[MFA]

Scoring: IMP

---

(1♥) - 2♣ - (3♥) - ??

3♥ is preemptive and could be absolute rubbish.

Do we have a plan?

[gwnn]

i will just x and raise whatever partner is going to bid. of course I would be more than happy if he could somehow pass it but that is not going to happen easily. partner likely has a singleton heart and that's not going to help our chances in 3NT but it looks OK for 5♣, the contract that we will most likely play. I am pessimistic today so I won't try for slam but that's probably not right. not sure.

[Fluffy]

I am bidding RKCW if partner plays it 1430

[pooltuna]

MFA, on Jan 22 2010, 10:36 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

---

(1♥) - 2♣ - (3♥) - ??

3♥ is preemptive and could be absolute rubbish.

Do we have a plan?

yeah I plan to bid 3NT

[gnasher]

Double.

3NT would be right opposite specifically AQxxxx and an ace. Double will work really well if he bids 3♠; if he doesn't, I'll bid 5♣. 5♣ will be the right spot if he doesn't have a side ace, or if we have a club loser. It may also survive if he has ♠A. It will only be terrible if he has ♦A and ♠xxx (and even then we're not completely dead).

It seems wildly optimistic to hope for slam. Qx x Axxx AQJxxx makes a good, but not cold, slam, but that's a very specific 6-4 where the opponents have reached the three-level on a combined 12-count.

[Vilgan]

X

If partner bids spades, I will raise. Will probably be a moysian, but should be a strong moysian. Its also very unlikely I'll get a crazy break in spades (4-2 at worst) whereas I could get a very bad club break.

If partner bids 4♣ or 4♦ I'll sign off in 5♣.

If partner passes (unlikely) that'll be fine too.

While slam is a possibility, I don't see a good way to explore for it in a safe way. Simply bidding 3NT was my first thought, but thinking about hands it seems like most hands that can make 3NT will make 5♣, and some that don't might still make 5♣.

[OleBerg]

X.

If partner simply rebid something, I'll raise to game.

If partner jumps, I'll bid 6♣. I see no reason to play a slam in spades.

[jdonn]

Double seems right, I think the odds 3NT is right aren't nearly as high as the odds that one of 4♠/5♣/6♣ are right. I think I'll be able to work it out most of the time.

[ArtK78]

Double and see what happens next.

Slam is certainly not out of the question. Partner is allowed to have a good hand for his overcall, and he doesn't need the best overcall ever seen for 6♣ to be a claim. Even a fair overcall with six clubs and three aces makes slam on a 2-2 club break. And if partner is 4-6 in the minors with three aces, slam will make even if clubs are 3-1.

There are a lot of other hands where partner has a singleton heart (highly likely) which don't require 3 aces for slam to be cold. For example: Ax x Jxxx AQTxxx. And other hands which provide very good play for 6♣.

So the pessimists who believe slam is highly unlikely may need to reevaluate.

[Jlall]

If we double can partner bid a 3 card spade suit very often when hes 3136? If so how do we get to clubs? Just curious, because I'm sure I'd try 3S with AQx x xxx Axxxxx or something...maybe that's wrong though?

edited my hand example to make it less strong heh

[gnasher]

Jlall, on Jan 22 2010, 10:46 PM, said:

If we double can partner bid a 3 card spade suit very often when hes 3136? If so how do we get to clubs? Just curious, because I'm sure I'd try 3S with AQx x xxx Axxxxx or something...maybe that's wrong though?

Maybe dbl-3♠-4♥ shows four spades and offers a choice of games.

[MFA]

gnasher, on Jan 22 2010, 07:34 PM, said:

Double.

3NT would be right opposite specifically AQxxxx and an ace.  Double will work really well if he bids 3♠; (...)

Are you also planning to raise 3♠ to 4♠?
What hand and shape are you expecting partner to have for that bid?

[gnasher]

ArtK78, on Jan 22 2010, 10:23 PM, said:

Double and see what happens next.

Slam is certainly not out of the question.  Partner is allowed to have a good hand for his overcall, and he doesn't need the best overcall ever seen for 6♣ to be a claim.  Even a fair overcall with six clubs and three aces makes slam on a 2-2 club break.  And if partner is 4-6 in the minors with three aces, slam will make even if clubs are 3-1.

There are a lot of other hands where partner has a singleton heart (highly likely) which don't require 3 aces for slam to be cold.  For example:  Ax x Jxxx AQTxxx.  And other hands which provide very good play for 6♣.

So the pessimists who believe slam is highly unlikely may need to reevaluate.

Your examples seem to tell us that:
- If the opponents have a combined 13-count consisting of QJ KQJ J QJ, slam will be poor unless partner is 4-6 in the minors.
- If the opponents have a combined 13-count consisting of QJ KQJ A, slam will be hopeless unless partner is 4-6 in the minors.

