[Echognome]

Scoring: IMP

P - (P) - 1♥ - (P)
1NT - (P) - 2♦ - (P)
3♦ - (3♠!) - ?

---

A very strange time for East to come in. You are a bit suspicious of dog walking, but regardless, you have to make a call.

[mike777]

4C

Maybe partner can bid 4h Kickback.
In any event we are getting to game at least.
btw 4nt by partner would be an offer to play.

[Blofeld]

Interesting problem.

I think I'm going to plough ahead and bid 4♦.

[Walddk]

I will just ignore East, whatever he is up to and bid 4♣. I have a great hand.

Roland

[mikeh]

This is a great problem! I have started my answer 3 times now

Partner did not bid 2♠, so has only a courtesy raise to 3♦... if you do not play 2♠ for all good raises, count me out of the problem: the game is too tough as it is.

I assume RHO is competent. Again, if not, count me out for now, since my inferences would need to be redrawn if he is a lunatic.

RHO passed twice, so has neither a classic preempt nor a weird 8221 with terrible trump (2♠ over 1N if he had no earlier bid). I suspect ♦ length with a long but weak ♠ suit: he has deduced from our auction that his partner is short in ♦, at least moderately strong in hcp and probably holds a partial or better ♠ fit. A protypical RHO hand might be J1098xxx x Kxx xx.

Unfortunately, he seems to have guessed well. A nightmare hand for LHO might be AKx Jxxxx x Kxxx.... which leaves partner with Qx Qx A10xxx Qxxx... certainly full values for 3♦... some might say too much.

The point is that aiming for slam seems tremendously optimistic.

I agree that we must bid. I also agree that 4♣ is better than 4♦. I do so because 4♣ is a game try (NOT a slam try) and may help partner should matters be as I fear and LHO now bids 4♠. I will have shown my stiff or void ♠ and a good hand, so partner can make the final decision for the partnership, whether LHO raises or passes.

[Walddk]

mikeh, on Jul 27 2005, 05:41 AM, said:

Partner did not bid 2♠, so has only a courtesy raise to 3♦

Yes, 2♠ should be very sound raise to 3♦ because responder can't have a spade suit on the auction (1NT response to the 1♦-opening), but who invented the term "courtesy raise"?

I didn't ask my partner to bid politely, I asked him to bid his hand. So 3♦ should not be a bunch of rubbish. We use pass for those hands where I come from. 2♦ is as forcing as 1♥ was, i.e. non-forcing.

Roland

[han]

Agree with 3D being a serious bid though not a great hand.

Agree with 4C being a game-try, and that I will pass 4D. I do like my hand, but I don't expect making more than game. And if partner has wasted spade values then game is likely to be too high.

Kxx xx AKxx xxxx is a maximum for partner, but I'd rather play in 4D.

If partner has xxx xx AKxxx Q10x instead, (s)he will know that their hand is golden, and I think that we'll get to slam over 4C.

[mike777]

hmm I can only ask you great players, is threading the needle to play in 4 of a minor winning imps?

4c 100% game force for this newbie.

[Echognome]

I've altered the bidding slightly from partner's true hand, since we were playing a funny system. But, partner's hand was effectively:

---

Those that can stop in 4♦, hat's off to you.

[han]

I'm not a great player (you've seen me play online Mike, so you should know! ). I don't know how great players would take 4C (slam try or game try), I don't even know how I would take it as the partner. However, I think that slam is very unlikely after this auction, and game-try should have priority. Besides, you can play it as both, just as most people play 1M-2M-3X. So having thought about it, I think it should be a game try.

About threading the needle (I don't know this expression, but I think I know what you mean from the context), it seems to me that partner should have a very clear picture of our hand. If partner signs off in 4D (assuming that it is clearly a sign-off) then I'm pretty sure that I don't want to be in game, even at IMPs.

[mike777]

Hannie, on Jul 27 2005, 12:02 AM, said:

I'm not a great player (you've seen me play online Mike, so you should know! ). I don't know how great  players would take 4C (slam try or game try), I don't even know how I would take it as the partner. However, I think that slam is very unlikely after this auction, and game-try should have priority. Besides, you can play it as both, just as most people play 1M-2M-3X. So having thought about it, I think it should be a game try.

About threading the needle (I don't know this expression, but I think I know what you mean from the context), it seems to me that partner should have a very clear picture of our hand. If partner signs off in 4D (assuming that it is clearly a sign-off) then I'm pretty sure that I don't want to be in game, even at IMPs.

Well if 4club is game try, how the heck can i pass with K10xx of clubs?

My point being I think partner will never have a hand they can pass a 4c game try so why bother with game try, oh well.

[mikeh]

Walddk, on Jul 26 2005, 11:02 PM, said:

[but who invented the term "courtesy raise"?

