[Winstonm]

kgr, on Jul 6 2005, 04:01 AM, said:

kgr, on Jul 5 2005, 12:45 PM, said:

<!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> South </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> N/S </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> MP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </span> </th> <td> KJ9x </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> ATxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> xx </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> Qxx </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end -->

MP's; Vul/NV
Bidding starting with you:
Pass-(1S)-Pass-(Pass)
?

This is MP's. (What) do you bid?
Would you make an other call if the vulnerability would be different?

I did bid 1NT. At MP's I just don't like to let opps play at 1-level. This time Pass would have been better. Opener had 5-card S and 5-card D and the complete
Bidding was:
Pass-(1S)-Pass-(Pass)
1NT-(2D)-All pass

RHO (opener's partner) did have 2-card S and 3-card D.
1S would have gone -1 and 2D made.

- Looking at the answers it looks like a 'balance' between 1NT and Pass. (Still I'm in good company - Luis, Frances - with 1NT...only mention this to defend my bid )
- I suppose Pass after 2D is straightforward or do you consider 2H/DBL? ...And would DBL be take-out or penalty here?
- I suppose pass after 1S is straightforward at IMP's? Or would you still consider 1NT.

Thanks,
Koen

I'm a 1N bidder here too at MP. 1S without a guarantee of a set is just a lousy score most of the time. What I don't understand is where partner was in this auction. I've announced 10-14, opener has not shown great strength with 2D, and LHO has nothing. Partner has to hold either 4 hearts or 5 clubs on this hand yet was to content to play 2D. At MPs, I believe you have to fight harder than this at the 1 and 2 levels. When partner bids 2H over 2D, you don't take it too seriously and you don't fault him if he's made the bid on A9xx. After all, it's MPs so we are concerned only about frequency of gain. -1100 and -90 are the same if we are on for +110.

WinstonM

[Fluffy]

I am used of playing MPs, and I would bid 1NT without a single doubt, then think about next round of bidding.

At IMPs the problem about reopining is opponent's finding a game normally, but my ♠ holding makes it unlikelly, I think I would reopen as well.

[Double !]

1NT

Indulge a less-than-expurt opinion on this matter, but I think an important issue has been omitted from the discussion (or I missed it--you know, ADHD)

Specifically, an important issue is how your partnership plays 2-level overcalls, especially vulnerable (aka: "aware"). There are a lot of opening-type hands (or close to it) that partner can be sitting with over there that didn't warrant immediate action. In such cases, P is expecting you to take some action in the balancing seat unless the bidding makes it clear that partner can't have much (such as P being a passed hand). OK, so passing kept the opps out of slam (this time). Let me know the next time the opps pass out at the 1-level when they have a slam. If you're not taking action with these hands, i believe that you are putting a lot of pressure on partner to overcall with very sketchy hands including the 13 pt 5332 hand. If that's your style, then go for it. OTOH, if you play light or risky 2-level overcalls, then the loss-gain frequency might shift. But, one hand does not a policy make.

[civill]

Balance for the ♠ suit.