[jillybean]

---

Teams? I chose a disciplined pass second seat, now how high?

[mike777]

3C

[DavidKok]

5♣

[mw64ahw]

4♣ The Law-1 for vulnerability, but given South's two passes 3♣ seems sufficient.

[TMorris]

5♣

[jillybean]

---

Now I'm regretting I didn't bid 5 dircetly, I was hoping to end the auction at 4
The OT had a direct route to 4H, North opening Prec1C
P (P) 1C (P) 1D (1S*) 4H

[DavidKok]

 jillybean, on 2026-March-15, 06:21, said:

Now I'm regretting I didn't bid 5 dircetly, I was hoping to end the auction at 4

I think this is a classic mistake.

[mike777]

5Cx, D lead, is killed, terrible 2C Vul overcall

[jillybean]

mike777, on 2026-March-15, 06:34, said:

5Cx is killed, terrible 2C Vul overcall

Yes, I was thinking 5S would go without X if I bid 5C directly, backwards optimism here perhaps
I can only work on my game ��

[jillybean]

DavidKok, on 2026-March-15, 06:28, said:

I think this is a classic mistake.

Agree

[mike777]

What is East doubling on?

[jillybean]

mike777, on 2026-March-15, 06:38, said:

What is East doubling on?

Red ace, red queen not enough

[DavidKok]

I strongly dislike East's 2♣ and double. I think those actions are far worse than the double clubs raise.

[mycroft]

Not sure how high I would bid, but it would be odd.

4♣ is reserved for hands where "4M goes down on reasonable hand from partner." For any preemptive raise, I want to be comfortable with them taking the bait.

I remember one where my partner bid 4, then bid 5 over their (obvious) game bid. Guess what? Even this C pair guessed right after that (this time it was double; next time it would be "bid 5", or even "bid 6 on the void"). I asked "did you think they were going to bid game?" "Of course, it's obvious." "Then why did you let them?" Frankly, the answer was "in this club, we get a bad score for -500 in 5♣x losing to many in the room's 4♣x -300, with -620 available." He knew it, I knew it, nobody had to say it, and frankly, it's true. But it's still bad bridge.

MikeH is famous for "I don't care about the field, I do what I expect to be right against top-flight players" (and hope to beat "the non-bracket-1 field" with pure skill). I - have a different opinion (well, no, but I'm much more likely to design system to "get back to the field" when our system has us behind). But here - 100%. I don't want to win in a "weak" field by playing bad bridge, even if it is bad bridge that will frequently score better *here* (but not against a field of my peers). For one thing, it trains me to be lazy when I *do* play in a field of my peers.

[mw64ahw]

I'd open North's hand 4♣

[mw64ahw]

DavidKok, on 2026-March-15, 06:44, said:

I strongly dislike East's 2♣ and double. I think those actions are far worse than the double clubs raise.

2♣ is OK, but not the X

[mycroft]

I don't mind the 2♣ call, if partner expects it. It's ugly, and *I* don't want to be playing with that partner the day the S/W hands are reversed, but (some) good players get away with it more often than not. It's hard to bid correctly over.

Yeah, here 5♣ goes for 800, and 5♥ is 850. I am reminded of the Emperor here :-).

But the double is pure MP thinking (and not really good MP thinking at that - don't you think *any* plus score is going to be A++?). Laying 5-2 odds that the opponents don't know what they're doing, just because you can "see" three tricks (and assuming that partner, who bid and rebid clubs, doesn't have all that many), and partner is "sure" to have one for her bidding (/s)? Lucky they didn't send it back (though here neither hand has reasonable sureness). Please, please read Chapter 1 of Simon (and then go read the rest).

On opening 4♣ - I've seen that suggested before with similar hands. How does partner know that (as a minimal change)

---

is 70+% for 6 (diamonds 4-1 with the stiff not the A sets it) but

---

might not make 4 (and 5 is shaky)? Or

---

? Or the many, many other hands where "I have 8 tricks, do you have the other 4?" (or, depending on your agreement, "I have 9 tricks, do you have the other 3?") gets answered with "I don't know. Can I even afford to look"?