[mike777]

Scoring: IMP

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

---

[HeartA]

pass, wtp?

[asdfg2k]

There is no question that you want to play 3nt. The only question is how you get partner to bid it if he has Qx. With as little as 13 HCP 3NT will roll if diamonds come in without a loser (Ax, xx, AKxxxx, Qxx).

I think you just have to pay homage to the fact that the opps have effectively precluded you from investigating things properly, close your eyes, hold your nose, and bid 3nt.

[pclayton]

I got this on a BW sampler too. I voted along with the majority and I DONT agree with the moderator's opinion on this.

[joshs]

I am a passer. I have no fitting diamond honor, so the likely hood of 9 fast tricks at NT is pretty small. I actually don't think the decision is close. If partner x's back in to show extra values, then I will have a decision...

[awm]

I'll try 3NT. To some degree this depends on what you expect from partner for the 3♦ call. Certainly for some people, 3♦ basically says "I have six decent diamonds" and could easily be a minimum hand (mostly competitive). With such an agreement passing becomes more appealing. But I think it's still standard that 3♦ here shows a bit extra, if not necessarily as much as a jump rebid in diamonds.

It's interesting that RHO passed initially, but has subsequently competed to 3♥ in a non-balancing situation. What are we to make of this? If he actually has six good hearts, he could've opened 2♥ (or 2♦ multi or something) initially. The failure to do so may well indicate a side four-card spade suit (not wanting to preempt with 4-6 majors), or that he's competing based on diamond shortness rather than extra heart length. In either case, any needed diamond finesses are likely to work. If partner tables something like Ax xx AQJxxx Qxx, I would rate my chances in 3nt as substantially more than 50%... and this isn't really a 3♦ call in my book either. Partner could easily have a seventh diamond, or 14-15 high, and I wouldn't expect partner to balance back in necessarily with hands like:

xx
xx
AKJxxxx
Ax

Qx
Kx
AQJxxx
Qxx

These hands are pretty minimal 3♦ bids as far as I'm concerned -- like I said, I don't expect a 3♦ call on any random opening hand with six diamonds. They're relatively flat, and it seems pushy to compete again after 3♥ comes back around.

Of course, there are also hands where 3NT will fail, but partner will understand that the 3NT call is expecting to run the diamonds and may pull it on some of these. For example:

Ax
x
QJTxxxx
AQx

[Kalvan14]

It depends on the partnership agreements: are you playing support doubles? Does 3♦ in the direct seat show a hand with reverse strength?

There is also another consideration: pard is marked with one or two hearts at most (I'd guess just one, if oppos are reliable), and probably 2 spades.
If the hand is something like xx x AQJxxxx AKx, our contract is 5♦, not 3N.

My suggestion is X, forward going (not penalty), in particular if partner can have 3 spades. Alternatively, I prefer 4♦ (if it is an established partnership) or even 5♦ outright, it must be the most practical contract (if pard's hand is Qx x KQJTxxx AKx, 5♦ are lay-down, and 3N is a disaster).

[mike777]

Adam has done a wonderful job visualizing partner's and rho hands. I want to bring the disussion back to one of my favorite topics that of the free bid in competition.

As a passed hand what does our free bid of 1S show? If you think it shows a constructive hand have we bid our values? Perhaps it is standard to bid 1s on almost nothing so now we need to come alive?

For those of you that play good/bad 2nt does it apply over 2h, if so then 3d shows extra's and 2nt puppet would show less?

[Kalvan14]

mike777, on Mar 20 2006, 06:00 PM, said:

Adam has done a wonderful job visualizing partner's and rho hands. I want to bring the disussion back to one of my favorite topics that of the free bid in competition.

As a passed hand what does our free bid of 1S show? If you think it shows a constructive hand have we bid our values? Perhaps it is standard to bid 1s on almost nothing so now we need to come alive?

For those of you that play good/bad 2nt does it apply over 2h, if so then 3d shows extra's and 2nt puppet would show less?

IMO, 1♠ might have been bid with less: A♥ and KJ♠ [with 3 diamonds and a clubs doubleton which should be good for a ruff] push me toward finding a bid for sure over 3♥.

2NT Lebensohol (or Good/Bad) is certainly applicable here; IMHO, if it is not played, it does not change the values shown with a direct 3♦: it just precludes a 3♦ bid on purely distributional values.