I didn't ask my partner to bid politely, I asked him to bid his hand. So 3♦ should not be a bunch of rubbish. We use pass for those hands where I come from. 2♦ is as forcing as 1♥ was, i.e. non-forcing.

Courtesy raise does not mean a garbage (rubbish) raise: it means less than a strong raise. 1N limited the hand to less than sound opening values. 3♦ limited it further: not a good 10 count... probably a decent 8 to a mediocre 10. I 100% agree that 2♦ was non-forcing, but it covers a lot of territory. 3♦ (over 1N) is game force, so 2♦ is anywhere from a good 11 hcp to a very bad 18. Responder has to cater to the maximums so cannot pass 2♦ with, say, 9 hcp and support... I suspect the difference between Roland and me on this is semantics due to our being on almost opposite sides of the globe: bridge idioms vary quite widely. We chose the same bid, for (I suspect) much the same reasons... we just use different language

[mike777]

Walddk, on Jul 26 2005, 11:02 PM, said:

but who invented the term "courtesy raise"?

I didn't ask my partner to bid politely, I asked him to bid his hand. So 3♦ should not be a bunch of rubbish. We use pass for those hands where I come from. 2♦ is as forcing as 1♥ was, i.e. non-forcing.

Roland

I do not know who invented it, but it is a bridge encyclopedia bridge bid with a defined meaning.

[Walddk]

mikeh, on Jul 27 2005, 07:15 AM, said:

I suspect the difference between Roland and me on this is semantics due to our being on almost opposite sides of the globe: bridge idioms vary quite widely. We chose the same bid, for (I suspect) much the same reasons... we just use different language

Not only that; now the Canadians also want to steal our precious island "Hans Ø" near Greenland.

I herby declare war between Denmark and Canada! A warship with a 12 mm canon is on its way and will arrive by the end of August (weather permitting). Hope this intimidates you.

Roland

[mike777]

Walddk, on Jul 27 2005, 12:37 AM, said:

mikeh, on Jul 27 2005, 07:15 AM, said:

I suspect the difference between Roland and me on this is semantics due to our being on almost opposite sides of the globe: bridge idioms vary quite widely. We chose the same bid, for (I suspect) much the same reasons... we just use different language

Not only that; now the Canadians also want to steal our precious island "Hans Ø" near Greenland.

I herby declare war between Denmark and Canada! A warship with a 12 mm canon is on its way and will arrive by the end of August (weather permitting). Hope this intimidates you.

Roland

I think some danish bridge player said this.


The play's the thing


Foul deeds will rise,
Though all the earth o'erwhelm them, to men's eyes.
Hamlet, 1. 2

[Walddk]

mike777, on Jul 27 2005, 07:50 AM, said:

I think some danish bridge player said this.


The play's the thing


Foul deeds will rise,
Though all the earth o'erwhelm them, to men's eyes.
Hamlet, 1. 2

Well, you got that wrong. Hamlet was the Prince of Denmark who suggested to build a bridge between Denmark and Sweden. His prayers were heard. It happened 399 years later.

Roland

[Chamaco]

Pard bid a constructive hand but the 3D raise was weaker than 2S.

a. I assume pard cannot have 2Aces + a King:
this wd be closer to a GF hand than a 1NT bid, but even if that wa the case, pard would CERTAINLY have made a stronger bid than 3D;

b. similarly, am rather skeptical that he holds one ace and 2 kings (holding 1A+2Ks, I would raise with 2S, not 3D).


BOTTOMLINE: If pard does not have 2A+1K NOR 1A+2K, slam seems a bad proposition to me, so I am going to signoff directly in 5D.

Bridge is a % game.

I might miss the magical slam (rare), but (much more often) I will deliver less info to opps t beat contact with the right lead or with the right return early on because bidding pictured my hand for them.

I rate that the plus of bashing to game will offset the occasional missed slams more often than the other way around.

This applies under "normal" circumstances; of course the conditions of contest and the state of the match/tourney will tip the balance for/against this choice.

[Al_U_Card]

Does the combined losing trick count (with adjustment for trump length) not come out to expecting good chances of making the 11 trick game?

Slam with the 6 loser hand opposite a passed hand is a bit of a pipe-dream, but the war-mongering, pipe smoking Danes appear to be on the Horizon with their mm guns blazing.........(They are just jealous that despite having a deserted Island 40 times the size of their country, they STILL don't have as much empty space as Canada does. (Most of which exists in our politicians heads.))

[cherdano]

How about a double? With so much outside of diamonds, should I be afraid of defending?
I don't think this should be a penalty double, just maximal with no aversion to defense.

Arend

[000002]

Can 3♠ bidder held this hand: 6=1=2=4 & xxxxxx x xx kqt9 ?

thanks