[jillybean]

Dealer: North Vul: None Scoring: IMP

♠ ♥ AJ8743 ♦ QJT7 ♣ 973

West North East South

 -     1♠    Pass  1NT*forcing
 Pass  3♠    Pass ?  

Agree with 1nt? What now?

[cherdano]

Pass.

[inquiry]

Pass

[jillybean]

Ok next question, what is 3♠ after 1nt forcing?
In sayc I'd expect 17-18 6+ ♠'s

[jtfanclub]

Wow, people pass with this. Fuuunky.

I would bid 4♥. If I'm wrong, well, probably won't be down too much more than 3♠. Partner's still odds on to have two hearts.

If I had

----
AJxxxx
xxxx
xxx

then I would pass 3♠.

I'm sure I'm the lone voice in the wilderness. Again. Sigh.

[the hog]

Clear pass. I would bid 4H with KQJTxx of H or similar. 3S should be 16-17 with 6 nice spades.

[Echognome]

"Find the misfit and pass."

[neilkaz]

This is tough but unless PD promises a near GF for his 3♠ (which he certainly doesn't in SAYC 2/1) I think it best to pass this miss fit. 3♠ hasn't been doubled yet, but 4♥ or 4♠ may be.

[effervesce]

I'll bid 4♥. Let's look at the relevant cards partner may have:
AKQ spades
KQ hearts
AK diamonds
AKQ clubs
This is 30 points worth of relevant cards.

Let's say partner is 16-17 points. On average he will have 5 of the cards given above.

Given that he has 6+ spades, he probably has two of the three top spades- let's neither be optimistic or pessimistic and give him AQ spades.
Let's give him one heart honor (K or Q), the K of diamonds and the ace of clubs (or the A of diamonds and K of clubs). Therefore, it seems that if partner has two card heart support or better, with a heart honor, you want to be in game.

Let's find the odds of partner having a heart honor or more, given the constraint that he has 5 of the 10 honors given above. P(0 heart honors) = 8C5*2C0 / 10C5 = 22%. P (1 or more heart honors) = 78%.

Next, let's work out the odds of partner having two or more hearts. Let's start with the premise that partner has just 6 spades. He has 7 other cards.
There are 7 heart cards remaining, with 26 non-heart cards.
The sample space of choosing 7 cards is therefore 26C7=657800.
p(0 hearts) = 7C0*19C7/26C7 = 7.7%
p(1 heart) = 7C1*19C7/26C7 = 28.9%
p (2 hearts) = 7C2 * 19C5/26C7= 37.1%
p (3 hearts) = 7C3 * 19C4/26C7 = 20.6%

That is, p(2 or more hearts) given he has 6 spades is 63%. Since partner can have more than 6 spades, this therefore goes down a bit. Let's say 60%.

Chances of game are therefore about 0.6 * 0.75 = 0.45, or 45%.

Seems like a reasonable shot at IMPs, and not so good at MPs.

[EDIT] I didn't add the chances for bad breaks. It should be more like 30-35% given hearts may not break. So I'll change my vote to pass.

[kenrexford]

Gadget break...

1♠-P-?

3♣ = 9-12 or so raise
One-under (3♥) = limix raise
3♦ = 6-card heart suit, invitational.

That last one (3♥ instead of 3♦ if you must) is a difficult hand to bid when Opener rebids his spades. Preempt partner out of that call.

[jdonn]

kenrexford, on May 14 2008, 09:57 PM, said:

Gadget break...

1♠-P-?

3♣ = 9-12 or so raise
One-under (3♥) = limix raise
3♦ = 6-card heart suit, invitational.

That last one (3♥ instead of 3♦ if you must) is a difficult hand to bid when Opener rebids his spades. Preempt partner out of that call.

In what way would this hand have qualified for invitational?

[kenrexford]

jdonn, on May 14 2008, 10:04 PM, said:

kenrexford, on May 14 2008, 09:57 PM, said:

Gadget break...

1♠-P-?

3♣ = 9-12 or so raise
One-under (3♥) = limix raise
3♦ = 6-card heart suit, invitational.

That last one (3♥ instead of 3♦ if you must) is a difficult hand to bid when Opener rebids his spades.  Preempt partner out of that call.

In what way would this hand have qualified for invitational?

This is a difficult hand to call "invitational," I admit.

However, difficult hands require choices. Do you elect to low-ball or elect to high-ball? That decision often is made after reflection upon the respective difficulties of approaching the hand each way.

