[Walddk]

Scoring: IMP

---

From a tourney on BBO today. At many tables the auction was (NS passing).

1♠ - 2♦
2♠ - 3♥
3NT - p

On the actual layout the declarers had an easy ride to 13 tricks, but 6♠ and 6NT (West) are both excellent contracts and will make most of the times.

Who should have done more, if anyone?

Roland

[keylime]

East. 100% East. East by a country mile. East.

[pbleighton]

West is entirely in the clear.

East, if anyone. I think the given auction is fairly reasonable, if timid.

Peter

[mikeh]

4N by West over 3♥ should logically be natural, since he will never have both a strong hand and 4♥...

But I'd like the ♠J or some other compensating factor before committing to 4N.
(however, that ♦ holding rates to be useful.)

East is arguably the one who has the most responsibility. His 3♥ bid endplayed partner into bidding 3N with ♣ stopped. He has a king more than he needed to in order to force to game, so logic suggests that he can bid one trick higher. 10 tricks seem safe enough: this is a hand very unlikely to make exactly 9 tricks.

So maybe he could risk 4N... in fact, I think that he should do so.

The other possibility is for East to raise to 3♠ rather than bid 3♥. However, I would rebid 2♠ with a 5 card suit on many hands, especially since I will not hold a ♥ stopper, and thus be unable to bid 3N. So raising ♠ on 2 small, seems misguided. Besides, we will never get to either 3 or 4N if I do so.

So, if I was assigning blame, it would be 75% east and 25% west, but, in truth, I have sympathy for both players.

[mike777]

Once again I fail to see the huge advantage of the ambiguous 2s rebid that so many insist on.

Whatever occasionial victory it must give does not seem worth the price.

In any event what in the world is wrong with 4nt over 3nt.

[mikeh]

mike777, on Jul 23 2005, 07:41 PM, said:

Once again I fail to see the huge advantage of the ambiguous 2s rebid that so many insist on.

Whatever occasionial victory it must give does not seem worth the price.

[QUOTE]

I assume you would prefer a jump to 3♠.

However, many play 3♠ as promising a very good suit: AKQxxx would be a minimum, and for some inadequate.

Why? Because this use, while rare, greatly eases slambidding. Responder can begin to count tricks, and cue-bidding (and/or keycard at some stage) comes into play immediately.

You don't have to agree with it: but it may explain the 2♠ bid: indeed, I would never to anything else

[han]

If anybody is wrong here it is East, west has little choice.

I like to play that 1S-2D-2NT shows a sound hand with 6+ spades and 1S-2D-2S is either minimal or a fairly flat hand. Playing this it would be easy for east to take another step over 3NT. I have played this with several different partners and I have never got any negative reactions.

[mike777]

[quote name='mikeh' date='Jul 23 2005, 08:54 PM'] [quote name='mike777' date='Jul 23 2005, 07:41 PM'] Once again I fail to see the huge advantage of the ambiguous 2s rebid that so many insist on.

Whatever occasionial victory it must give does not seem worth the price. [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]

I assume you would prefer a jump to 3[sp].

However, many play 3[sp] as promising a very good suit: AKQxxx would be a minimum, and for some inadequate.

Why? Because this use, while rare, greatly eases slambidding. Responder can begin to count tricks, and cue-bidding (and/or keycard at some stage) comes into play immediately.

You don't have to agree with it: but it may explain the 2[sp] bid: indeed, I would never to anything else [/QUOTE]


I too love 2s here, promising a 6 card suit very often which allows partner to bid 3s, slam try, please start cuebidding opener. . It was the nebulous rebid of 2S that I dislike but I understand most disagree with me.

[Winstonm]

Why did East bid 3H knowing a heart fit was impossible? He either has a strong hand or he is angling for 3NT without a club stopper.

x, AKJx, KQxxx, xxx would be a 3H call. But so is the actual hand.

Why didn't East bid 2N over 2S? His stopper holding is such he cannot bid NT or he is interested in a higher contract or both.

With this knowledge that East has consolidated red suit cards, what should West do? Although his shape isn't the best, he certainly holds adequate minimum controls to be interested in slam if partner is interested - and he holds an adequate spade suit to be able to play opposite a fairly shaky holding, as well as holding secondary diamond support. Yet he holds the required stopper for 3N. How does he explain this all to partner in one bid?

By bidding 4C.

