[straube]

all white imps

2S P 3S ?

2S is 7-11 usually 6-cd suit

[TylerE]

4♦, showing ♦+♥. If I don't have that available I will just pass - if partner has a big hand, they will double and we can bid some number of something, probably 4♥. If it's the opponents hand, I'm not about to tell them how bad everything is splitting without a good reason. If the points are about equal, bidding immediately probably gets us too high much of the time. The suits aren't close to solid or anything, and this hand will likely disappoint across from partner's expected random 8 count with ♠ length.

[straube]

TylerE, on 2013-August-27, 10:33, said:

4♦, showing ♦+♥. If I don't have that available I will just pass - if partner has a big hand, they will double and we can bid some number of something, probably 4♥. If it's the opponents hand, I'm not about to tell them how bad everything is splitting without a good reason. If the points are about equal, bidding immediately probably gets us too high much of the time. The suits aren't close to solid or anything, and this hand will likely disappoint across from partner's expected random 8 count with ♠ length.

I've wondered if that would be a good agreement to have. We play thrump doubles in other situations and 4D would be the reds. In the question I'm posing, 4D would be natural and not Michaels.

[TylerE]

What are "trump doubles"?

[gwnn]

Th(ree no tr)ump doubles - in auctions like 1m-(3M), x is primarily looking for 3NT, i.e. asking for a stop, often without 4 of the other major.

[straube]

TylerE, on 2013-August-27, 10:52, said:

What are "trump doubles"?

thrump (with an h)are doubles designed to get to 3N. After an opening bid and a preempt of 3D, 3H, or 3S a double is not negative but thrump. They ask opener to bid 3N with a stopper or something natural without. They are game forcing doubles. You might see them described by Marty Bergen but they may have originated with Rodwell (not sure). Part of thrump is...

1m (3S)

dbl-thrump
4m-5H/5m
4H-6H

So for example, if responder had xx Ax AQJxxx xxx and the auction went 1C (3S) he might thrump double in the hope that his partner can bid 3N. Obviously this is optimistic a bit on the given hand, but other folks might be bidding 4D on that hand and that's probably more optimistic.

[straube]

gwnn, on 2013-August-27, 10:59, said:

Th(ree no tr)ump doubles - in auctions like 1m-(3M), x is primarily looking for 3NT, i.e. asking for a stop, often without 4 of the other major.

Any vote on the stated problem? Remember 4D is just diamonds.

[gwnn]

I pass with regret in the original problem.

[mgoetze]

Maybe the problem would be clearer if you explicitly stated why you posted it in the N/B forum (for instance, if you are absolutely disinterested in discussion of Nonleaping Michaels and Thrump doubles?)

[Wayne_LV]

straube, on 2013-August-27, 09:24, said:

all white imps

2S P 3S ?

2S is 7-11 usually 6-cd suit

4♦, Leaping Michael's ...... showing diamonds and hearts (the other major). The raise to 3♠ by responder is of no consequence.

[straube]

mgoetze, on 2013-August-27, 12:38, said:

Maybe the problem would be clearer if you explicitly stated why you posted it in the N/B forum (for instance, if you are absolutely disinterested in discussion of Nonleaping Michaels and Thrump doubles?)

It's a judgment question. It was actually an opponent who was in this position and I wanted to know whether folks thought they took the right action with this hand.

I'm not disinterested in Nonleaping Michaels or Thrump doubles and I've learned about and discussed these on other threads.

You seem to be very interested in which forums I start threads. I started one in the expert forum and you asked the moderator to reassign it to the Intermediate/Advanced forum. Now I second-guess whether a topic is of interest to this or that forum. Anyway, you take a lot on yourself.

[the hog]

4H, given the unreasonable constraints of the problem. In a normal game I would bid 4D for the reds, of course.

[hautbois]

Pass. I expect letting them play part score is best. They might be able to crossruff their way to 10 tricks and I can't lead a trump.

If bidding were 2S - P - 4S - ?, I'd bid 4NT in a NY minute.

[mikeh]

Pass

Partner is very likely to hold 4 spades, and while RHO may be long in clubs, there is reason to place partner with a lot of black cards and, thus, not many reds.

If I reversed the reds, this would be a much tougher call, but playing in a 5=3 heart fit, if he has as many as 3, is not likely to fare well when tapped at trick 1, and with a lot of work to do to establish my source of tricks.

