[benlessard]

Scoring: MP

---

1C----(1D)------1H-------(1S)
1Nt---(2S)-------2Nt------(3S)
Pass--------------???

1H is 4 or +
1Nt (good13-14) tend to deny 3H.

[jdonn]

This is hard to answer, since I can't fathom a reason I wouldn't have bid 3♣ instead of 2NT and gotten to our known 9 card fit. Even at mps.

[xcurt]

If you're polling between Pass, Dble, and 4♣, I think Dble is clearly the worst option of the 3.

As Josh points out we should have just bid 3♣ last time. Now we have the hand without our side's cards in the enemy suit trying to guess (repeat: guess) what to do, instead of the hand that knows how many trump tricks we can take in the enemy suit deciding what to do.

[benlessard]

Yep 3C is a better bid since game is pretty much out of the picture. Still i dont think 2Nt is such an awful bid, I choose 2Nt because i was afraid of A♦ followed by a ♦ ruff.

[H_KARLUK]

pass
our side might have 20-21Hcp
east dangerous holding 5d+4sp with 10-11 hcp
our suits are lower to compete

[han]

2NT is incorrect imo.

[Hanoi5]

Pass now.

[OleBerg]

Yes, I whack it.

The difference betweem -140 and -730 is probably much smaller than the difference betweem +100 and +200.

I also find 2NT a little silly, but can live with it at MP. (At imp's I'd kill myself if partner bid it. )

[effervesce]

Partner is very likely then to have a doubleton in hearts, probably Ax. Give him one natural trump trick, 2 nat heart tricks + heart ruff, we only need 1 trick in the minors to set. Then again, would partner lead A from Ax in hearts? Meh.

I double. +100 (or -140) is a bad score as I think we can make 3♣.

I wouldn't be that surprised however if they make it doubled, since partner doesn't know about our huge club fit.

[655321]

Abstain, don't know why I didn't bid 3♣ last round.

[MFA]

Pass.
Here I don't buy the classical mp excuse of -140 and -730 being almost equally terrible. I expect them to have 9 trumps and therefore a decent field will be in 3♠, if their hands are not too flat.

[benlessard]

Scoring: MP

---

If EW play snapdragon X, the 1S tend to show a stiff D or a 6th spade. If east find the D lead they can make 5 tricks. With the snap dragon agreement East can probably X 4C.

3Nt by N will probably make. N should try to get his 9th trick with the finesse of the ♦J with west singleton diamonds finding the club queen shouldnt be a problem.

EW make 4S easy.

I think north did well to bid 1Nt instead of making a support double. Do you agree ?

[MFA]

benlessard, on Dec 16 2008, 11:37 PM, said:

I think north did well to bid 1Nt instead of making a support double. Do you agree ?

No, certainly not I, I'm very far from prefering 1NT to X.

If south in practice ended the auction with a matchpoint double then I think NS fully deserve -930 for a throughoutly speculative auction.

[benlessard]

X is terrible, he already showned values with 2Nt, if north doesnt X then he has nothing good defensively that partner doesnt know.

If south bid 3C the 1st time it will be more tempting to X 3S.

[xcurt]

benlessard, on Dec 17 2008, 08:50 AM, said:

If south bid 3C the 1st time it will be more tempting to X 3S.

Why?

[gnasher]

xcurt, on Dec 17 2008, 02:54 PM, said:

benlessard, on Dec 17 2008, 08:50 AM, said:

If south bid 3C the 1st time it will be more tempting to X 3S.

Why?

Because by bidding 3♣ first you've made a reasonable description of your hand, so partner is better placed to decide what to do next. Bidding 2NT followed by double would give partner the impression of fewer clubs, more spades, and therefore better defence.

[xcurt]

gnasher, on Dec 17 2008, 09:19 AM, said:

xcurt, on Dec 17 2008, 02:54 PM, said:

benlessard, on Dec 17 2008, 08:50 AM, said:

If south bid 3C the 1st time it will be more tempting to X 3S.

Why?

Because by bidding 3♣ first you've made a reasonable description of your hand, so partner is better placed to decide what to do next. Bidding 2NT followed by double would give partner the impression of fewer clubs, more spades, and therefore better defence.

I guess I should elaborate. I was asking a rhetorical question hoping to get the OP to explain why it's at all tempting to double them in either auction. Of course, I don't agree with his statement that snapdragon double shows a stiff in overcaller's suit either -- generally snapdragon indicates tolerance for overcaller's suit. Without tolerance you just bid your suit if you have sufficient values to control the ensuing auction, or you pass and bid later.

[gnasher]

xcurt, on Dec 18 2008, 02:58 AM, said:

I guess I should elaborate.  I was asking a rhetorical question hoping to get the OP to explain why it's at all tempting to double them in either auction.

I don't mind bidding hearts, then clubs, then double - that seems quite a reasonable description of the hand. If partner were 3235 with the same high cards, and dummy were 3460, 3♠ would be two down on careful defence (heart to the king, two top trumps, club).

On the actual hand, we probably wouldn't be in this position. Once I'd implied five clubs with 3♣, and conscious of not having shown his heart support, partner would probably have bid 4♣ over 3♠. Not having done that already, surely he should do when I double 3♠?

Quote

Of course, I don't agree with his statement that snapdragon double shows a stiff in overcaller's suit either -- generally snapdragon indicates tolerance for overcaller's suit.

He didn't say that - he said that *not* making a Snapdragon double suggests six spades or a singleton diamond.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2008-December-18, 04:33

[OleBerg]

I dont like the 1NT bid either. At IMP's I would find it to be 100% wrong. We have a suit-oriented hand, especially for hearts. At matchpoints there are a few arguments for the double, mainly that 1NT played from the right side, could be a good-scoring contract. But as MFA said this is speculative (at the very least). I dont think that it in any way justifies a 1NT-call, it simply makes it a little less crazy.

One thing that occurred to me, probably influenced by seeing the whole deal, was that maybe South should have supported partners clubs on the first round.

If partner doesn't have 4-4-1-4 or 4-4-1-5, this can hardly backfire. In all other cases, whenever partner has 4 hearts, opponents will have eight spades betweem them. I wouldn't do it at IMP's, but maybe at MP's it is worth a consideration?

[OleBerg]

MFA, on Dec 17 2008, 12:43 AM, said:

Pass.
Here I don't buy the classical mp excuse of -140 and -730 being almost equally terrible. I expect them to have 9 trumps and therefore a decent field will be in 3♠, if their hands are not too flat.

I agree that the opponents bid like they have 9 spades, but partner bids like he has three. 1NT on a doubleton seems very strange to me.

I stand by my double.