benlessard, on 2015-June-29, 14:37, said:
I just dont understand pass. Not only 2NT might be a better contract than 2D after a S lead but passing aim for a narrow target. The target is 2D by us will make but 2M by them or 2NT by us will fail. If partner raise 2NT to 3NT we have no reasons to be ashamed of our hand; we have 2 stoppers and 2 cards in partner suits we may even have a secret weapon with our Q9873 of clubs (if partner got extra values but so-so diamonds).
I guess 2NT may cost undertricks but im not willing to miss a vul game for that. Its a 1S in 3rd seat and partner overcall 2D vul knowing im a passed hand. I dont mind agressive overcalls so im ok in giving him some leeway but he may easily have 15-17 pts and we could make 3nt+2. The fact that east wasnt able to make a negative double and im short in hearts increase the odds that partner overcall is sound.
The fact that RHO didn't raise spades and didn't make a negative double increases the odds that RHO is very, very happy to defend diamonds
Maybe, and this has been known to happen, LHO has length in both majors! Maybe LHO is 6=5=1=1 and RHO is 2=3=4=4 with xx QJx Q109x Kxxx. I mean, if we are going to base our bidding decisions on the chance that we are cold for 11 tricks, why not posit partner having say x xxx AKJxxx AJx, a clear 3N raise, followed by a clear double, and on a good day down only 800.
Obviously that doesn't mean that one should infer that RHO has diamonds well under control or, indeed, any other specific layout. My point is that it is a common characteristic of those advocating for their choice to see only the arguments that support the choice they want to make, and to ignore or minimize arguments that run counter to their choice.
Thus we have Ben and wank pointing out the truism that bidding (and making) a game carries a nice bonus, as if none of us who chose pass understood that. Wank implicitly and Ben explicitly minimize the chances of a bad outcome.
Ben notes that partner could have 15-17 hcp, and dismisses LHO as a third seat opening bid, thus implicitly light. However, in the real world, players who open 1
♠ in third chair have sometimes held as many as 15-17 hcp....I could swear that I have seen even stronger hands!
Of course bidding 2N could work. No bridge player would argue otherwise and I infer from the fact that Ben posted the hand as a question and that he now strongly argues for action that either he made the 2N call in real life and it backfired (so he is seeking to avoid blame), or that he was the 2
♦ bidder and his partner passed and they missed a game (and he is seeking to cast blame).
Maybe I am wrong, and he simply thought that this was an interesting question, which I think it is.
Quote
In general Inv that stay at the same level and that may even improve the contract do not need to be rock solid.
That is frankly idiotic. We don't make invites to improve the partscore. We make invites because we hope that partner will accept, which means that we need to have a hand that justifies making the invite. When, as here, we have (at best) borderline values, we need to take into account the bad things that can happen as well as the good. My take, and that of the others who vote pass, is that the bad likely outweighs the good. FWIW, the outcome of any given hand won't be of much use, whether it justifies pass or 2N. Forming bridge judgement, which is what this hand is all about, cannot be based on small samples, and one hand is the smallest sample possible.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
Imps, your partnership style is to open the majority of 11 count.
I do not know if EW are agressive bidders but its from the open trials.