[shyams]

This is one more hand that proves to me that my bidding judgement needs a significant upgrade.

I agonised long over my decision whether to bid game at all. I think I did bid game because it was IMPs; I'm not sure I would have taken the leap at MPs. If I recall, I did not realise the near-certainty that partner had 0 or 1 spade cards. My mind kept worrying about two spade and one club losers.

North's hand was something like ♠x ♥Axxxx ♦xxxx ♣Kxx (it's possible North had ♥J) and the play of the hand took far lesser time than my final bid took for me.

[bluenikki]

 shyams, on 2020-May-20, 04:52, said:

This is one more hand that proves to me that my bidding judgement needs a significant upgrade.

I agonised long over my decision whether to bid game at all. I think I did bid game because it was IMPs; I'm not sure I would have taken the leap at MPs. If I recall, I did not realise the near-certainty that partner had 0 or 1 spade cards. My mind kept worrying about two spade and one club losers.

North's hand was something like ♠x ♥Axxxx ♦xxxx ♣Kxx (it's possible North had ♥J) and the play of the hand took far lesser time than my final bid took for me.

4 small ♦ is a joke. The jump is supposed to reassure opener about the suit's playability.

[bluenikki]

 Cyberyeti, on 2020-May-20, 02:14, said:

Maybe, maybe not, if partner doesn't have a stiff spade he may well have the K or the two other aces, but I think it's incredibly unlikely he has more than one. And no I'm not banking 10 IMPs on it -1 NV vs +130 is 5 IMPs.

You referred to ace-asking. The 10 imps was the bing-bang set of 6♦.

[bluenikki]

 sfi, on 2020-May-19, 20:44, said:

I'm not sure that's a useful distinction to have here when you have to give up a way to force with a hand that's not interested in 3NT. To repeat my answer to your earlier question: Yes, I would expect a stranger to take 4D as forcing for the reasons I gave.

3♠ or 4♣ are available as cheaper, unambiguous forces.

[NoelParker]

 bluenikki, on 2020-May-19, 13:46, said:

would you expect a stranger to take 4♦ as forcing? On what general principle?

i think they mean closeout; not forcing as in must bid. If responder thought they should be in 5D s/he would put them there.

[Cyberyeti]

 bluenikki, on 2020-May-20, 08:43, said:

You referred to ace-asking. The 10 imps was the bing-bang set of 6♦.

If my ops are moronic enough for there to be 2 spades off the top, I'll beat them on the other boards (or they'll fail to lead one), in the real world I know where I am after asking for aces.

[miamijd]

 bluenikki, on 2020-May-19, 20:26, said:

North had a chance to bid 3♠ over 1♠ but didn't. North also had the chance to bid 3♠ at 2nd turn but didn't.

Two chances to show ♠ control but refused.

But you are willing to hazard 10 imps on your sense of the *opponents'* bidding. They are not there to help you.

Let's give partner the minimum hand he rates to have on this auction:

x AJxx Qxxx Jxxx

Do you think that's strong enough to splinter 3S after (1C) 1D (1S)? I certainly don't. You are basically committing yourself to 3NT or 5D, and your hand isn't strong enough.

After the 2S bid, a 3S call by partner is NOT any spade control. It's a spade stop for NT (the opponents have bid two suits, so cue bids show controls). Partner doesn't have that.

Please tell me what hand partner can have on this auction that (a) justifies his bidding; (b) makes sense given the opponents' bidding; and © has two spades worse than Kx and only one rounded Ace. It's very hard to make up such a hand.

As for the opponents, West must have at least five spades and East must have exactly three. If you believe otherwise, I suggest you start playing in better games.

And by the way, I'm not the only one risking IMPs on 5D making. You are risking IMPs on 5D not making. I'll bet 5D is at least 80% on this auction.

Cheers,
mike

[miamijd]

 shyams, on 2020-May-20, 04:52, said:

This is one more hand that proves to me that my bidding judgement needs a significant upgrade.

I agonised long over my decision whether to bid game at all. I think I did bid game because it was IMPs; I'm not sure I would have taken the leap at MPs. If I recall, I did not realise the near-certainty that partner had 0 or 1 spade cards. My mind kept worrying about two spade and one club losers.

North's hand was something like ♠x ♥Axxxx ♦xxxx ♣Kxx (it's possible North had ♥J) and the play of the hand took far lesser time than my final bid took for me.

Don't be so hard on yourself. One thing that separates top players from everyone else is the ability to visualize what partner holds during the bidding and then play the hand out mentally.

Experience is a good teacher here. Thus, any time you see a free rebid opposite a support double, you know it's 5+ and 3. This is just one of those things that comes up from time to time, and the more you see it, the more likely you are to get it right next time. As you point out, once you figure out that partner has a stiff spade, it's pretty easy to play the hand out and determine that 5D is likely to make if partner has as little as four diamonds and the Ah.

By the way, I think your partner overbid with 4D. The Kc is worthless. A simple 3D is plenty good enough after the 2D 10+ raise. You'll still get to game over 3D.

Keep on truckin'
Mike

[msjennifer]

EDITED by myself.

[msjennifer]

Sir,
I would have asked the meaning of 2Cx by RHO. If it is a support double showing 3 card spade support the partner is marked with a singleton spade .(1) 2D is a disgusting under bid (2) in our style we prefer a bid of 3D rather than 2S.(3) because of the underbid of 2D partner is showing his full worth with a bid of 4D.i accept and bid 5D.There is a possibility of missing 6D.In our style we bid 5C showing a singleton club(with a void club we would redouble 2Cx bid of RHO.There is no harm in bidding 5C) THANX

[bluenikki]

 miamijd, on 2020-May-20, 09:53, said:

Let's give partner the minimum hand he rates to have on this auction:

x AJxx Qxxx Jxxx

Do you think that's strong enough to splinter 3S after (1C) 1D (1S)? I certainly don't. You are basically committing yourself to 3NT or 5D, and your hand isn't strong enough.

