[P_Marlowe]

sceptic, on Aug 16 2005, 07:40 AM, said:

Pard never directly raised hearts, so he felt he had to introduce his Spades, then he has shown heart support, not raised to game, which I would have thought was easy to bid as you are vuln, I cant see what purpose there is to bid 3NT here without a club control of your own. as if he was interested in NT he could show clubs or lack of diamond control somehow.

I think showing another major then supporting hearts is not the way to NT

Hi,

partner was looking for a 4-4 fit in spades.
A 4-4 will most of the time play better than
a 5-3 fit, that's all.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

PMetsch, on Aug 13 2005, 05:26 PM, said:

Hard to tell what the right game is. I bid 3♠ and hope partner will understand that I have bad hearts and some support for spades. Partner may have only a doubleton heart and 5 good spades in wich case 4♠ may be a better contract  than 4♥. Without good spades and good hearts, partner should bid 3NT.

Do I miscount?

The heart suit is nothing to be proud off, but it is a
6 card suit, I probably showed that already, but ...

If we really wanna make 3NT, we will need the heart
suit, partner has 3 cards, most likely with one or two of the
missing honours.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[luis]

4♥ quite automatic

[Double !]

Assuming responder hasn't responded 1 spade with something like AJxx, Jxx, xxx, Qxx (responder should simply raise hearts IMO), I suspect that responder has a 10-11 pts hand with dbltn H-x in hearts, maybe xxx. With xx in hearts and scattered values 2NT might be an alternative rebid, taking preference to 3H should opener bid something like 3 diamonds. With the Hx in hearts and 10-11, i think 4H is a reasonable shot. Not so comfortable in 4H if responder has xx.

[Fluffy]

TheoKole, on Aug 14 2005, 04:42 AM, said:

I would bid 4 diamonds to describe strength there, and direct partner towards his card holding, I like my hand, especially the fitting K ♠ honor.

Althou I think 4♦ is an overbid these shows some of mypoint here: we are much closer to slam than to part score.

What does that mean? well, we will make 4♥ confortably, unless we find trumps very badly.

What's wrong with 3NT?, we won't cover ourselves from the problems we can find at 4♥ since bad ♥ split will mean defeat at 3NT almost for sure, but we instead intrroduce a new hazard: the ♣s.


I won't say this is foolproof, but for beginners it should be a good guide: at IMPs you wanna play 3NT with major fit in 2 cases:

-when you wanna gamble: that is to run 9 tricks quickly (requires something like a 6-2 fit with solid/semi-solid suit) but you aren'tsure 4M would make at all, at 3NT you can count 8 tricks and hope partner has a K or a Q well placed, or they miss the bestlead to make.


-when you wanna add extra-security: this happens when you have something like 2 balanced hands with 28-30 HCP combined, you are pretty far from slam, and the only problem in 4M would be to find trumps spliting horrible or a defensive cross-ruff. Playing 3NT you cope with that.

[PMetsch]

P_Marlowe, on Aug 16 2005, 08:57 AM, said:

If we really wanna make 3NT, we will need the heart
suit, partner has 3 cards, most likely with one or two of the
missing honours.

I just generated 50 hands to see what game should be bid. Partner's hand is restricted: 4/5♠, 2♥ and 10-12HCP. As far as I can see 4♥ is a good contract if partner has ♥A or both black aces. If partner lacks those aces, then a few times 3NT was a good contract if played by partner. In 3NT you can't establish the heart suit (to weak), but need the spade suit and/or some succesfull finesses.

[mike777]

PMetsch, on Aug 16 2005, 04:23 PM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Aug 16 2005, 08:57 AM, said:

If we really wanna make 3NT, we will need the heart
suit, partner has 3 cards, most likely with one or two of the
missing honours.

I just generated 50 hands to see what game should be bid. Partner's hand is restricted: 4/5♠, 2♥ and 10-12HCP. As far as I can see 4♥ is a good contract if partner has ♥A or both black aces. If partner lacks those aces, then a few times 3NT was a good contract if played by partner. In 3NT you can't establish the heart suit (to weak), but need the spade suit and/or some succesfull finesses.

Please explain why this set of limitations is best? I strongly disagree as does BW Sept 2005 issue which is where this lesson hand is from.

To be fair, based on these forum comments so far most would seem to agree with your Model.

[PMetsch]

mike777, on Aug 16 2005, 04:31 PM, said:

Please explain why this set of limitations is best?

I play this sequence as a limit raise. If partner has 3♥ he will always correct to 4♥, so there is only a problem if he has only 2♥. Maybe others (BW) play it as forcing, I don't know if that is "standard".

