[Apollo81]

(1) all red mps

5
J3
109853
AKJ104

1.a: (1NT)-?
1.b: hidden->

Spoiler

if you pass, the bidding goes 2♥ p 2NT back to you, 2NT means a superaccept without a worthless doubleton

(2) unfav, mps

852
83
A72
109432

1♠*-(2♥)-p-(p)
2♠-(3♣)-p-(3♥)
p-(p)-
* 11-15

2.a: agree with the first two passes?
2.b: finally time to bid something?

(3) all red, mps

KQJ85
KJ5
Q43
J7

1♠*-(p)-1NT-(2♥)
p-(p)-Dbl-(p)-
* 11-15
edit: 1NT = semiforcing, 2/1 context
Dbl = takeout
edit: a direct double of 2♥ would be takeout also

3.a: your call?
3.b: what if the vulnerability was unfav?

[gnasher]

1a) Bidding over 1NT isn't so much brave as silly. You're unlikely to stop them from getting to wherever they're going; all you are going to do is tell them how to play it.

1b) 3♣. Tempting to bid 3♣, but I've grown out of that sort of thing.

2a) I'd have bid 2♠ on the first round, thereby avoiding this problem.

2b) No. Partner doesn't promise any great strength when he bids 2♠ - he might just have short hearts but be unsuitable for a reopening double.

3a/b) 2♠. Maybe I'll get to double 3♥.

[ArtK78]

1) ( a ) I bid. I show both minors if I can - otherwise, I show clubs. Yes, it is possible that this could help the opponents out in the play of the hand. But getting into the auction over 1NT so often disrupts the opponents' bidding that it is worth the risk.

1) ( b ) Having passed on the first round, I pass again. The opponents have already exchanged enough information so that I cannot disrupt their bidding, and if I bid I give them a free shot at doubling or using the distribution information gained by my bid to aid them in the play of the hand.

2) ( a ) I would have bid 2♠ over 2♥, but I don't have any real problem with the pass.

2) ( b ) I pass over 3♥. Bidding would be giving the opponents a fielder's choice - double if it is right for them or reevaluate their cards and bid the game they may have missed.

3) My first thought was to pass the double, but if the double is 100% for takeout, then passing is too dangerous. The opponents may have a 9 card fit and we should not have enough in high cards to defeat 2♥. The problem is what to bid. Is partner really 5-5 or better in the minors? I doubt it. I bid 2♠. I cannot have a really great spade suit from my failure to bid over 2♥, so partner may be in a position to correct this to a minor suit if appropriate.

[Cascade]

1a/ Pass not close

b/ Pass not close - are these guys really playing in 2NT with a 5=4 heart fit?

2a/ close to 2♠ on the first round. If i didn't bid 2♠ on the first round then I would bid 3♠ on the second round. Partner should have something decent for 2♠.

b/ 3♠ now seems ok but I would prefer to have bid earlier. I just noticed it is a limited opening context which makes 2♠ even safer on the first round. I must learn to read the posts more carefully.

3/ There doesn't seem to be a good alternative to 2♠. 2NT if natural might be ok but I think it is more useful as equal preference - I would do this with 3=3 in the minors as partner rates to have a five-card minor.

What incidentally is 1NT, non forcing and limited I presume.

[Apollo81]

Cascade, on Apr 4 2008, 12:42 PM, said:

What incidentally is 1NT, non forcing and limited I presume.

edited

[Codo]

1. Yes I like to disturb their auctions, so 2 NT to me, yes this gives them a road map, but maybe they have it in the wrong contract.

1 B. Having passed once, I pass again.

2. 2 NT Natural had been nice once in a while, but it is not, so 2 Spade

3. I had bid 2 Spade, but if I had passed, I would bid now.

Hey this is not Bridge, it is MPs!

