[kgr]

Scoring: MP

---

Bidding goes:
1♦-(2♥)-3♦-(3♥)
4♦-(5♥)-5♦-(DBL)
all Pass

1♦ : at least 4-card (opening 5-5-4-2)
2♥: 6+card and 12+pts
3♦: preempt (4 or 5-card ♦, does not promise much else)
4♦: extra length ♦

4♥ could make. 5♦ did go -3 for an absolute 0 (everybody else was in 4♥).

What bid was too much or was it just bad luck (mirror distribution)?
(Note that 3♦ will often be bid on a 4-card)

[FrancesHinden]

I predict from your post that you were North.

I don't like the 4D bid, on a weak NT hand with Qx hearts.
I don't much like the 5D bid either with extra defence and a balanced hand, but I like the 4D bid less.

[kgr]

FrancesHinden, on Aug 2 2005, 12:02 PM, said:

I predict from your post that you were North.

I don't like the 4D bid, on a weak NT hand with Qx hearts.
I don't much like the 5D bid either with extra defence and a balanced hand, but I like the 4D bid less.

I was South
Note that I don't mind to post anything on which I errored. For me it's more important to learn from my own errors then from partner's (see also my other recent post on which I think I should clearly have bid 4♠).

Probably I did not have ♥Qx , but ♥Jx. (opps play stong ♣ system. I don't like to give them the change to open 1♣ and tend to open a bit lighter against them).
Does that change anything?

[joker_gib]

Sorry but for me 3♦ is not a prempt (no jump).

For the rest, Frances already said it !

Alain

[hotShot]

I would not bid 4♦, because there is a chance that opps will pass on the 3 level and miss game. No need to push them to 4♥.
(I think they bid 4♥ and not 5♥ as stated.)

You should rethink your strategie against strong ♣ systems. You should open normaly against them. After they bid 1♣ is the time to act.
Since 1♣ shows strength and not suit, opps need bidding space to find their fit. So treat e.g. the 1♣ openeing as if it was a strong NT and use a NT defence (e.g. Cappelletti) against it, taking away the one level and a lot of the 2 level. The idea of using a strong 1♣, is to save bidding space for the exchange of more information, taking this bidding space is more disturbing than just sending them on their well established bidding pathes in second seat.

[inquiry]

First rule of limiting your hand (bidding NT, preempting, ,etc) your partner is the captain. So north having "preempted", is out of the auction. I have sympathy for him, if he thinks 4♦ is invitational.

As for your 4♦ bid. What where you thinkiing? I have no sympathy for that bid. Did you hear your partner's bid? An extra diamond is hardly an excuse to bid again here.

[kgr]

hotShot, on Aug 2 2005, 01:13 PM, said:

I would not bid 4♦, because there is a chance that opps will pass on the 3 level and miss game. No need to push them to 4♥.
(I think they bid 4♥ and not 5♥ as stated.)

I did bid 4♦ because it is MP's. Very good possible on my hand that both 4♦ and 3♥ make or 4♦ makes and 3♥ -1 ... ?

Quote

You should rethink your strategie against strong ♣ systems. You should open normaly against them. After they bid 1♣ is the time to act.
Since 1♣ shows strength and not suit, opps need bidding space to find their fit. So treat e.g. the 1♣ openeing as if it was a strong NT and use a NT defence (e.g. Cappelletti) against it, taking away  the one level and a lot of the 2 level. The idea of using a strong 1♣, is to save bidding space for the exchange of more information, taking this bidding space is more disturbing than just sending them on their well established bidding pathes in second seat.

We use our strong NT defence (multi-Landy) over a strong 1♣ opening, but it doesn't come up a lot.

[mike777]

[quote name='kgr' date='Aug 2 2005, 06:25 AM'] [quote name='hotShot' date='Aug 2 2005, 01:13 PM']I would not bid 4[di], because there is a chance that opps will pass on the 3 level and miss game. No need to push them to 4[he].
(I think they bid 4[he] and not 5[he] as stated.)

[/QUOTE]
I did bid 4[di] because it is MP's. Very good possible on my hand that both 4[di] and 3[he] make or 4[di] makes and 3[he] -1 ... ?


How can you make 4D?
You said 3D promises 4 or 5 D and "does not promise much else"?

That means you cannot make 1D!

[coyot]

If you play 1♦-3♦ as weak 5card, you should not bid 4 or 5 based on the fact that
LOTT does not work here - because HCP aren't likely to be 20-20.

