[Dr Ace]

---

IMP scoring

[bftboy]

Sort of a "do you feel lucky?" hand. Vul at IMPS, I guess I stretch to invite with 4♦. 5♦ could easily be 40% or better. 'course, we could also go for 800 at 4♦, but lots of folks just won't dbl here. If we're down at 4♦ when 3♦ was making, not a disaster, but missing makeable 5♦ could be.

[mtvesuvius]

Easy pass, partner needs an awful lot.

[bucky]

Pass. This one is really easy. My hand is not strong enough to want to contract for 11 tricks in diamonds. 3NT is a possibility, but even if it is right, I have no way to find out (and get partner to declare) below 3NT.

[Cascade]

Partner can do more if we belong higher.

Routine Pass

[bucky]

BTW, getting to 4♦ down 1 is surely a disaster, it costs same imps as missing a non-vulnerable game. Same is true if we get to 5♦ going down.

[the hog]

Pass.

[awm]

Certainly one can construct hands where pass is (very) wrong. However, we should consider what we know about partner's hand. Given the initial pass, partner will not have 12 hcp. If partner had 10-11 points and a club stopper, he should've tried 3NT here rather than 3♦. If partner had 10-11 points and some shapely hand with 5+♦ (but no club stop) he should encourage us with 4♦ or a cuebid.

We conclude that partner likely has 0-9 points. In any case we don't have a major suit fit. What game are we likely to have under these circumstances? It's true that if partner is very maximum we might make a game (say ♠Axx ♥xx ♦Qxxxx ♣Qxx is a good game) but this has to be weighed against the more typical slightly weaker hands where 3♦ is about the limit.

[mikeh]

Pass. Thinking about bidding is an overbid. Did you look at your clubs, and see LHO's pass...we probably have 2 losers right there, and you think you have a play for no other losers opposite a 3♦ call?

Finally the imps one blows from overbidding these hand types far outweigh, in the long run, the occasional home run from reaching a thin game on magic cards.

[whereagles]

Pass or 3NT, depending on how lucky I feel. Certainly not anything else.

[bftboy]

I don't really disagree that the long-term, percentage, disciplined action here is to pass. That is why I prefaced my comment by asking whether one felt lucky.

I do disagree that it's not even close. There are many good minimums that P can hold that will give good play for game if he chooses to bid it (Axx, xx, Qxxxxx, xx), and no, that isn't a vul weak 2 bid. Something like Ax, Jxxx, Qxxxx, xx) isn't crazy. At the other table they are making 3NT because P holds Axx, xxx, Qxxxxx, Qx, and there was no preempt because RHO holds only 6 ♣.

The safe pass will win the postmortem but, IMO, 4♦ is only slightly agressive, and may get you a push or a big win.

[Cyberyeti]

bftboy, on 2010-October-28, 04:53, said:

I don't really disagree that the long-term, percentage, disciplined action here is to pass. That is why I prefaced my comment by asking whether one felt lucky.

I do disagree that it's not even close. There are many good minimums that P can hold that will give good play for game if he chooses to bid it (Axx, xx, Qxxxxx, xx), and no, that isn't a vul weak 2 bid. Something like Ax, Jxxx, Qxxxx, xx) isn't crazy. At the other table they are making 3NT because P holds Axx, xxx, Qxxxxx, Qx, and there was no preempt because RHO holds only 6 ♣.

The safe pass will win the postmortem but, IMO, 4♦ is only slightly agressive, and may get you a push or a big win.

Your hand for pard is 14 cards, AQ, xxx, Qxxxxx, xx was the hand I visualised where 5♦ was cold. I think I'd probably pass, but wouldn't crime 4♦.

[gordontd]

3♣?

[655321]

Anything except pass seems really bad, this is not at all close.

[Fluffy]

you need to double on really crap often if this hands looks like extras for you