[mikeh]

1. Pass all the time.

i: if I bid this will increase the odds of partner being on lead: I know which minor to lead, he won't

ii: while maybe we can disrupt them, we can also go for a number. Partner might even think we have better diamonds and make a poor bid

iii: bidding draws a road map. Assume they have 9 spades missing the Queen with a 2-way hook, or 8 missing the J....bid 2N and kiss your partner's trump trick good bye.


2. I continue to pass. When I hold nothing, I bid nothing. The opps haven't shown a genuine fit yet.

3. 2♠: Passing is insane unless we knew that partner had at least 2 Aces.. and even then, may not work. I imagine partner is 2=2=(45) or so but he might, I suppose, be 2=1=5=5. If the latter, I may get a crack at 3♥

It make no difference to me if we were at unfavourable... contrary to rumour, the trick taking power of one's hand is independent of vulnerability

[Edmunte1]

1. Pass/pass
2. a) no i would have bid earlier
3. 2♠

[dburn]

1a) Would usually pass, but if in need of a top would consider 3♣, which might make life difficult for all concerned including me.

1b) Not much point in bidding now - even if they're going to play 4♠ from responder and we need a club lead from partner to score well, too much risk involved.

2) Would have bid 2♠ on previous round. Will certainly bid 3♠ now.

3) What would it have meant if I had doubled 2♥? If for penalty, then will pass confidently now - partner is presumably prepared for me to do this with a primarily defensive hand that did not make a penalty double of its own. If for takeout... well, I will still pass, but less confidently.

[Apollo81]

dburn, on Apr 4 2008, 04:11 PM, said:

3) What would it have meant if I had doubled 2♥?

edited

[ArtK78]

Jlall, on Apr 4 2008, 02:28 PM, said:

ArtK78, on Apr 4 2008, 10:29 AM, said:

2) ( b ) I pass over 3♥.  Bidding would be giving the opponents a fielder's choice - double if it is right for them or reevaluate their cards and bid the game they may have missed.

Lol...or let's you play in 3S making? Why are you assuming it's not our hand?

The fact that partner is a limited opener and I have an ace and out?

Granted, it is likely that we have 9 spades (although that is not a certainly - partner could easily have 5 excellent spades). But we have LOTS of losers. And the fact that we have 9 spades means that they may have very little in the way of wasted values for their heart contract. They may be playing with a 30 point deck.

So, while we may do OK in a spade contract, I doubt that we will make 9 tricks and I fear that they may make 10.

[han]

1. Pass. Agree with dburn that 3C has more upside than 2NT but it's pretty desperate.

2. Would definitely have bid 2S immediately. Would have bid 3S the second time. Would bid 3S now.

3. I pass at MPs but not at IMPs! You are a maniac Justin.

[jdonn]

1. Pass wtp

2. I would HATE to play with someone who went all three rounds of this auction with this hand and never found a way to raise me. It makes me wonder why I even got out of bed that morning.

3. I'm sure I wouldn't ever pass this, I don't even have an ace. Who knows, if I bid they might end up going to 3♥. I have to admit I wouldn't be surprised to see pass get a top...but even less surprised to see it get a bottom.

[dburn]

han, on Apr 4 2008, 04:43 PM, said:

1. Pass. Agree with dburn that 3C has more upside than 2NT but it's pretty desperate.

2. Would definitely have bid 2S immediately. Would have bid 3S the second time. Would bid 3S now.

3. I pass at MPs but not at IMPs! You are a maniac Justin.

Desperate situations (such as playing matchpoints) call for desperate remedies. Bidding 3♣ on problem 1a is one of those, but the more I think about it, the more 3♣ has going for it.

Many pairs simply do not know what do to when 1NT is overcalled at the three level: they don't know whether double is penalty or takeout; they don't know whether a three-level bid by responder is forcing or not; they don't know how to reach 3NT with any confidence when opener has three clubs to the queen.

Of course, those who post messages on the BBO Advanced and Expert Class forum do know these things, and I would have to be very desperate indeed to bid 3♣ against any such. But in a pairs tournament where I don't know my opponents, I'd think 3♣ has a better than 50% chance of generating a decent score.