Partner promised something 2-5? 3-8? 5-8? Anyway, if he is minimal, they have approx. one extra honor card, plus you have heart wastage, plus they still can have diamond ace. AND, you have terrible shape!

All this says pass. Sure, it may turn out that 5♦ would be a good save, or 4♥ does not make and you'd have pushed them, but it may as well turn out a disaster.

in short, both 4♦ and 5♦ bids are wrong. Maybe the 5♦ worse than 4♦, because the hand has nothing extra, but 4 is as bad with the Qx in hearts. 4♥ most likely makes if your p has diamond ace... and you have heart loser or two AND 5 losers in black suits

[the hog]

4D is poor and 5D is worse. Frances says it all.

[luis]

I think 4♦ is a very bad bid.

[helene_t]

The LOTT is with you, but the distributions duplicate. Maybe this is a good deal for Lawrence's/Wirgren's book. You can't discover the duplication, yet both hands are ballanced which suggests less aggesive bidding. As others have said.

[ochinko]

I sympathize with NS bidding. It's not unreasonable from any of them to expect his partner to be 4:2 or 2:4 in the black suits. In that case the Law would've proven correct, and they'd be -2 for 100% instead of -3 for 0%. I find it strange that noone else defended here.

I had a simillar experience recently (NV vs. V):

J
T7
AJ98654
942

Partner deals, and opens 1D. RHO intervenes with 2C. I smell some major fit(s), so I jump to 5D. LHO bids 5H, doubled from partner, corrected to 5Sp from RHO. I pass, LHO passes, a pass from my partner would get us 96% now. Partner instead fights with 6D, doubled from RHO, LHO shifts to 6Sp, two passes, my turn again. I bid 7D. Opps decide to take what's certain, and double. We go down 5 for -1100. Turns out, they had 7Sp. We still scored 87%.

Petko

[FrancesHinden]

ochinko, on Aug 2 2005, 09:05 AM, said:

I sympathize with NS bidding. It's not unreasonable from any of them to expect his partner to be 4:2 or 2:4 in the black suits. In that case the Law would've proven correct, and they'd be -2 for 100% instead of -3 for 0%. I find it strange that noone else defended here.

I agree that 5332 opposite 5332 is unlucky. But 4:2/2:4 in the blacks may not help.

If North has Kx xx Jxxxx A109x you need the spade finesse right to avoid 500 (and 4H is off much of the time the spade finesse is right).

If South has AJ Qx KQxxx xxxx you can't avoid 500 if they lead hearts or clubs as expected (change the SJ into the CJ and you can on a good day, but again 4H might go off).

If South has AJxx Qx KQxxx xx or North has Kxxx xx Jxxxx Ax you need the spade finesse to avoid 500, though 5D is now not an unreasonable matchpoint effort as it may well be right.

[mikeh]

Playing 3♦ as strictly preemptive makes little sense. What does North do when holding a decent, invitational hand? You can hardly use the 3♥ cue for all invitational and forcing hands.... since it forces to the 4 level, while at the same time aiming (intentionally or otherwise) for 3N any time opener holds a stopper, regardless of how good the contract is.

But, you are stuck with your methods.

4♦is silly.

To my way of thinking, bidding 4 of a minor in a competitive auction is VERY rarely correct.

One useful rule when considering such a bid is: how comfortable will you feel if the opps now bid game in their major?

If you will be uncomfortable, don't do it.

The opps may be bidding game anyway, but your 4♦ bid increases the chances of their doing so, especially at mps.

By bidding 4♦ you announce extra length and that will sometimes allow an overcaller to upgrade with, for example, xxx in your suit: they are now confident of finding ruffing values in dummy.

Furthermore, overcaller may have a borderline decision. He may opt for pass, playing for the plus score and not wishing to push. His partner was under some pressure and may have bid 3♥ on borderline values, not wanting to sell to 3♦. But when you bid 4♦, you give 4♥ two ways to win: it may make or it may be a good save against 4♦ (assuming no double, if red).


So a bid of 4♦ should be discussed between partners: does it suggest saving if responder has a suitable hand (lots of shape, no defence) or does it announce a desire to defend if the opps bid 4♥.

Absent that agreement, don't bid 4♦.

As it is, neither partner really had their bids. South had horrible shape and North had too much defence, given that 3♦ allegedly promised nothing. So 4♥ makes: that is life: sometimes the opps are allowed to have the hand.