[kgr]

Scoring: IMP

---

Bidding (opps always pass):
1NT-2♦
2♥-3NT
Pass

I thought when partner had enough to bid 3NT then 3NT would play as good as 4♥. (After 2NT I would have bid 3♥).
Would you have bid 4♥? If yes: can you imagine a hand with 3-card support where you would stay in 3NT?

Lead was ♣T taken with my K (RHO plays the 6).
I now played ♥K (4,2 and 3 are falling under it).
And then I finessed ♥ by playing ♥ to the J.
My partner said after the play it is better not to finesse the ♥ so that RHO does not get the lead (to play ♣) in case he has ♥Q2, but is that true? I don't yet have 9 tricks and 5 tricks in ♥ would help me to get there. Finessing would give me the best change to get there. If I only get 4 tricks in ♥ then RHO will get the lead sometime anyway to play through my ♣.
.... Do you finesse or not?

[helene_t]

In general, I would prefer 4♥ even with a 4333-shape since responder may be unballanced. In this case, with all those honours in the short side suits, I can understand your pass on 3NT.

BTW, I'm not sure if I would consider this hand strong enough for a 1NT (15-17) opening.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

no I would have bid 4H.

My rule is simple, if we have a 8 card mayor
suit fit, we play the mayor.
Even if not following this rule, in the current situation:
partner did ask about 3 card support for hearts, you
have it, show the support, you have no clue, what
partners hand may look like, in contrast to your partner,
who knows your hand pretty well.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: In rare situations partner could still be interested
in slam, in case he finds a mayor suit fit.

[Gerben42]

I disagree with 3NT from north, he should bid 3♦. Not to suggest a trump suit but to warn partner that his hand is suit-oriented. How else can south make an informed decision? I pass 3NT expecting a balanced hand from partner.

About the play: Counting tricks you will find out that if you make only 4♥ you will need two from both minors. This means simply that if you lose a ♥ trick that the ♣A must be with East.

So the best play to make 3NT is take the percentage play in ♥ which is to finesse. If West has ♣A and ♥Qxx and you play ♥K, ♥A, ♦ to Q and ♥ you will still go down as West will simply return a non-♣.

[whereagles]

Bidding is fine. A bit agricultural, but passable.

I would have finessed as well.

[Walddk]

helene_t, on Jul 22 2005, 11:20 AM, said:

BTW, I'm not sure if I would consider this hand strong enough for a 1NT (15-17) opening.

Not sure I understand. One of us must have miscounted, and I don't think it's me.

Roland

[helene_t]

Counted? What has hand evaluation to do with counting? Not sure I understand ....

[coyot]

Yep... any 15 balanced is worth opening 1NT . maybe with a few exceptions like having 4432 with Qxx and KJ in the last two suits... but generally when I get 15, I open it.

To answer the original question: Since 4♥ needs both red finesses to work, while 3NT has the additional chance to make with club ace onside, I would finesse hearts and then diamonds. If the diamond finesse fails, LHO may still err by playing a club for me (not seeing the queen). If heart finesse fails, I was in a hopeless contract but I don't really care as 4♥ goes down as well.

[Blofeld]

I agree with helene in that I don't much like it (4333 shape, few fitting values, just one ace), but I still think that I'd open it 1NT (the bigger question is whether I'd stretch it down to open 1NT playing 12-14). I'd also pass 3NT. I agree with Gerben: North should not have bid 3NT with such a suit-oriented hand.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

asking North to bid 3D at his 2nd turn is
ridiculous, I would use stronger words,
but there may be children out there.

North's diamond suit is not existing, i.e. he
has no business introducing the suit.

If you require North to bid always diamonds
you will most of the time help only the opponents
in their search for an lead.

As a side note: Bidding 3D opposite a unknown
partner is aksing for trouble, because he may pass.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[helene_t]

I don't think partner would pass 3♦ (unless he's unsure if we play transfers or not) but he might bid 4♦.

[coyot]

3♦ bid is strange, no doubt about it. Offering 4 spot cards? If partner has 2 hearts and 3 diamonds, I'm now playing the same 3NT but will even less chances to make.

Anyway, I just looked at the heart hand well - and I would NOT bid 3NT with it . 2NT is perfect. I have 9HCP with no fit guaranteed and I don't want to end up in a 3NT on 24 HCP. I trust my partner to correct to 3♥ if he has 3card in hearts and good suit-contract values.
I.e. 3 aces and king are an obvious 15HCP correction to 3♥, or an empty doubleton... so I will find 3NT or 4♥ on brute force and I will find 4♥ on most suitable 15HCP hands as well.

[whereagles]

There's nothing wrong with 3D instead of 3NT. It's just a matter of style.

[coyot]

whereagles, on Jul 22 2005, 08:57 AM, said:

There's nothing wrong with 3D instead of 3NT. It's just a matter of style.

What exactly does the 3♦ bid convey according to your style?