[mikeh]

mike777, on Mar 20 2006, 06:00 PM, said:

As a passed hand what does our free bid of 1S show? If you think it shows a constructive hand have we bid our values?  Perhaps it is standard to bid 1s on almost nothing so now we need to come alive?

1♠ shows almost the same as if RHO had passed: I would do it on KJxxx and the ♦J. Okay, I admit that there are some extremely weak 1♠ responses to an opening bid that I would pass after the overcall, since I stretch to respond to a minor opening, but they are truly weak.

I had thought that the old free bid fallacy had long since gone to that place where losing bridge ideas end up: along with strong two bids, direct cue overcalls as big hands, and culbertson 4-5NT (along with so many others). Apparently not

Mike, it is a bidder's game. Take a look at the styles in use by todays top players. Everybody bids! And don't tell me that the top players win because they play the cards better than anyone else. At the higher levels, the difference is 80% or more about bidding. While Rodwell, Versace etc will play hands better than, for example, me... I can tell you from personal experience that there are few boards in a typical match where their edge in declarer play matters: and a heck of a lot where their edge in bidding counts.

[kenrexford]

There is one HUGE inference being missed. Partner opened fourth seat, and yet he apparently cannot raise spades. Give him at most two spades, and his minimum HCP count is 13. He also looks to have two hearts, meaning nine cards in the minors, an ugly opening on minimal values.

We also know that partner did not elect a 2D or 3D opening. This is strange. I assume that a 3D opening would show a solid suit and serious interest in 3NT? Perhaps a broken 3NT invite, instead? What about a fourth-seat 2D opening?

As 3D is a "free bid" to a degree, I expect a hand that is inappropriate for a 2D or 3D opening initially, whatever the parameters are for normal folks, but very strong. Give opener a strong enough hand, with a heart stop, and 3NT seems reasonable from his side, or 3H asking for a stopper. Thus, this is getting real tight.

Now, to the Rexford side of the moon. I realize, up front, that this will not be accepted. However, I cannot visualize a 3D call that would not be opened 2D or 3D in fourth seat and yet can freely bid 3D in this auction but opts against 3H, 2NT, or 3NT. Thus, as strange as it seems, 3D seems to be fit-showing (spade support). I expect something like two of the top three honors in diamonds, game-invitational or better. Thus, ideally, I'd bid 3H as a control bid. Maybe partner holds AQx-xx-AKJxx-KQx?

In practice, having never thought this auction through, I doubt I'd catch it. However, think through this auction. 3D is dangerous, if partner might pass. But, the failure to bid 3D or 2D initially makes 3D forcing, IMO. Thus, 3D is safe, as 4S over anything clears the matter up. What about 3H? This may be ideal opposite Qx, if I guessed wrong.

In the end, however, I like 3D as fit-showing, an "Opener's Fit-Showing Jump." What else makes sense? On all the hands suggested by awm, I'd open 2D (in fourth seat).

[hatchett]

Quote

  On all the hands suggested by awm, I'd open 2D (in fourth seat).

I'd be tempted to open both of these hands 1NT (15/17). The second one in particular is very tempting.

[whereagles]

3NT. This can go wrong if diamonds don't run, and even if they do, there'll still be work.

Since we are a passed hand, pard can take this out to 4♦ if his hand is unsuitable. He's guaranteed of a fit because with misfit and 8-9 hcp the bid is pass, not 3NT.

[kenrexford]

hatchett, on Mar 21 2006, 01:26 AM, said:

Quote

  On all the hands suggested by awm, I'd open 2D (in fourth seat).

I'd be tempted to open both of these hands 1NT (15/17). The second one in particular is very tempting.

I actually would also consider 1NT with two of these myself, which increases my argument that this late 3D should be fit-showing.

[ArcLight]

>There is one HUGE inference being missed. Partner opened fourth seat, and yet he apparently cannot raise spades

Pard opened in 4th seat AND can't raise Spades. So why did he bother opening, if we can be out bid in a minor?
I think he has some points, and will bid 3NT because 3 Spade bid might be passed out. I dont see any way to get pard to bid 3NT.

I expect more than minimal crap, like AQJxxx in Dimes and a few scattered queens.

[whereagles]

kenrexford, on Mar 21 2006, 12:16 PM, said:

I actually would also consider 1NT with two of these myself, which increases my argument that this late 3D should be fit-showing.

Isn't that going a bit overboard? Fit bids are nice, but you can't fit bid all the time. What do you do if you simply have diamonds?