I might add that:
- If the opponents have a combined 13-count consisting of AQ KQJ J, slam will be hopeless even if partner is 4-6 in the minors.

I think I'll stick with my original evaluation.

[gnasher]

MFA, on Jan 23 2010, 12:55 AM, said:

Are you also planning to raise 3♠ to 4♠?
What hand and shape are you expecting partner to have for that bid?

Yes, I am. I expect partner to be 4-6 or 4-5.

However, if I thought 3-6 was possible, I'd bid 4♥, choice-of-games.

[Jlall]

How about this logic:

If partner is 4135 he will always X 1H (and almost always with 4225, but we "know" thats not his shape anyways). If partner is 4126 he will often bid 4S over our X(?), ergo partner is often 3-6 if he bids 3S?

Not sure if I agree with that btw, just thinking out loud. I think the first part is good, but the second part is probably questionable.

[Jlall]

What does X then 3N over 3S suggest? Surely that would imply 4 spades and a (not so great) heart stopper, else I would have started by bidding 3N to begin with?

The problem with that is that even if I expect partner to pull with 4 spades, 5C might be the right contract rather than 3N if partner has a 3 card spade holding.

What about X then 4C over 3S? Is that forcing? Probably not, I could have been trying to get to 3N and now when partner couldn't bid it, I'm trying to stop in 4C opposite a min. That would be a useful agreement here though.

Gnasher is probably right that 4H should be a COG over 3S, but I think my partners would take it as a slam try in spades.

X and 3N over 3S at least seems like a possibility though. I think 5C rates to be better than 3N when partner has 3 spades though, so I'd prefer gnasher's option of X then 4H. If 4C was forcing over 3S then 4H should be a slam try in spades though imo, but as I said I don't think it is.

[gnasher]

Sorry, my suggestion that partner might be 4-5 in the blacks was absurd.

Let's assume that our objective is to reach any 8-card spade fit, but not a 7-card spade fit. Assume also that 3♠ over 3♥ would be non-forcing.

When advancer has game values, either of these methods will work:
(1) Overcaller bids 3♠ with either three or four. The sequences dbl-3♠-3NT and dbl-3♠-4♥ ask the overcaller to bid 4♠ if he has four.
(2) Opener bids 3♠ only if he has four. The sequence dbl-4♣-4♠ shows five and offers a choice of games.

So, on the game hands it doesn't matter how we do it, as long as we're both playing the same way. I think this comes down to what advancer does when he has five spades and not enough to insist on game. If he usually doubles, we should play (1); if he usually bids 3♠, we should play (2).

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2010-January-23, 04:02

[FrancesHinden]

Jlall, on Jan 23 2010, 12:08 AM, said:

How about this logic:

If partner is 4135 he will always X 1H (and almost always with 4225, but we "know" thats not his shape anyways). If partner is 4126 he will often bid 4S over our X(?), ergo partner is often 3-6 if he bids 3S?

Not sure if I agree with that btw, just thinking out loud. I think the first part is good, but the second part is probably questionable.

I think partner's 3S bid will often be a 3-card suit and your logic is correct.

A couple of weeks ago we bid 1S 2D 3S x; P 4H where the 4H bidder was 1336 and it was the right contract.

I'm not sure that dbl...3NT shows 4S. Certainly it shows doubt about 3NT as a contract, but if you were, say, 3=2=5=3 with Ax of hearts wouldn't you also want to bid that way?

[MFA]

Ok.

I tried X and 3NT over 3♠. I think partner usually only has three spades for 3♠, and if he is 4-1-2-6 and min, he should remove 3NT anyway. I have no intention of trying a 4-3 with such a bad spade suit.

Also I consider 3NT in this sequence to be a mild suggestion only. Anything but 3♠ from partner takes us above 3NT. If he has something like QJx, x, Jxx, AQJxxx he can perhaps bid 4♣ over 3NT, since passing would play us for a stopper + the club filler + 2 toptricks on the side, a bit much for a mild suggestion. But perhaps I'm just dreaming.

At the other table there was a significant huddle before 3♠, and south then felt obliged to raise to 4♠, which was an unlucky contract with spades 1-5. I thought that south was just being a little masochistic there, but this thread seems to prove me wrong, so wp.

Partner had ♠AQx, ♥x, ♦xxxx, ♣AJTxx. I'm used to X instead of 2♣ but that's another discussion.

[Jlall]

Yeah as I said my only problem with X then 3N is I think we get to 3N when 5C is better too often. I think with your example hand of partner having 6 good clubs for instance that he will sit for 3N since he has a source of tricks, despite his stiff heart.

If we had no way to say "lets play 5C if you have 3 spades, and 4S if you have 4" then I like X then 3N best I guess.