[mike777]

PMetsch, on Aug 16 2005, 05:13 PM, said:

mike777, on Aug 16 2005, 04:31 PM, said:

Please explain why this set of limitations is best?

I play this sequence as a limit raise. If partner has 3♥ he will always correct to 4♥, so there is only a problem if he has only 2♥. Maybe others (BW) play it as forcing, I don't know if that is "standard".

Yes, this is a limit raise, it is the Model itself BW and I disagree with.

[PMetsch]

mike777, on Aug 16 2005, 05:20 PM, said:

it is the Model itself BW and I disagree with.

I am afraid I don't understand what you are trying to say (I don't read BW).
Do you mean the limit raise should show more/less points or more/better hearts or a specific distribution (BAL/UNBAL) or (lack of) stoppers?
Or does the sequence ask to bid game with good hearts or a maximum?

[mike777]

PMetsch, on Aug 16 2005, 05:45 PM, said:

mike777, on Aug 16 2005, 05:20 PM, said:

it is the Model itself BW and I disagree with.

I am afraid I don't understand what you are trying to say (I don't read BW).
Do you mean the limit raise should show more/less points or more/better hearts or a specific distribution (BAL/UNBAL) or (lack of) stoppers?
Or does the sequence ask to bid game with good hearts or a maximum?

Those are all good questions to ask, I think other questions should be asked also.

Model building is very difficult, garbage model, garbage results.
In fact most people do not seem to realize you need to start with theory first, then build the model for simulation later. Just building a model is data mining at its worst.

In other words, start with your theory of bidding first, then think of building the model much later.

As a side note I see many people post simulations and conclusions and then post a theory of bidding systems.

This is model, simulation abuse and exactly backwards.

[mike777]

I found this hand interesting for us players coming back to bridge, I hope you do also.

IMPS VUL

P=1H=P=1S
P=2H=P=3H
P=?

K7=K97642=AKJ=86

What is your thought process and bid?

3S

This is from a Swiss Team teaching problem in Sept 2005 BW.(PLUG FOR WONDERFUL MAGAZINE).

These were the teaching points:

1) Hearts are weak
2) Have a good spade fit
3) Already have shown an opening hand
4) Already have shown 6 hearts
5) You have extra high card points
6) With weak hearts you may have raised one spade to two spades with 3 card spade holding.
7) Bidding 3 spades here suggests only two spades.
8) Give partner another option.

AQT862=Q3=Q8=J54

[Rebound]

Double !, on Aug 16 2005, 10:56 AM, said:

Assuming responder hasn't responded 1 spade with something like AJxx, Jxx, xxx, Qxx (responder should simply raise hearts IMO), I suspect that responder has a 10-11 pts hand with dbltn H-x in hearts, maybe xxx. With xx in hearts and scattered values 2NT might be an alternative rebid, taking preference to 3H should opener bid something like 3 diamonds. With the Hx in hearts and 10-11, i think 4H is a reasonable shot. Not so comfortable in 4H if responder has xx.

I think this raises the key point of the discussion, and perhaps is the thrust of your last post, Mike. What type of hand will partner hold with which he will forgo raising hearts immediately to show the spade suit?

I believe if you and your partner agree to the answer to this question, it more or less solves the problem of what to do over 3♥.

[Double !]

mike777, on Aug 17 2005, 07:20 PM, said:

8) Give partner another option.

AQT862=Q3=Q8=J54

If P has this hand, would not the correct rebid be 2 spades (forcing 1 round)? This auction was the topic of one of Fred's earlier articles where it was suggested that rebidding 2S to play because you had 6 spades alone didn't make much sense when P had already shown 6 hearts. Hence the rebid was forcing one round.

[pclayton]

Well its sort of a neat problem I guess, but I'd be concerned about pard opting for a suppose 5-3 in spades in stead of a 6-2 in hearts.

2H doesn't deny 3S does it?

By the way, I'm never bidding 4D. Hard to construct a minimum opener opposite an invite that suddenly looks good for slam. Why tip your hand to the defense?

[the hog]

Double !, on Aug 18 2005, 02:07 PM, said:

mike777, on Aug 17 2005, 07:20 PM, said:

8) Give partner another option.

AQT862=Q3=Q8=J54

If P has this hand, would not the correct rebid be 2 spades (forcing 1 round)? This auction was the topic of one of Fred's earlier articles where it was suggested that rebidding 2S to play because you had 6 spades alone didn't make much sense when P had already shown 6 hearts. Hence the rebid was forcing one round.

Playing 1H 1S 2H 2S as forcing is a possible treatment, but may not be best. What if resp holds QJT9xx void Kxx xxxx

I agree with you Phil, 2S by opener here sounds far too much like a 3- 6 shape.