[helene_t]

jillybean, on 2013-December-29, 20:53, said:

(1x) 1y (P) 2y is very different from the auction I posted in the OP where the 2nd seat bidder is unlimited and partner has popped up after 2 bidding opponents.

That is true but even so, your partner showed some game interest with his 3♣ bid (presumably?) so he must have had a good hand. Good enough to force to 3♠ opposite whatever the minimum for your 1♠ bid might be

I would probably have passed and I don't think 3♠ is such a terrible contract. I would think 3♠+1 should be at least a normal result. I am not sure if I really want to be in game on this hand.

Did you consider 3NT as an alternative to 4♠? If partner has good long clubs you could easily have the first 9 tricks, otherwise partner has to have Qxx in hearts or such. And partner knows you have five spades, it is not like your suit quality makes it important to restate that! If partner has only three trumps, 3NT might be a better game. If he has four he will correct to 4♠.

As it happens, 3NT probable wouldn't make (♣T needs to fall).

[kenberg]

I have a question.

Let's grant that the 3♣ shows a fit for spades and a willingness to play 3♠ opposite a minimal overcall. Let's also suppose that over 3♥ a call of 3♠ is weak and pass shows at least decent values.

The question(s): After passing 3♥, what do we envision happening? Can partner pass out 3♥ given that he was willing to play 3♠ opposite a minimum and we have shown, with our pass, more than a minimum? If he doubles, are we going to sit for it? We have a second five card suit that is apt to be far more useful on offense than on defense. Are we then left with the following: Partner won't pass and we will pull a double. If we also are going to raise 3♠ to 4♠, why don't we just bid 4♠ directly over 3♥? If all roads lead to Rome, we may as well take the shortest route.

Otoh, suppose that after we pass 3♥ we will not raise partner's 3♠ to 4. Then: If partner bids 3♠ we will pass it, and if partner doubles we will pull to 3♠ expecting partner to pass. If this is our plan, why don't we just bid 3♠ over 3♥?

In short, over 3♥ we can bid 3♠ or 4♠, alternatively we can pass and then, after partner acts, bid 3♠ or 4♠. How will these two approaches lead to a different contract?

I suppose we could pass 3♥ thinking that when partner doubles then we will pull to 3♠ and then partner will pass that, while we will raise 3♠ to 4. . Would that be the thought in passing 3♥? This requires a lot of understanding. Partner must bid 3♠ to get us to 4, and double 3♥ to get us to 3♠. Logical enough if you think about it, but a bit of a stretch (for me) for thinking in real time.

[wyman]

wyman, on 2013-December-28, 12:07, said:

Pass now.

Incidentally -- and this may be a style thing -- I would have bid 2N at my first call; if 4H were next, I would not want to bid diamonds, nor would I want partner to lead a spade.

billw55, on 2013-December-30, 07:42, said:

Interesting. I must admit that I probably would not make this 1♠ overcall in a situation where partner could easily be on lead. But this got no comments, is it so totally normal to do this kind of thing at matchpoints?

I might venture a two-suited call though, if available.

What am I, chopped liver?

[billw55]

wyman, on 2013-December-30, 10:02, said:

What am I, chopped liver?

heheh, no liver, I just overlooked it.

If making a 2-suited call, I would be happier if 2♣ or 2♥ fit the bill, than 2NT. That way, if we are in trouble, we maybe can keep it at the two level.

[kenberg]

The spade overcall obviously has some issues, but I have a singleton heart so I imagine that if the opponents play this hand it will probably (not certainly but probably) be in hearts and I will be on lead. I suppose partner might be a little surprised when I lead a soade, dummy comes down with AKx, and declarer wins with the queen, but he will survive. Now whether I will survive playing in a spade contract is another matter but if partner supports spades I actually like my chances if we don't get too high. Here, the problem turned out to be not getting high enough!

[wyman]

billw55, on 2013-December-30, 11:19, said:

heheh, no liver, I just overlooked it.

If making a 2-suited call, I would be happier if 2♣ or 2♥ fit the bill, than 2NT. That way, if we are in trouble, we maybe can keep it at the two level.

Yeah 2C & 2H are natural for us (most?) there, so 2N is really the only option available to us.