[hanp]

By the way, I had a very hard time deciding between 3S, 4D and pass. Adam made a good case for 4D, and 655321 is of course right that partner is likely to hold strong hand and rarely less than 15 HCP. If we bid the chance that we go plus is very small.

[P_Marlowe]

Pass.

Lack of alternatives.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[marcD]

at IMP I would only consider 3♠ and 4♦ (pass might be correct at MP , 3NT is sick ). Guess 3♠ is clear in spite of my longer diamonds as partner could still surprise me and rebid 3NT or 4♣(much harder on 4♦)) .

[wclass___]

Pass
I doun't think that we can make something.

[rogerclee]

I would pass, good problem.

[Flameous]

Pass stands out, especially at MP. I'd like to bid 3♠ if I knew p won't raise it to 4 but it seems so likely he will.

[kenrexford]

Jlall, on Jun 3 2009, 12:06 AM, said:

Ken you are clearly almost a good bridge player, if you would just not do stuff like bidding 3N on hands like this...

Bidding 3NT at the table on many hands "like this" where 3NT "cannot be right" is one source of frustration for my best partner. But, not for the obvious reason. Rather, it frustrates him that I always seem to land on my feet doing this.

This one admittedly might be a tad of an overreach.

[Oof Arted]

4♥ up the ante

[gnasher]

4♦.

3♠ will be raised more often than 4♦. If diamonds are raised, at least we'll have eight or nine trumps, whereas we'll rarely have eight spades.

If we get left in 3♠ it won't make. The main advantage of 3♠ is that we might be able to wriggle our way to a 5-3 club fit. I don't think that makes up for the risk of reaching 4♠x when we had a 4-4 diamond fit.

Edit: Another advantage of 3♠ is that partner may bid 3NT over it, which might be making. This isn't enough to make me change my mind about 3♠.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2009-June-03, 08:02

[jdonn]

Oof Arted, on Jun 3 2009, 07:17 AM, said:

4♥ up the ante

LOL

The ante is high enough already thank you.

[kenrexford]

One huge upside to bidding 3♠ is that this possible final contract is the least likely to be doubled, IMO. The risk of 3♠X making is MUCH higher than the risk of 3NTX making. The risk of 3♠ yielding 9 tricks is lower than the risk of 4♣ or 4♦ yielding 10 tricks.

[Phil]

Oof Arted, on Jun 3 2009, 07:17 AM, said:

4♥ up the ante

Unfortunately your LHO has the nuts and you are about to move a bunch of your stack over to him.

[barryallen]

hanp, on Jun 2 2009, 08:57 PM, said:

I think that on most of the hands where you can make 3NT, partner wouldn't let you play there. Now, that may also be true for 3S but at least partner won't expect values for that bid. I was going to post earlier that the good news is that the opponents likely won't double you after partner raises to 4S. That isn't necessarily true when partner raises to 6NT.

I doubt partner would raise to 6NT but your point is still very valid. Damned if you do, damned if you don't with 3♠ fitting my duck beneath the duvet.

I would love to see the system that caters for exactly this type of hand!

[xcurt]

barryallen, on Jun 3 2009, 11:40 AM, said:

hanp, on Jun 2 2009, 08:57 PM, said:

I think that on most of the hands where you can make 3NT, partner wouldn't let you play there. Now, that may also be true for 3S but at least partner won't expect values for that bid. I was going to post earlier that the good news is that the opponents likely won't double you after partner raises to 4S. That isn't necessarily true when partner raises to 6NT.

I doubt partner would raise to 6NT but your point is still very valid. Damned if you do, damned if you don't with 3♠ fitting my duck beneath the duvet.

I would love to see the system that caters for exactly this type of hand!

Ken's system caters to this type of hand. Advancer guesses a contract, and doubler is precluded from bidding again without 10 tricks in hand because no bids by advancer (except a slammish 4♥) show any values.

[nick_s]

barryallen, on Jun 3 2009, 11:40 AM, said:

hanp, on Jun 2 2009, 08:57 PM, said:

I think that on most of the hands where you can make 3NT, partner wouldn't let you play there. <snip>

I would love to see the system that caters for exactly this type of hand!

Umm... 3♦, then correct to 3N?

More seriously, great problem. Thanks for posting.

[skjaeran]

3♠ for me. The contract least likely to be doubled, and least likely to encourage partner too much. (Not that it's obvious we'll be playing there.)

[Jlall]

gnasher, on Jun 3 2009, 08:59 AM, said:

4♦.

3♠ will be raised more often than 4♦.  If diamonds are raised, at least we'll have eight or nine trumps, whereas we'll rarely have eight spades.

If we get left in 3♠ it won't make.  The main advantage of 3♠ is that we might be able to wriggle our way to a 5-3 club fit.  I don't think that makes up for the risk of reaching 4♠x when we had a 4-4 diamond fit.

Edit: Another advantage of 3♠ is that partner may bid 3NT over it, which might be making.  This isn't enough to make me change my mind about 3♠.

Why is finding a 53 spade fit not a plus side of bidding 3S? I definitely think partner would X (and pass 3S) with min (13/14 etc) 51(43) hand types rather than overcall most of the time.

[neilkaz]

skaeran, on Jun 3 2009, 01:31 PM, said:

3♠ for me. The contract least likely to be doubled, and least likely to encourage partner too much. (Not that it's obvious we'll be playing there.)

I don't want to sound like I am playing follow the leader with Harald's posts, but 3♠ is really my top consideration with this call. I really don't want to be a trick higher with 4♦ and I am hoping to escape the aX.

[gwnn]

I used to pass these hands or bid 3♠ but I was sort of convinced of 4♦ by Adam and Andy. Thanks, I'll try it.

[gnasher]

Jlall, on Jun 3 2009, 08:11 PM, said:

Why is finding a 53 spade fit not a plus side of bidding 3S? I definitely think partner would X (and pass 3S) with min (13/14 etc) 51(43) hand types rather than overcall most of the time.

I didn't say it wasn't a plus - I said it was rare.

To me it seems unlikely that we'll play 3♠ in a 5-3 fit, because RHO might well have have raised to 4♥ with 2-3 card support and a good hand. We're more likely to find ourselves in 4♠ opposite that shape and a better hand, but that might not be a disaster.