As to the third problem, it's not maniacal in the least to pass out 2♥ doubled at any form of scoring and any vulnerability. The extent to which a double is "takeout" is more than somewhat vague, and solid partnerships will have defined the extent to which an ostensibly "takeout" double means: "Pass this only if you have them beaten in your own hand"; or "Pass this unless you have something clearly better to do, but don't rely on me to have them beaten in my own hand - if you do have something clearly better to do, I can at least tolerate whatever it is."

Still and all, on the actual hand:

♠KQJxx ♥KJx ♦Qxx ♣xx

I would probably bid 2♠ if my fourth-highest spade were the ten, thinking that this would be unlikely to get me a bottom or lose a lot of IMPs. But since I don't have ♠10, and since I have therefore close to no playing strength whatever, bidding 2♠ could just as easily get me a bottom as passing 2♥ doubled. By the same token, it could just as easily get me -500 as passing 2♥ doubled could get me -470 at IMPs.

Maybe I should have a game with Justin sometime. As long as no one calls the director, that is.

[Apollo81]

Results:

1. I passed. They played in 3♠ when we're cold for 4♦. Presumably no one would bid over 3♥ retransfer p 3♠.

2. Usually my approach to such a hand is to bid the first time, but today I was in a weird mood and passed throughout, partially because my RHO at the time is a very sound bidder and I thought the risk of 200 was quite high. In fact RHO had a 17 count and they are cold for 3NT, but we would have made 3♠. They can only make 9 tricks in hearts.

3. This auction didn't occur at the table. Had this auction occurred, I would have bid 2♠, which partner would correct to 2NT (1255 10 count) and I would pass. 2♥ is -2, so passing the double is the winner.

[nige1]

Apollo81, on Apr 4 2008, 09:20 AM, said:

(1) all red mps ♠5 ♥J3 ♦109853 ♣AKJ104
1.a: (1NT) ??
1.b: if you pass, the bidding goes (2♥) _P (2N)
back to you, 2NT means a superaccept without a worthless doubleton

1.a IMO 2N = 10, 3♣ = 9, _P = 7.
If opponents don't play 3-level transfers, then 3♣ becomes more attractive.

• You don't have much but you don't promise much and you do have what you promised
  
  
• You are vul but so are they and it is pairs
  
  
• You have the worst shape but your intermediates are good and your values are pure

1.b Now IMO _P = 10, 3♣ = 6, _X = 5.

• You missed the boat to disrupt opponent's auction.
  
  
• Suggesting a five level sacrifice is a bit rich vulnerable at pairs.
  
  
• You might bid 3♣ for the lead, except that you are likely to be on lead.

Apollo81, on Apr 4 2008, 09:20 AM, said:

(2) unfav, mps ♠852 ♥83 ♦A72 ♣109432
1♠ (2♥) _P (_P)
2♠ (3♣) _P (3♥)
_P (_p) ??
1♠ = 11-15
2.a: agree with the first two passes?
2.b: finally time to bid something?

2.a Over (2♥), IMO _P = 10, 2♠ = 7.
Over (3♣) IMO 3♠ = 10 _P = 4.
2.b Now _P = 10, 3♠ = 5
Again belated action presents opponents with fielder's choice.

Apollo81, on Apr 4 2008, 09:20 AM, said:

(3) all red, mps ♠KQJ85 ♥KJ5 ♦Q43 ♣J7
1♠ (_P) 1N (2♥)
_P (_P) _X (_P)
1♠ = 11-15
edit: 1NT = semiforcing, 2/1 context
_X = takeout
edit: a direct double of 2♥ would be takeout also
3.a: your call?
3.b: what if the vulnerability was unfav?

3.a/b IMO 2♠ = 10, _P = 8, 2N = 6, 3♣ = 4.
2♠ is not encouraging and the quality of the suit is adequate. Pass is attractive but a bit speculative because if partner's double is T/O, opponents are likely to hold 8-9 ♥.