Now if partner was angling toward a diamond slam he can rebid diamonds; if he has a reasonable spade holding - 2 small or singleton honor - he can now feel secure that it is enough support for either game or slam; and if he had the "angling for 3N hand", he can rebid 4H and West can sign off in 4N. Although 4N every once and a while might be too high, it's worth the slight risk to investigate the slam options, I believe.

Winston

[the hog]

East bid the hand perfectly - a 2/1 and then a reverse into H shows about this point count. West has an almost self sufficient S suit and should certainly do more than bid the pusillanimous 3NT.

[Antoine Fourrière]

West never hinted that he had more than 11 HCP in a mundane hand when he was in a position to do so. With clubs and spades switched, every strong notrumper would have opened 1N, so a 2N rebid over 2♦ doesn't seem particularly far-fetched.

(Of course, 2N can't be 5332 when you open a (strong) notrump even with KJTxx Ax Axx Axx, in which case it is semi-balanced or conventional.)

[whereagles]

The_Hog, on Jul 24 2005, 07:11 AM, said:

East bid the hand perfectly - a 2/1 and then a reverse into H shows about this point count.

That responder's reverse should imply a fairly decent hand is logical. However, this is the sort of stuff that might lead to misunderstandings (as it did) if it is not discussed beforehand.

As to the hand itself, I guess West didn't bid 3♠ after 3♥ because of "right-siding". This hand shows the problems of putting lesser things like stoppers or right-siding before completing your hand description......................

[Blofeld]

I think West really ought to bid 4NT over 3♥. East should possibly make another move over 3NT, but as West sounds like he's a minimum opening, I sympathise with the pass of 3NT.

[Wiste1]

1♠ - 2♦
2♠ - 3♥
3NT - pass?

Pass is wrong, east most show his doublton ♠, so if he bid 4♠ i think west would continue to 6♠

[whereagles]

Wiste1, on Jul 24 2005, 01:41 PM, said:

1♠ - 2♦
2♠ - 3♥
3NT -  pass?

Pass is wrong, east most show his doublton ♠, so if he bid 4♠ i  think west would continue to 6♠

That is only valid if play that 1S-2x-2S shows 6 cards.

[mcphee]

It is not reasonable to play the 3H shows extra values when the partnership is trying to find a game. 3H would show a stop and is sensible to not be a real suit with extra values on many different hands. The point is when you do have the hand with the extra values you have to let partner know.

It seems to me the E sould bid 4N over 3. Now west can begin to consider bidding on. West now has a far better hand and knows E is making a slam invite on a hand where e/w have no real fit, and can expect a strong D suit with good H cards.

Should E remove 3N to 4S? Not so clear to me at all and would not be my choice.

It strikes me that when I look at the east hand it seems as though I have 7 fast winners and partner has opened the bidding. This is a very good hand and to not bid again seems timid to me.

If west has opened some bad 11 count that is not easts problem. As stated else where in this post, E has at least an A or K extra for the 2/1 and if you do not tell you do not let partner into the photo.

[whereagles]

mcphee, on Jul 24 2005, 03:00 PM, said:

It is not reasonable to play the 3H shows extra values when the partnership is trying to find a game. 3H would show a stop and is sensible to not be a real suit with extra values on many different hands. The point is when you do have the hand with the extra values you have to let partner know.

I don't understand the point at all. Could you rephrase that, pls?

[mikestar]

At first I was going to blame East for not bidding 4NT over 3NT, but that isn't right. For all East knows, West could have a non-descript 12 count with five spades and a club stopper. Then 4NT can easily be too high, and slam is unlikely if West has extras but not enough to make a try of his own. West on the other hand has 14 HCP including the golden J♦. The ♥ doubleton is promising for play in spades as well. For 3NT he could easily be a King weaker with some wastage. He needs to show extras.

I can see two alternatives for West: 4C, which must show slam interest, with a club suit or a club stopper West just bids 3NT, so it shows club values and is a clearcut slam try.

If it will be taken as natural, 4NT quantitative is OK--it rightsides the NT but may make it haredr to find spades if that is needed.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

not reaching 6NT on a combined 29 count is hardly the end of the world.

The same holds true for 6S, because both hands are fairly balanced,
and there exists no primary fit, unless 2S showed already a 6 card
suit, in which case one could blame East for not showing support, which
would just be result merchandising, afterall West showed a minimum
opening bid either with 2S or with 3NT, and 3NT will be a great contract
and maybe safer than 4S.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[helene_t]

This is quite difficult. Unless the partnership has some "Mad Scientist" agreements that they forgot to use, I would not blame anybody.