]

Let me see:
Did you notice the negative double over your 3♦ call?
And you still felt that bidding one of LHO's suits was a good idea? Not to mention jumping in it?
Even if partner held 3 of them, on the likely 4-1 break, precisely how many diamond winners do you think you can establish and run?
Did you notice your heart void? Did it occur to you that maybe partner has the decency to hold 5 of them even if the opps have found a fit?
Your hand maybe warrants the plan of pre-empting in diamonds and then bidding spades, but you forgot an important part of bridge: listening to the auction, so that when the opps tell you that your plan is probably suicidal, you stop bidding.
At least, that's my impression of what happened. -- mikeh
***

*** Nailed it.

[aguahombre]

I agree with abandoning a plan when more information suggests it is not a good idea. But, despite Cherdano's label of "silly", I wouldn't have had the plan to begin with. If I wanted to get spades into the fray, I would have Mike'd or started with 2D....and I rejected either of those plans and agree with 3D, not 4.

I don't believe that the negative double is more than a mild deterrent, however, if the player started out with that bad plan. Since when does a negative double there guarantee spades? Responder could easily have hearts and clubs.

[mikeh]

aguahombre, on 2013-September-09, 21:19, said:

I agree with abandoning a plan when more information suggests it is not a good idea. But, despite Cherdano's label of "silly", I wouldn't have had the plan to begin with. If I wanted to get spades into the fray, I would have Mike'd or started with 2D....and I rejected either of those plans and agree with 3D, not 4.

I don't believe that the negative double is more than a mild deterrent, however, if the player started out with that bad plan. Since when does a negative double there guarantee spades? Responder could easily have hearts and clubs.

who said it guaranteed spades? But everyone plays that opener should act as if it promises both majors, and that responder is prepared to correct spades to clubs if he doesn't have spades.

The reality is that LHO will usually but not always have spades.

We are red. If he has spades, we have no safety anywhere, once partner didn't compete in diamonds. The hand rates to play poorly for whichever side declares, unless the opps have simply too much strength and aren't worried about splits.

So, while we don't know for sure that LHO has the majors, we do know that he often will AND that gambling that he doesn't is very high stakes at poor odds.

Note that we might on some days be turning a modest plus into a monstrous minus, when partner's hearts look like QJ108x.

[cherdano]

aguahombre, on 2013-September-09, 21:19, said:

I agree with abandoning a plan when more information suggests it is not a good idea. But, despite Cherdano's label of "silly", I wouldn't have had the plan to begin with. If I wanted to get spades into the fray, I would have Mike'd or started with 2D....and I rejected either of those plans and agree with 3D, not 4.

I really think that's very wrong - if you are planning to make just one bid, you should bid at least 4D.

Quote

I don't believe that the negative double is more than a mild deterrent, however, if the player started out with that bad plan. Since when does a negative double there guarantee spades? Responder could easily have hearts and clubs.

Sure, but in addition to what Mike said: if responder doesn't have 4 spades, he has 4 hearts only. So they are going to play in a 4-4 fit. Breaking 5-0.

[the_clown]

I think I would bid 1/4♦. Against very good players I would tend to bid 4 to give them a tough problem, while against weaker players I would just bid my hand and let my partner make an informed decision.

[the_clown]

cherdano, on 2013-September-10, 01:13, said:

I really think that's very wrong - if you are planning to make just one bid, you should bid at least 4D.


Sure, but in addition to what Mike said: if responder doesn't have 4 spades, he has 4 hearts only. So they are going to play in a 4-4 fit. Breaking 5-0.

Responder may have a hand with 5 hearts and club tolerance too weak for a GF 3♥ bid Qx KJxxx x Kxxxx. Of course this is not the most likely hand that responder can have but its not impossible.

[rhm]

There are 2 strategic plans after RHO opened with 1♣

1) Preempt and give up on spades
2) Try to bring spades into consideration either directly with a two suited overcall or later.

Plan one means preempt as high as you dare. At all red the highest I would want to go on my own is 4♦.
Plan two: Using a two suited overcall is dangerous, since you will almost never play in diamonds even when that is clearly better. Therefor, without specific agreements I would start with diamonds.

However trying to combine plan one and two is not a good idea. Bringing spades into the picture means, you must be prepared to get a preference back to diamonds. Therefor keep the bidding low and start with 2♦ only.
Jumping to 4♠ was really bad since it essentially meant you were prepared to preempt with 5♦. Too rich for my blood, particularly after giving opponents all the room and information they needed. Preempts work best before opponents had a chance to exchange information.
The jump to 4♠ got what it deserved.

Overall I much prefer plan one. Preempt with 4♦. Given your void in hearts this is fairly safe and often will create big problems for opponents.
Of course you might make as many tricks in spades as in diamonds or even more if a spade ruff looms in a diamond contract, but overall it is too narrow a target.
Plan two simply tries to accomplish too much and gives up tactical advantages. Trying to play in spades will too often land you in spades when you belong in diamonds: Meanwhile it gives opponents too much information as well as bidding room to judge well.

Rainer Herrmann

[JLOGIC]

So you say that if you preempt you must give up on spades, then advise a 2D overcall over 1C if you want to get spades into play...got it.

[rhm]

JLOGIC, on 2013-September-10, 03:11, said:

So you say that if you preempt you must give up on spades, then advise a 2D overcall over 1C if you want to get spades into play...got it.

Technically a weak jump overcall of 2♦ is also a preempt. But I would overcall 2♦ in preference to 1♦ mainly to make it clear to partner when I later bid spades I am weak in HCP and can not contribute to the defense.

Rainer Herrmann

[aguahombre]

JLOGIC, on 2013-September-10, 03:11, said:

So you say that if you preempt you must give up on spades, then advise a 2D overcall over 1C if you want to get spades into play...got it.

[quote name='rhm' timestamp='1378811221' post='751889']
Technically a weak jump overcall of 2♦ is also a preempt. But I would overcall 2♦ in preference to 1♦ mainly to make it clear to partner when I later bid spades I am weak in HCP and can not contribute to the defense.
/quote]
Or, in my case, the mention of 2D was a brain fart.

[MrAce]

Art i would have started 4♦ and give up on spades. I usually need 4+ spades from pd since i have too many ruffing values from long trump in a 5-3 fit (yuk!)

Having started 3♦, i think 4♠ was way too much. Pass as Mike said seems good choice but if you really feel like you have to bid i think you could just bid 3♠. After all, even 3♠ by preemptor is an unusual bid and enough to take pd's attention when vulnerable.

[jogs]

Yes, you could have bid 3♠. Only -800. You would have won 7 imps.

[DJNeill]

I like 3♦, and might have tried 4♠ had LHO bid 3♥ (under duress maybe) and RHO raised, but over the negative double, spades look doubtful now so I give up.