After the 2S bid, a 3S call by partner is NOT any spade control. It's a spade stop for NT (the opponents have bid two suits, so cue bids show controls). Partner doesn't have that.

Please tell me what hand partner can have on this auction that (a) justifies his bidding; (b) makes sense given the opponents' bidding; and © has two spades worse than Kx and only one rounded Ace. It's very hard to make up such a hand.

As for the opponents, West must have at least five spades and East must have exactly three. If you believe otherwise, I suggest you start playing in better games.

And by the way, I'm not the only one risking IMPs on 5D making. You are risking IMPs on 5D not making. I'll bet 5D is at least 80% on this auction.

Cheers,
mike

I was never talking about the risk of 5♦. I was talking about the risk of 6♦.

Bidding 3♠ at your first turn is not any stronger than bidding 2♠ then jumping to 4♦ at your 2nd. (Overcaller's 2♦ did not show more than minimum high cards.)

As to 2♠ guaranteeing 5: Responder is in a position to expect to defend. With AKQx and out, why not make it hard for the intervening side to find NT?

[bluenikki]

 miamijd, on 2020-May-20, 09:53, said:

Let's give partner the minimum hand he rates to have on this auction:

x AJxx Qxxx Jxxx

Do you think that's strong enough to splinter 3S after (1C) 1D (1S)? I certainly don't. You are basically committing yourself to 3NT or 5D, and your hand isn't strong enough.

After the 2S bid, a 3S call by partner is NOT any spade control. It's a spade stop for NT (the opponents have bid two suits, so cue bids show controls). Partner doesn't have that.

Please tell me what hand partner can have on this auction that (a) justifies his bidding; (b) makes sense given the opponents' bidding; and © has two spades worse than Kx and only one rounded Ace. It's very hard to make up such a hand.

As for the opponents, West must have at least five spades and East must have exactly three. If you believe otherwise, I suggest you start playing in better games.

And by the way, I'm not the only one risking IMPs on 5D making. You are risking IMPs on 5D not making. I'll bet 5D is at least 80% on this auction.

Cheers,
mike

You think it is a *better* game when the opponents can be trusted to have their bids?? Or maybe never to false-signal?

You must mean easier for you.

[smerriman]

 shyams, on 2020-May-20, 04:52, said:

North's hand was something like ♠x ♥Axxxx ♦xxxx ♣Kxx (it's possible North had ♥J)

 shyams, on 2020-May-20, 04:52, said:

This is one more hand that proves to me that my bidding judgement GIB needs a significant upgrade.

FYP.

[Cyberyeti]

 bluenikki, on 2020-May-20, 17:01, said:

You think it is a *better* game when the opponents can be trusted to have their bids?? Or maybe never to false-signal?

You must mean easier for you.

45+ years of bridge tell me that if you trust your opponents' bidding you gain a hell of a lot more times than you lose.

[bluenikki]

 Cyberyeti, on 2020-May-21, 04:00, said:

45+ years of bridge tell me that if you trust your opponents' bidding you gain a hell of a lot more times than you lose.

The toughest games are those where opponents do not let you rely on their bidding and play.

You haven't played in those, I guess.

[Cyberyeti]

 bluenikki, on 2020-May-27, 06:51, said:

The toughest games are those where opponents do not let you rely on their bidding and play.

You haven't played in those, I guess.

I've played at pretty high domestic level although not internationally (would have been a junior intl if I could have proved any Irish ancestry), been in the last 8 of the UK's main long match K/O competition for example, knocking out a team with at the time arguably the best pair in England in it in the last 16 before losing to the eventual winners in the last 8 in a 64 board match that was close for 48.

[mycroft]

Ah, but that isn't the toughest games. The toughest games are like the one that Sontag helped his client break up that one time - where if you do particularly well, you have to be prepared to be a tough after to keep the money you won (or, conversely, you won't do particularly well, and you may need to be a tough to get your money back after you find out why)...
</sarcasm, but not really>

Having said that, have you tried playing in the novice game recently? It's insanely hard "and you're one of the best players in the club". This isn't an argument against your (very well and repeatedly proven, not just by you) belief.

Now, when you start trusting your opponents over your partner, there's a problem. But that's a whole different fishstick.

[Cyberyeti]

 mycroft, on 2020-May-27, 15:47, said:

Now, when you start trusting your opponents over your partner, there's a problem. But that's a whole different fishstick.

Agreed, but when you can form a picture by trusting all of them, most of the time it's wise to do so

[Douglas43]

 miamijd, on 2020-May-19, 10:50, said:

I would have bid 2S or 3D, rather than 2D. You have a hand that is much better than minimum for your 1D overcall. 6/4, great diamonds, a stiff in opener's strong suit. When the opponents have bid two suits, a cue-bid of one suit tends to show, rather than ask for, a stop. Since you have sort of a stop in spades, you could bid 2S, so that if partner has a good stop in clubs, you could play 3NT. Or you could jump to 3D if you are afraid that East could lead a spade to West, who would then put a club through your partner's stop.

On this bidding, yes, I would try 5D. What do you think partner has for his bidding? East has shown long, strong clubs. West has shown five spades, East three, and you have four. I would wager partner has the Ah, the Qd, a stiff spade, and probably one club honor (that you don't need). In that case, 5D will roll.

Cheers,
Mike

Mike's post sums it up for me. I suppose you could pass 2CX with an absolute minimum 1D, hence 2D is presumably non-minimum, but even so, this hand is a corker (sorry I'm a Brit = a particularly fine example of its type). If you had shown extras the round before, partner would be making an informed decision.