[jonottawa]

Here's another hand from the final Swiss in Reno.

IMPs, favorable

♠J7x ♥8xxx ♦Q9 ♣A6xx

1♣ - 1♦ - 1NT - P
2♣ - 2♦ - P - P
2♥ - P - 3♣ - ?

Please explain your reasoning.

[Pict]

I pass.

My reasoning is that this is not MP.

[jdonn]

3♦ and this is the ultimate wtp, just like when you gave it to me in Reno. Passing is awful, in fact this hand should think about raising 2♦ to 3♦ directly if anything. Btw I think I was a little harsh regarding the 2♦ rebid when I talked to you the first time, it's aggressive and ok.

[wclass___]

Partner is likely to be 3-3(+) in majors.

JTx and 8xxx opposite is just terrible.

And 1NT on my right, humm, very easy pass for me.

[jonottawa]

Food for thought:

What do you think LHO's shape is? (I think there are very strong clues as to his exact shape.) Does this influence your decision?

[Pict]

3343 was my decision.

(or inverse if you mean the other opponent - diagrams and who opponed are good for people like me)

[gnasher]

wclass___, on Mar 24 2010, 09:19 PM, said:

Partner is likely to be 3-3(+) in majors.

Wouldn't he have doubled 2♣ with that?

I think that the most likely shapes are
          3343
4261              3424
          3415

[jonottawa]

More food for thought:

Have you figured out LHO's exact shape?

I think that lets you figure out RHO's exact shape, no?

[quiddity]

LHO ran from 1NT and bid 2H instead of reopening with a double. I would guess he's more likely 3406.

[jonottawa]

You're on the right track. Who at the table is most likely to have 4 ♠?

[wclass___]

gnasher, on Mar 24 2010, 03:35 PM, said:

wclass___, on Mar 24 2010, 09:19 PM, said:

Partner is likely to be 3-3(+) in majors.

Wouldn't he have doubled 2♣ with that?

I think that the most likely shapes are
          3343
4261              3424
          3415

Yes, you are most probably right...

I was thinking about 6331, but didn't mention that it leaves one of opponents with 4♠. Hmm, but LHO could still be 5440, maybe that explain why he didn't double 2 ♦. Bidding 2♥ with 5431 feels a bit strange for me, you give up possibility to penalize opponents, and he hardly wants to be in 4-3, when you have to ruff ♦ in your own hand, although he has same problem with 5440.

Anyway, if partner has 4261 3♦ contract is way more appealing, although i am still inclined to pass, as i see perspective in defense.

[quiddity]

jonottawa, on Mar 24 2010, 04:10 PM, said:

You're on the right track. Who at the table is most likely to have 4 ♠?

Probably parter - LHO showed clubs and hearts, RHO might have bid 1S instead of 1NT with 4 spades.

[jdonn]

The analysis of the shapes is a worthwhile exercise but is not needed to know that raising partner is right. Our hand is SO GOOD for this auction. Even the 9 of diamonds and jack of spades are likely to be working opposite length in partner's hand.

[jonottawa]

If partner has 4 ♠, wouldn't he have bid 2♠ over 2♥ (since you're a heavy favorite to have ♠ on this auction, with his RHO sounding like he's 6-4 in the rounds and his LHO ostensibly denying 4♠ when he bid 1N.)

Granted, he could have 4 bad ♠ perhaps and a bare minimum.

[jonottawa]

My analysis (fwiw):

Spoiler

LHO rates to be 4-4-0-5 as both partner and RHO have had opportunities to bid ♠ and declined. This would also explain why LHO pulled 1N and why he didn't reopen with a double.

If you accept that LHO is 4-4-0-5, RHO rates to be 3-3-5-2. He didn't raise 2C to 3C. His ♦ aren't that good, so he likely would have bid 3♣ with 3-3-4-3.

So would you rather defend a 7-card club fit or declare an 8 card Diamond fit breaking 5-0, both at the 3-level?

At any rate, I thought it was an interesting problem.

The hand was given to Josh, Justin, Justin's dad, Mark Lair, Marin Marinov and (not by me) Eric Rodwell. All bid 3♦ quickly.

Partner's hand:

Ax Qxx AJT7xx xx

(Opener was 4-4-0-5, 3DX went -300, win 8 vs the spade game our teammates bid.)

[quiddity]

jonottawa, on Mar 24 2010, 04:40 PM, said:

If partner has 4 ♠, wouldn't he have bid 2♠ over 2♥ (since you're a heavy favorite to have ♠ on this auction, with his RHO sounding like he's 6-4 in the rounds and his LHO ostensibly denying 4♠ when he bid 1N.)

Granted, he could have 4 bad ♠ perhaps and a bare minimum.

No, I don't think so. Quite possibly I have hearts and clubs on this auction. Why would partner unilaterally sign us up for a 4-3 spade fit or a 3-level diamond contract? He already showed a diamond suit and values, and he trusts us to work out the spades and do something intelligent.

I think it's far more likely for partner to hold 4 spades - he did not choose another bid, he chose to pass. LHO chose another bid (2H) instead of showing spades.

[jdonn]

As far as the analysis, I think RHO could have four bad spades if his hand is balanced, and that RHO won't necessarily raise a round earlier with 3343, so I don't think it's nearly so automatic the hand is like this. Anyway partner had an 11 (11!) count and diamonds were 0-5 and you cost yourself 2 imps by raising. I'll stick with Rodwell thx. I still don't find this at all close.

[jjbrr]

3♦

[wclass___]

Are you really aiming to get more than +2 by raising? What i hear is how damn good this hand is and how right the 3♦ bid is, but it would be nice if someone explained his reasoning, and what kind of plus score are you actually aiming at? Part score swing? 3NT? 3♦x=? 5♦? After shape analyses they all feel quite distant possibilities, so what is it?

[jdonn]

wclass___, on Mar 24 2010, 07:08 PM, said:

Part score swing?

that

Look at the list of players (and please feel free to remove me). They all bid 3♦ and they all bid it quickly. Why do you think that is? I believe the problem is you grossly underestimate the hand and suit shown by rebidding 2♦ opposite a silent partner.