This hand pattern will be a mess to describe. So, it seems preferable to use a rough estimate of the playing strength (about a seven-loser hand) if that serves my ultimate goal of an ideal auction. With a void in partner's opened suit, I want to focus the hearts NOW and shut down (or strongly dissuade) his spade-suit exploration.

Thus, I am calling this "invitational" because it is the assessment of playing strength that leads to the most convenient auction.

Also, perhaps more important, is that the 3♦ jump actually shows about 8-11, or constructive+ to just under "GF." Because 1♠-P-2♥ is often bid with an optimistic view as to the value needed to force game, for the same ease-of-auction reasons, then the "invitational" assessment for this call is perhaps more fanciful.

[jdonn]

kenrexford, on May 14 2008, 10:25 PM, said:

This is a difficult hand to call "invitational," I admit.

However, difficult hands require choices.  Do you elect to low-ball or elect to high-ball?  That decision often is made after reflection upon the respective difficulties of approaching the hand each way.

This hand pattern will be a mess to describe.  So, it seems preferable to use a rough estimate of the playing strength (about a seven-loser hand) if that serves my ultimate goal of an ideal auction.  With a void in partner's opened suit, I want to focus the hearts NOW and shut down (or strongly dissuade) his spade-suit exploration.

Thus, I am calling this "invitational" because it is the assessment of playing strength that leads to the most convenient auction.

Also, perhaps more important, is that the 3♦ jump actually shows about 8-11, or constructive+ to just under "GF."  Because 1♠-P-2♥ is often bid with an optimistic view as to the value needed to force game, for the same ease-of-auction reasons, then the "invitational" assessment for this call is perhaps more fanciful.

So to clarify:
- You upgrade due to having a void in partner's suit.
- You upgrade since it will be hard to show your shape whether you upgrade or not.
- You confuse "difficult hand to call invitational" with "difficult hand" (after all, it's a difficult hand to call a limit raise in spades too.)
- You make up a false definition of invitational as 8-11 based on a false premise of upgrading to force to game with long hearts (false in the context of having an invitational bid to show hearts available.) I mean lets play follow-the-logic. "People upgrade to game force since they can't easily show invitational hands. Therefore I create a bid to show invitational hands. Therefore I reduce the values required to show an invitational hand since people are upgrading to game force."

I mean it's your system, 3♦ can show whatever you want it to. I myself play the 3♥ response natural and invitational. However lets not pretend this hand is invitational when it clearly isn't, purely based on hindsight.

None of that even addresses the misguidedness of showing invitational with hearts on a hand like this, bad hearts to the ace and a good minor. You will miss diamond games and slams left and right.

[andy_h]

Definitely agree with 1NT. And now I pass 3♠. 3♠ should roughly be about a good 15 to 17.

[jillybean]

cherdano, on May 14 2008, 01:11 PM, said:

Pass.

inquiry, on May 14 2008, 01:13 PM, said:

Pass

The_Hog, on May 14 2008, 06:50 PM, said:

Clear pass. I would bid 4H with KQJTxx of H or similar. 3S should be 16-17 with 6 nice spades.

Echognome, on May 14 2008, 06:54 PM, said:

"Find the misfit and pass."

Keep saying it, one of these days I'll find the right bid

[CSGibson]

I may be way off base here, but I'm bidding 3NT. It's the same 9 tricks, but I get a bonus if it makes this way. All I really need is 1) a favorable lead and 2) a heart honor in partner's hand to make this a reasonable gamble. Matchpoints and I pass.

[Mbodell]

I'd bid 2♥ if you were playing SA, but playing 2/1 like you seem to be I'd bid 1NT too. Against bad opps I'd bid 3NT now. Against good opps I'd pass.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

it is either Pass or 4S, I would go with 4S.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Free]

My modified version of Gazzilli is bless

I'd bid 4♥... If partner can't bid a side suit, he must have some ♥s or lots of ♠s (but why didn't he bid 4♠?).

[P_Marlowe]

Free, on May 15 2008, 03:12 AM, said:

My modified version of Gazzilli is bless

I'd bid 4♥... If partner can't bid a side suit, he must have some ♥s or lots of ♠s (but why didn't he bid 4♠?).

He may have to cater for the 4-7 raise,
... depending on the hand types included
in the 1 NT.

For that matter: For me 4H would be a cue
bid for spades, showing the 10-12 limit raise.

With kind regards
Marlowe