Is it a game-try with willingness to play 3♥ on 5-2 fit? Or it is GF? And do you expect partner to bid 3NT with small diamond doubleton (thinking that you're stopping that suit? Or to bid 4♥ with 3card support and diamond king?

[whereagles]

I don't know what american text books say about

1NT 2♦
2♥ 3m

but in the books I read it showed a game forcing hand with 5-4 shape. According to that definition, 3♦ on the hand given originally is perfectly normal, even with a broken suit. Pard is now supposed to bid 3/4♥ with fit max/min, bid a a stopper at the 3-level with heart misfit (or 3NT with both side suits well stopped) or drive on to the 4-level with excellent diamond fit and a max. If the hands are

♠ KQxx.......Axx
♥ Kx...........AJxxx
♦ AKxx........xxxx
♣ xxx..........x

there's no reason to play 3NT if you can bid it like

1NT 2♦
2♥ 3♦
3♠ 4♦
5♦

Of course.. if opener has another hand, all this "precise" bidding ends up in 3NT anyway, and the defense can pick the correct lead more easily.

Which is why I say to bid 3NT (the pragmatic bid) or 3♦ (the unlucky expert's bid) is a matter of style.

[coyot]

whereagles, on Jul 22 2005, 09:29 AM, said:

I don't know what american text books say about

1NT 2♦
2♥ 3m

but in the books I read it showed a game forcing hand with 5-4 shape. According to that definition, 3♦ on the hand given originally is perfectly normal, even with a broken suit. Pard is now supposed to bid 3/4♥ with fit max/min, bid a a stopper at the 3-level with heart misfit (or 3NT with both side suits well stopped) or drive on to the 4-level with excellent diamond fit and a max. If the hands are

♠ KQxx.......Axx
♥ Kx...........AJxxx
♦ AKxx........xxxx
♣ xxx..........x

there's no reason to play 3NT if you can bid it like

1NT 2♦
2♥ 3♦
3♠ 4♦
5♦

Of course.. if opener has another hand, all this "precise" bidding ends up in 3NT anyway, and the defense can pick the correct lead more easily.

Which is why I say to bid 3NT (the pragmatic bid) or 3♦ (the unlucky expert's bid) is a matter of style.

You're basically forcing partner into 24HCP no-fit game or suggesting to offer 8xxx in diamonds TWICE???

I don't think the hand qualifies as gameforcing, but even so, if I open 1NT and p transfers and then bids diamonds twice, I'll happily raise him with third honor... I will never expect such a garbage hand .

So, for me the pragmatic bid is 2NT and the expert bid is 2NT as well . If I occasionally miss 3NT, I don't care. If I very occasionally miss 5♦ that needs a lot of help, I don't care...

The example you showed above is about the most optimistic 15HCP hand you could expect and still quite likely fails on a trump lead (and you can BET it will come when opps hear that you don't want to play 3NT

[whereagles]

coyot, you asked me how I play 1N-2D-2H-3D, and I told you.

The examples I gave were merely elucidative of the point I wanted to make. Whether or not you evaluate responder's hand to be enough for a game force is a completely different matter.

[coyot]

whereagles, on Jul 22 2005, 10:36 AM, said:

coyot, you asked me how I play 1N-2D-2H-3D, and I told you.

The examples I gave were merely elucidative of the point I wanted to make. Whether or not you evaluate responder's hand to be enough for a game force is a completely different matter.

OK, sorry to push... but your example suggest that you will rebid the diamonds twice with an empty four-card - which is indeed strange to me.

[whereagles]

Well, if the hearts were stronger, say AQJxx, responder might try 4H to suggest the 5-2 fit. As it is, a rebid of 4D is probably the lesser evil.

But of course, that depends on your style and/or evaluation of the hand. If you prefer to bid 2/3NT after the transfer, that problem won't arise

[mike777]

kgr, on Jul 22 2005, 03:48 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

---

Bidding (opps always pass):
1NT-2♦
2♥-3NT
Pass

I thought when partner had enough to bid 3NT then 3NT would play as good as 4♥. (After 2NT I would have bid 3♥).
Would you have bid 4♥? If yes: can you imagine a hand with 3-card support where you would stay in 3NT?

Lead was ♣T taken with my K (RHO plays the 6).
I now played ♥K (4,2 and 3 are falling under it).
And then I finessed ♥ by playing ♥ to the J.
My partner said after the play it is better not to finesse the ♥ so that RHO does not get the lead (to play ♣) in case he has ♥Q2, but is that true? I don't yet have 9 tricks and 5 tricks in ♥ would help me to get there. Finessing would give me the best change to get there. If I only get 4 tricks in ♥ then RHO will get the lead sometime anyway to play through my ♣.
.... Do you finesse or not?

Cool everyday hand. Lot of meat here.
1) I thought your bidding was fine. Perhaps most important point was to remain composed and concentrate on the next hand.
2) Try a forcing 3D rebid next time and compare results and see which one makes you happier.
3) I would force to game with 14-16NT, heck 23 hcp and no fit, no super accept, why not? This is imps yes? Just bid the darn game and give us a chance to improve our declarer play.