[kenberg]

Thanks much for posting the hand.

It seems right to say that if 3S is off 1 with that dummy then passing, anticipating a lessee dummy, has merit.

I liked your comment that only W knew what her double of 1S meant. So it often is. My earlier guess was that it was intended to show hearts, and that appears to be the case. I claim no great insight on that, but I think I see that meaning more often than anything else.

Despite the 5-0 trump split I am not so sure you are beating 3C. Declarer can take 3 hearts and a top diamond for 4 tricks in the side suits, so if she can come up with 5 club tricks she is home.Ruff 2 spades on the board, ruff 1 diamond in hand, lead a heart from hand. There are timing issues so it might depend on just who plays what when.

Again, thanks for posting the hand.

Added: I don't think going after ruffs right away is unlikely. The spade distribution is known with reasonable confidence and the hearts are probably 4-3 because 4-3 is a priori the most likely and because nobody has shown an interest in hearts. Not conclusive I know but likely. So it seems straightforward to get the two spade ruffs in dummy and to develop the hearts while chasing the spade ruffs. When the heart J is led from dummy I expect S will cover and N will give count. I would believe N, this does not seem like a place where one gives false count. With that info in hand, the described play seems pretty normal.

So maybe 3S off 1 is as good as you can do. As long as they don't double.

[P_Marlowe]

Mkgnao, on 2017-August-27, 15:17, said:

<snip>
About the meaning of the double, no one at the table aside from opener knew what her double meant. As a final note, I polled my real life partner and he clearly favored 3♠ over pass. Ok, he's a junior but still it was surprising to see that almost everyone chose pass with only Cherdano contemplating bidding. Groupthink or glorious insight?

Nobody assumed our partner was playing games.
Weak opponents can mean lots of thinks, one possibility, that they have underbid.
The one, who knowes what is going on, is your partner, and if I pass, then this does
not mean we are selling out a the 2 level, I just pass the decision over to partner.

[kenberg]

To say a bit more:
On the auction
1C-P-1D-1S
X-?
I think 2S is apt to be on more than 6 highs.He has the option of passing and then later, if 2S is still available, bidding it then. If 2S is not available when it gets back to I don't think that's a big concern if he is holding only the spade A and an outside Q somewhere. So I think the 2S is more than 6 but this rather good hand is a bit heavy for 2S. But then what? XX would be nice if it would be understood. If a cue bid shows this, which cue bid? I can imagine some palying that 2D shows spade support and values while 2C shows clubs. I have no idea what the best agreement is. After XX I imagine E bids 2C. Here it would be really good to know what the X of 1S was. If it doesn't show hearts I think S could I don't see this as showing anything extra, just getting the hearts in. If the X of 1S showed four hearts, then I think that after XX-2C South could describe his hand well by passing.

Except at the highest levels, and sometimes even there, there is often a lack of clarity as to what means what. So it is here. We are told that only W understood what her X of 1S meant. NS had not discussed what XX would mean. Nobody expected the 2S call to be on such a good hand.

My passing of 3C was not at all group think, I didn't think 3S was at all likely to make, and we are vul. I can't see why it would be expected to make opposite, say, Axx / xxx / Kxx / Qxxx We woould take 5 spades, perhaps both red Kings (and perhaps neither res King) and what else? Ruffing clubs in hand might be fun but the first 2 ruffs to not increase our trick total. Thanks to partner's maximal, at least maximal, holding, 3S is only off 1 and the opponents were not strong enough, so they thought anyway, to double. I do think that 3C is apt to come to 9 tricks so I think this is just one of those things. I am pretty sure you do not want to be playing 3CX.

[Winstonm]

Mkgnao, on 2017-August-27, 15:17, said:

At the table, I pressed on with 3♠. 3♠ -1 was 36%: most pairs were in 2♠ making, 3♠ -1 or -2 and 3♠ was made three times (the latter requiring a horrific defence).

The full hand:

---

As you can see, partner tried to trap the opponents with his heavy 2♠-bid.

I thought I'd diagnosed overbidding in competitive 3 over 3 situations as one of my leaks, so I told myself only to bid on with extra's: an extra trump, significant extra HCP or a powerful void (in this case in their suit). Initially I thought raising to 3♠ was automatic so I ascribed the result to bad luck but soon afterwards I began to get second thoughts. Partner is likely to have 4+♣ on the bidding and if he has his promised 6-9 HCP, then combined with my 8 HCP the opponents will have 23-27 HCP. In other words, the 3♠-bid runs the risk of giving the opponents only winning options: either doubling 3♠ or bidding a making game. (Though the club break will remain a liability for 3NT.)

About the meaning of the double, no one at the table aside from opener knew what her double meant. As a final note, I polled my real life partner and he clearly favored 3♠ over pass. Ok, he's a junior but still it was surprising to see that almost everyone chose pass with only Cherdano contemplating bidding. Groupthink or glorious insight?

Something to consider is that the void in the long-trump hand is not as valuable as it would be in partner's hand. You control the suit, sure, but you are also subject to taps and losing control of the hand.

I agree with your ideas about when to bid on - it is your assessment of the value of this hand I question.

[kenberg]

This is merely some add-on thoughts, not addressing the 3S call. On that issue I have said my piece.

Earlier I mentioned that I thought 3C should make easily. In fact 130 seemed plausible. I decided to check it with GIB, and the result is 130 EW unless N starts with the !C K at T1. Of course GIB plays double dummy, but I think +110 for EW in 3C should be easy enough.

So why are many pairs playing in 2S NS? EW have half the deck and the spade ruffing situation is much better for them than the club ruffing (which produces no extra trick) is for NS. Spades were bid and raised at other tables, since the other tables are playing 2S. . This makes the ruffing situation is favorable for EW. W looks at his four spades and expects to see a stiff in dummy, or else E simply looks at his stiff spade, either way they can anticipate ruffs. And W might reasonably hope for a biy more strength in dummy. The E hand is minimal, , the trumps split 5-0, and still 3C is an easy make. Those EW pairs that sold to 2S seem to be a bit cautious. I conced that when E bid 3C he had to worry that W could be 4=4=2=3, definitely possible, but then he presumably be playing in 3D. At mps, selling to 2S seems wrong.

All in all, reaching 3S undoubled off 1should be a great result for NS

As mentioned, this is an add-on for whatever interest it holds. If I were S and E bid 3C they would be scoring up 110 or maybe 130.

Bridge can be an unfair game.

[gszes]

pass

Not merely because p is likely to have 4+ clubs but because they are looking at their clubs and can tell much better than we can if they have weak or strong clubs. It should also be quite clear to partner that we are short in clubs and must be weak since we took no action. I think this leaves partner in excellent shape to make any further decisions:))))))))