[sceptic]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     Pass  1♣    1♦
 1♠    2♦    3♣    3♦
 3♥    Pass  4♣    Pass
 4♥    Pass  Pass  Pass
 

was my 3 hearts unreasonable

was 4 clubs reasonable

was 4 hearts a bad mistake

[Winstonm]

IMO, this is a difficult hand on which to find a plus score. I don't see anything particularly wrong with the auction - 3C is aggressive, but surely right as 3N is not out of the question - and it's more right if you play good/bad 2N with the meanings reversed.

The question comes after 3C...what are likely shapes for partner? It sounds very much like partner holds 3 diamonds along with his 6 or 7 clubs, so that leaves very little in the way of major suit support - and the West hand requires good support in hearts to be of much value - not as much in spades.

Although it seems strange, my feeling is that it is so unlikely to find partner with the heart support needed to make this contract playable, that the best thing to do with the West hand is simply try to find a 6/2 spade fit with a 3S bid. It's just too timid I think to pass 3C. If you reverse the major holdings for partner you have some chance for game.

After the 3S bid, if partner can do no better than rebid clubs it's time to pass. Too high by a notch or two, but the game bonus is probably worth the risk.

Winston

[mike777]

Minimum hand so I do not rebid 3clubs but pass over 2D. Not sure what happens now but my partners know I open on junk with lousy a-k controls.

After 3clubs the hand is doomed. Perhaps doomed no matter what?

edit: Yes if playing g/b 2nt I can bid 2nt and tell my story but this is novice room, yes? In any case P may bid 3Hearts over good/bad 2nt, or I would in any case. So passing not g/b 2nt may be our only hope but may be doomed in any case.

[Double !]

A new suit bid at the 3-level, especially by an unpassed hand, tends to be regarded as being forcing at least one round?

FWIW, IMO, part of the problem with this hand was partner's 3 club bid. This tends to show a better hand (That's what G-B 2NT was created for).

[Winstonm]

sceptic, on Jul 30 2005, 11:38 PM, said:

what is wrong with passing 3 hearts?

What else but 3H would one bid with this:

AQxxx
AJ9
Jx
xxx

3H could be a suit, but it could also be asking partner to bid 3N with diamonds stopped. Playing in 3/3 fits at the 3 level is not the best idea.

A difficult concept in bridge is that weakish distributional hands lose a great deal of their value when no good fit is found. There is always a trade off in bidding - do you look for games or the best partscore? A long history has proven that winning bridge is about building a bidding system that gives precedence to game bidding over partscore bidding - hence, the 3H bid should be a fairly serious effort to reach the correct game contract. Three spades is in between those two - it invites, but doesn't force. 3H here has to force to at least 4 clubs, so if it is a real heart suit the hand should be better.

Anyway, that's my considered opinion for what it is worth.

Winston

[the hog]

Wayne, I agree pretty much with all Winston has said. 3H here is definitely forcing. I would have bid a good/bad 2NT as East instead of 3C. Not having that convention at my disposal I would have passed.

4H has some play if H do not break 4-1 and the opposition is kind. I sympathise with your 3H bid, but with this minimum I would pass over 3C - the singleton C is a big minus.

[mike777]

sceptic, on Jul 31 2005, 01:14 AM, said:

Quote

Anyway, that's my considered opinion for what it is worth.

worth a lot or I would not keep asking LOL

has anyone got a link to good bad 2NT please as I think it is a concept I need to get used to

g/b 2nt is very difficult. I see it mentioned often on forum and it is used incorrectly often, very often.

One of the problems is little is written about it in detailed competitive bidding. What is written does not always agree.

Some play only opener can use it, many play both partners can use it.
I see many forum posters use it when they overcall but this is not standard expert practice.

In general most of what I have seen written on this forum about it is very very poor.

Try Bridge Encyclopedia or Bergen better bidding volumes 1 and 2.

[Winstonm]

sceptic, on Jul 31 2005, 01:14 AM, said:

Quote

Anyway, that's my considered opinion for what it is worth.

worth a lot or I would not keep asking LOL

has anyone got a link to good bad 2NT please as I think it is a concept I need to get used to

I wish I could help with the link but cannot. I picked up the concept from Larry Cohen's book The Law of Total Tricks and found it so useful an idea that my partner and I have adopted its use in virtually every case where the opponents bid and raise their suit.

Not to get too deep, but we've found that on auctions like this:

1D-1S-X-2S that it is rarely right to want to play 2N or even 3N but it is very important to know if opening bidder has a game invitational hand or instead some shapely minimum with enough to compete - hence, 2N in this sequence is also good/bad.

Of course, as we are a couple of oddballs we reverse the meanings - for us it's the direct bid that is the weaker.

Winston

[Double !]

Winstonm, on Jul 31 2005, 01:28 AM, said:

sceptic, on Jul 31 2005, 01:14 AM, said:

Quote

Anyway, that's my considered opinion for what it is worth.

worth a lot or I would not keep asking LOL

has anyone got a link to good bad 2NT please as I think it is a concept I need to get used to

I wish I could help with the link but cannot. I picked up the concept from Larry Cohen's book The Law of Total Tricks and found it so useful an idea that my partner and I have adopted its use in virtually every case where the opponents bid and raise their suit.

Not to get too deep, but we've found that on auctions like this:

1D-1S-X-2S that it is rarely right to want to play 2N or even 3N but it is very important to know if opening bidder has a game invitational hand or instead some shapely minimum with enough to compete - hence, 2N in this sequence is also good/bad.

Of course, as we are a couple of oddballs we reverse the meanings - for us it's the direct bid that is the weaker.

Winston

Page 112+ in "Better Bidding with Bergen, Volume II".

[the hog]

Wayne basically it works like this:

1C (1d) 1h (2d)
3c - is a normal 3c bid, eg 16-18 with 6 good c
2n - is a puppet to 3C which opener can then pass iow it shows 6
+ decent c and a hand willing to compete. obviously if resp has a good hand, he does not bid 3c, but makes some other bid, which is forcing, except 3h here which is merely invit.

Downside? You give up a natural 2nt bid. This is not a problem imo - how often is the 8 trick contract exactly right?

Obviously there are a number of complicated continuations you can introduce.

[Echognome]

With a few of my partners we play that 2NT is never natural in competition. This simplifies matters greatly as the meanings are then logical extensions from either Lebensohl or Jacoby. The main thing is, as usual, to agree them with partner.

[han]

Agree with all of west's bids, disagree with 3C and 4C.