[mike777]

3nt But I understand Al Roth's choice of Pass playing his style. I think Larry Cohen even choose pass, wow!

This must be a good problem, lots of answers with passion

I do think the 3D bidder has more than a minimum but agree that it may take a bit of luck or misdefense to make.

[kenrexford]

When you have a multitude of ways to bid one hand type and none to bid another, the default should be to use wasted bids to show the unbiddable, not to fine-tune the one you have multiple ways of bidding.

I would expect that the vast majority of partnerships have some definition to fourth-seat diamond "preempts." Personally, I prefer a 3D opening to be a solid suit, with decent values, and 2D to show a non-solid suit with decent values.

If this late 3D call makes sense, we must assume, after this specific auction, that partner had a reason to open. With a minimum, and two spades or fewer, partner would pass the auction out. With decent values, partner would open 2D or 3D. Hence, partner must have very strong values to bid 3D.

With no spade fit, partner has 2NT, 3NT, or 3H available. That's 3 ways to show a very powerful diamond-oriented hand. All other diamond-oriented hands that cannot raise spades would have been passed out or opening 2D or 3D. Thus, as there is not sixth option, 3D must show something else. The logical candidate is diamonds with a spade fit.

That's my thinking, anyway. Partner cannot "simply have diamonds" because he would not end up forced to bid 3D with that hand.

[whereagles]

Well.. while it is true that in 4th seat many diamond 1-suiters might just open 2/3♦, I think there are also cases were you'd want to open those 1-suiters 1♦. For instance, any hand starting with, say, 14 or 15 and a good suit might want to try for game construtively instead of taking a unilateral decision.

Of course, the more aggressive your 1/2nd seat openings are, the more wide-ranging a 2/3♦ opening on 3rd/4th seat can become. But if you're going to pass, say, 11 hcp balanced hands, you probably wouldn't want to open 2/3♦ with more than 14 hcp.

Additionally, 6-4s with a major on the side will be more pressed to open 1♦. (Not the case here, though.) And don't forget pard might also want to bid 3♦ on a 5 carder if he has extras and is stuck for a bid.

So where am I getting at? That you can play 3♦ as fit bid, but note there may be considerable number of hands that might want to bid a natural 3♦ here. You'd also have to convince pard your style is the best thing since sliced bread, something which is probably more difficult to do than proving the technical soundness of the method

[Kalvan14]

kenrexford, on Mar 21 2006, 01:51 PM, said:

When you have a multitude of ways to bid one hand type and none to bid another, the default should be to use wasted bids to show the unbiddable, not to fine-tune the one you have multiple ways of bidding.

I would expect that the vast majority of partnerships have some definition to fourth-seat diamond "preempts." Personally, I prefer a 3D opening to be a solid suit, with decent values, and 2D to show a non-solid suit with decent values.

If this late 3D call makes sense, we must assume, after this specific auction, that partner had a reason to open. With a minimum, and two spades or fewer, partner would pass the auction out. With decent values, partner would open 2D or 3D. Hence, partner must have very strong values to bid 3D.

With no spade fit, partner has 2NT, 3NT, or 3H available. That's 3 ways to show a very powerful diamond-oriented hand. All other diamond-oriented hands that cannot raise spades would have been passed out or opening 2D or 3D. Thus, as there is not sixth option, 3D must show something else. The logical candidate is diamonds with a spade fit.

That's my thinking, anyway. Partner cannot "simply have diamonds" because he would not end up forced to bid 3D with that hand.

Since opener is marked with a singleton heart (or in the worst case with 2 - but I'd bet on a singleton) he cannot rebid NT.

A ♥ cue bid would likely to be interpreted as a good hand with spade fit (quite obvious).

Opener's hand (if he is not one of those guys who don't know the meaning of pass)
will be something like:

Qx x KQJxxxx AKx

or

xx x AKJxxxx AQJ

Both of this hands are close to a minimum for the "free bid" of 3♦ [and this time it is a true free bid: no one is asking opener to bid. Even if the partnership does not use 2NT Good/Bad 3♦ shows a single-suit reverse].

The second hand makes a slam playable, and open might even be stronger.
The first hand has no play for 3N, but 5♦ is lay-down.
I'm quite biased in trying to play 3N on a lot of hands which are normally played in a suit; not on this hand, though. The final contract has to be 5 or 6♦.