Meanwhile, aiming for a diamond contract makes little sense with a hand this weak in my suits.

Also note that LHO plays sound weak two bids: 7-11 is far different, and more dangerous to bid over, than the usual garbage that people (including me on occasion) will open white.

Btw, I expect partner's action, when 3♠ comes back to him, to be to find a lead, but I can always hope I am wrong.

[quiddity]

mikeh, on 2013-August-28, 12:47, said:

Meanwhile, aiming for a diamond contract makes little sense with a hand this weak in my suits.

I don't understand this comment. Why does it make little sense?
LHO opened a constructive weak 2 and RHO thinks they have no shot at game so partner is marked with some values. I have some values and I'm 6-5 with a spade void. That seems reason enough to think we can make 4♦ and quite possibly they can make 3♠.

[mikeh]

quiddity, on 2013-August-28, 14:34, said:

I don't understand this comment. Why does it make little sense?
LHO opened a constructive weak 2 and RHO thinks they have no shot at game so partner is marked with some values. I have some values and I'm 6-5 with a spade void. That seems reason enough to think we can make 4♦ and quite possibly they can make 3♠.

Bridge is not played in a vacuum.

RHO bid 3♠ because the vast majority of the time his aiming to play in a 9 card fit at the 3-level works well for him. Why? Because the vast majority of the time, spades don't break 4-0.

Now, he doesn't have to have 3 spades. He might have 2! I've seen it happen, and more often than his having 4, when he is more likely to take the advance save. Nothing is assured, but the odds are they hold 9 spades.

The odds are, also, that partner's other 'long' suit is clubs.

This means that bidding a red suit risks playing in an 8 card fit, getting tapped at trick one. In fact, if we bid 4♥, he may be 4=2=2=5 or even 4=1=3=5, while if we bid diamonds, he may be 4=3=1=5, and so on. Please note that in my posts I am, as the OP suggested we do, ignoring gadgets that might afford an answer that we'd prefer over either passing or bidding a red suit. The OP wanted views on what to do in a novice/beginner context. Obviously, if we could show a red 2-suiter, bidding would be a lot safer. I should add, for the benefit of non-experts who don't play these gadgets: don't sweat it and don't put learning this stuff high on any list of priorities. Those who play it tend to write as if the gadgets are the only way to play. They are wrong. Card play, learning bridge logic (rather than bridge gadgets), and learning to focus are far, far more important than memorizing dozens of gadgets, each of which might come up once every 500 or 1000 hands, or less.

Playing 4♥ has the benefit of paying big time if we are right, so even tho I wouldn't do it here, I would do it if 6=5 reds (well, I'd at least think long and hard about it).

Playing precisely 4♦ makes little sense. The opps are not going to do as well as RHO expects, playing in spades, so we may very well be turning a small plus into a small minus, or on a good day turning a small plus into just a little bigger plus: 130 v 100 for example.

But often times, action by us catches partner with good values and a borderline fit...and gets us too high. Again, reverse our reds, and this isn't as much of an issue. He'll know that we were under pressure and that a game bid by us could be a real stretch, so he'd be reluctant to advance a 4♥ bid. However, in diamonds, he's going to think that we must have a real hand, to bid 4♦, and the payoff for the raise is huge....a payoff that doesn't exist in hearts....playing 5♥ rather than 4 is silly.

Thus, at least on some of the hands on which par is getting to 4♦, we'll be playing in 5♦, sometimes doubled.

[davechimp]

Why 4 d is leaping michaels I don't know, no leap. However, what happened to 6-5 come alive? Must bid and hop partner does not cruxify me

[gwnn]

davechimp, on 2013-August-31, 00:34, said:

Why 4 d is leaping michaels I don't know, no leap. However, what happened to 6-5 come alive? Must bid and hop partner does not cruxify me

Hence the name NON leaping michaels.

[PhilG007]

I would pass this hand. The bidding is already too high to
make any red suit bid a safe one. And the shape suggests
the trumps will break badly. If partner had anything to say,he
would have come in over 2S. The mark of a good player is to know when you have been outgunned....and go quietly (!)

[Vampyr]

PhilG007, on 2013-September-01, 08:51, said:

If partner had anything to say,he
would have come in over 2S.

Possibly not, given that partner is extremely likely to have length in spades.