[jdonn]

Ax AQ87 KQJ9 AQJ, 4th seat, imps, vul against not.

1♠ p p X
2♠ p p X
p 3♦ p ??

(No agreement about strength of 3♦ or what 2NT by partner would have been or anything like that, none of it is anything special.)

[mike777]

jdonn, on Jun 20 2007, 04:55 PM, said:

Ax AQ87 KQJ9 AQJ, 4th seat, imps, vul against not.

1♠ p p X
2♠ p p X
p 3♦ p ??

(No agreement about strength of 3♦ or what 2NT by partner would have been or anything like that, none of it is anything special.)

3S

[kenrexford]

I agree about 3♠. Here's why, though:

Partner has shown me almost nothing. He certainly has not promised the diamond Ace.

I did not bid 2NT after 2♠, so I'm not simply balanced.

I must like his diamond call.

If partner has the spade Qx, even, he should get the picture and try 3NT.

If partner has nothing of use in spades, but the diamond Ace is in his hand, he knows that I asked him to bid 3NT when I was not looking at that diamond Ace. So, it seems that the diamond Ace is as good as the spade control.

Or so it seems to me, maybe.

[mikeh]

I sure as heck hope he doesn't bid 3N on Qx of ♠s... not unless I can persuade opener to lead out of turn

[awm]

It's a trap! Run away! Pass quickly before it's tooo late....

[mikeh]

It IS possible that a conservative partner could hold, say, xxx J9x Axxxx xx and we make 5♦ (note how I gave us the ♥9, so we could unblock and hook against responder's 10xxx) but that is extraordinarily remote, given that some might bid 4♦ with that hand over the second double and, even for those whoo would not, other, weaker hands are much more common.


While I disagree with Justin about thinking about bidding (I certainly thought about it, and when I first looked at it, was going to bid 3♠ almost reflexively) I do agree that passing is the smarter move. And while at golf I can never make myself take the thinking player's shot, I can sometimes manage it at bridge...so I pass.

BTW, I have almost always had very good results by passing in this and analagous situations...partners rarely have the 'magic' hands that would warrant bidding on.... but isn't the pass here inconsistent with aggression in the recent thread featuring KQJx void AKxxx AKxx? Especially since we are on this post chasing a vul. game (the contract we most stretch to reach) while on the other it is a slam, which is never better than 50-50 in terms of desirability... and on that hand far, far worse because of the significant risk both that the 5-level was unsafe and that slam could be going for a doubled number?

[kenrexford]

mikeh, on Jun 20 2007, 06:10 PM, said:

I sure as heck hope he doesn't bid 3N on Qx of ♠s... not unless I can persuade opener to lead out of turn

Oops! Oh yeah. LOL

[kenrexford]

This question begs another question.

If you will not convert 3♦ to 3NT or 3♠, then you doubled planning to pass 3♦. The same would be the case for 3♣. I'm not sure what the plan is after 3♥, but...

Is the second double the best alternative?

What would...
1♠-P-P-X-
2♠-P-P-2NT
...show?

1♠-P-P-2NT would typically show about 19-21, I'm assuming.

With a simple 16-19 balanced, are you bidding 2NT now, after 2♠ and a pass from partner? Or, would you pass unless takeout-like, in which case you'd double?

So, what is 2NT after a passed advancer? It seems like a really big bid, but I have never seen it, discussed it, read about it, whatever. I have no idea.

But, it seems like a really big bid.

If it is a realy big bid, balanced and all, then that seems to work rather well. If partner has Axxxx in diamonds, he can raise to 3NT. If he has a second spade stop and a smattering, he can raise. If he has four or five hearts, whatever you have agreed to play in an auction I have never seen, discussed, read about, or whatever, the system you have in this sequence to distinguish heart length, works great!

[kenrexford]

Jlall, on Jun 20 2007, 07:55 PM, said:

The problem with this hand as I see it is the usual HCP guides don't apply. We can easily have 27 HCP and not make game. This often happens when we have one stopper in the opps long suit and they have an entry. I really don't want to play 2N or 3N on this hand on most hands where partner will pass or bid 3N. I am happy to play 3D.

Fair point.

But, out of curiosity, what the Heck does 1♠-P-P-X-2♠-P-P-2NT show?

[cherdano]

kenrexford, on Jun 20 2007, 06:58 PM, said:

But, out of curiosity, what the Heck does 1♠-P-P-X-2♠-P-P-2NT show?

It shows whatever you agreed X-then-2N to show Over 1S, this should be stronger than a direct 2N (I think). E.g. 1N = 11-16, 2N=17-19, X-then-2N=20-22. But I have no idea what is standard, I have seen all of 15-18, 16-18, 17-19, 18-20 claimed to be standard for 1S-2N...

[foo]

kenrexford, on Jun 20 2007, 07:58 PM, said:

Jlall, on Jun 20 2007, 07:55 PM, said:

The problem with this hand as I see it is the usual HCP guides don't apply. We can easily have 27 HCP and not make game. This often happens when we have one stopper in the opps long suit and they have an entry. I really don't want to play 2N or 3N on this hand on most hands where partner will pass or bid 3N. I am happy to play 3D.

Fair point.

But, out of curiosity, what the Heck does 1♠-P-P-X-2♠-P-P-2N show?

The SA definitions:
1♠-pa-pa-1N= 11-16
1♠-pa-pa-2N= 19-20
1♠-pa-pa-X intending to rebid 2N= 17-18
(but this last may assume Advancer bids)

In the exact sequence given, I'd say X, then 2N says "I can count 8 tricks. Raise to 3N if you have a good card."


With the OP hand: Ax AQ87 KQJ9 AQJ
This 23 (!) count is outside all those boxes.

I don't know how much of a moose you have to have to X then keep going over Their continuing action and pd's refusal to chime in, but whatever it is, you have it.

OTOH, it's not clear to me that any NT rebid is appropriate on =this= board.
X again. Maybe even a 3rd time if you have to.

We are not getting rich defending 2S Red @ IMPs.

[jdonn]

Foo I can't tell from your post what you bid lol. Or are you saying you disagree with the prior bidding.

[foo]

jdonn, on Jun 21 2007, 12:36 AM, said:

Foo I can't tell from your post what you bid lol. Or are you saying you disagree with the prior bidding.

I like the sequence thus far. What I don't like are my current choices opposite a pd who could have no more than 40-12-23= 4 HCP.

Any game except 5♦ in a super fit with shortness in the rounded's rates to fail. But 3♦ is not paying as well as 2♠X going down or Game.

[jdonn]

Foo I STILL can't tell what you are bidding lol.

[Free]

Pass seems pretty clear imo.