[CSGibson]

wyman, on 2013-January-10, 08:52, said:

fwiw i am planning on checking out 3S

Same here.

[CSGibson]

cherdano, on 2013-January-10, 05:12, said:

I don't want to be rude, but I really think the 3♥ bidders are wrong in so many ways, that it can only be explained by playing too much against weak opponents.

• Playing 3NT: It's true that this might be the right contract, but partner won't know when to bid it. He doesn't know we have a running 7-card suit, so he doesn't know that he just needs a stop and an ace (and no ♥ honour).
  
  

But they may offer 3N with some sort of double spade stopper-ish looking thing like AQx, KQx, AJx, or KJx, along with a smattering of other values - I think you are underestimating the likelihood of this.

Quote

"They may run out of steam": If opponents pass out 4H after 3H-3S-4H or 3H-3S-P-P-4H, then that's likely to be right for them. And if they bid 4S, that's also more likely to be right than when they have to guess over a direct 4H.

In fact, just think about how many bids you give opener to help responder decide whether to go to 4S: He can pass, he can bid 3S, and he can make a maximal double. Doesn't that sound like a better position to be in than guessing over 4♠? Anyway, all this is way too complicated: opponents are more likely to guess right if they have more room to exchange information.

I think it is true that opponents are likely to decide right after exchanging information. Unfortunately, they've already exchanged information. On the other hand, my partner and I have not, and I really need more information after they bid 4S. If they bid 4S after I bid 4H, I don't know if they are saving, taking a 2-way shot, or bidding to make, and neither does partner. If they bid it after 3H, it is much more likely to be on power/to make, and partner knows that too, and can make a decision based on that inference.

Quote

"We won't know what to do over 4S, but after 3H-3S-4H-4S I know to bid 5H": Sorry, but this is the definition of master-minding. I mean, it's true that we have an obvious 5H bid here, partly because we have misdescribed our hand earlier. But think about how unlikely that auction is: LHO has a 3S bid, not a 4S bid (if he has ♥ shortness, he will likely jump to 4S). Partner has a raise of 3H, but not a raise of 4H. And RHO competes to 4S, after he limited himself with 2S. Meanwhile, if we instead jump to 4♥, partner can make a decision, with a good guess about our hand type.

The argument that partner has a better idea of our hand after 4♥ rather than 3♥ is disingenuous at best. Game bids tend to be wildly variant in nature, bid both with single-suited powerhouses as well as preempts. I don't think partner will "know" our hand type any better or worse after 4♥ than after 3♥.

Quote

Anyway, the fact alone that some (most?) of the 3H bidders won't pass out 3S is evidence enough that 3H is wrong - just bid as far as you want to bid right away. (Bidding 3H then 4H is much more likely to result in the -300 against a partscore or -500 against game that the 3H bidders are afraid of.)

Yes, bidding 3♥ then competing to 4 is a horrible strategy on this hand for the reason you mentioned and others. But just because some of the people who bid 3♥ will screw up the auction later does not mean that 3♥ is the wrong bid in a vacuum; it just means that some of the people bidding it are the wrong players to bid it.

[quiddity]

CSGibson, on 2013-January-10, 12:31, said:

But they may offer 3N with some sort of double spade stopper-ish looking thing like AQx, KQx, AJx, or KJx, along with a smattering of other values - I think you are underestimating the likelihood of this.

This would just be hanging you when you have a typical non-vulnerable prebalance. He has no heart help for you and he cannot possibly think that you are making 3NT on his smattering of values.

[lalldonn]

I think cherdano put it really well. Also if I bid 4♥ and the next player bids 4♠ I don't feel bad at all. I might have forced him to stretch or to not make his slam try, and if partner saves or doubles I will feel good about it.

[pigpenz]

quiddity, on 2013-January-10, 12:58, said:

This would just be hanging you when you have a typical non-vulnerable prebalance. He has no heart help for you and he cannot possibly think that you are making 3NT on his smattering of values.

actually on this particular hand 3NT is down one
with 4NT being a good save against 4♠

question is how will partner interpet 3♠ if he doesnt have spade stopper and you bid 4♥ over his minor suit bid

[kenberg]

pigpenz, on 2013-January-09, 14:44, said:

on this particular hand there was not way as your left hand opp bid 4♠

Just out of curiosity, did partner have a hand that might tempt him to bid 5♥?

[pigpenz]

kenberg, on 2013-January-10, 20:22, said:

Just out of curiosity, did partner have a hand that might tempt him to bid 5♥?

partner had heart support 3 of them
5♥could be set three but requires underlead of an Ace
4NT-2 and 3NT-1 are best par scores

[MrAce]

I would bid 4♥

But i can't blame those who bid 3 and then bailed out over 3♠. I think it is fairly legit strategy.

Bidding 3 and then 4 is awful imo.

It has been explained in detail why it is awful by previous posts, but the main downside of 3 and then 4 is, you are basically messing with your pd, not opponents. At the end even if you get lucky somehow with this bidding, your pd will think you have much different hand than this, for your failure to bid 4 previous round. He will definetely place you with a different hand and this doesn't only hits you in the auction, it may harm you in defense as well.

[kenberg]

pigpenz, on 2013-January-10, 21:12, said:

partner had heart support 3 of them
5♥could be set three but requires underlead of an Ace
4NT-2 and 3NT-1 are best par scores

This is the way of bridge, imo. It makes it fun . We don't just finish bidding and then turn the hands over to GIB to see what should be scored up.

And it bears on what I was saying. If I were the partner of the heart bidder, would I bid 5♥ over 4♠? I dunno. Maybe. I would have to see the whole hand and even then I probably could not say for sure what I would have done. But I would be more inclined to bid 5♥ if partner had said 4♠ than I would be if partner had said 3♥. For me this was always the issue. Looking at my hand, I expect the opponents will be playing spades, probably at the four level. Which call, 3♥ or 4♥, will be most helpful to partner when he has to decide whether or not to bid 5. Looking at the long heart hand, it looks to me like rather often 5♥ will lead to -500.

However. It sounds as if 5♥ is, in practical terms, the right call. At least, that is, if this Ace underlead has to be at trick 1. Might happen. Perhaps if Justin or Meckstroth or such is on lead it would happen. But most times it won't happen, and the score will be a good matchpoint score of -300.

So, at least this time, perhaps 4♥ would have produced 5♥ from pard, and most likely this would have been good. But I am sticking with my 3♥ call. And I never was advocating going on to 4♥ at my next turn, even should that be an option, which I wouldn't expect that it would be.

As mentioned, I have no real quarrel with 4♥. But I don't think 3♥ is totally dumb.

[pigpenz]

kenberg, on 2013-January-11, 07:04, said:

This is the way of bridge, imo. It makes it fun . We don't just finish bidding and then turn the hands over to GIB to see what should be scored up.

And it bears on what I was saying. If I were the partner of the heart bidder, would I bid 5♥ over 4♠? I dunno. Maybe. I would have to see the whole hand and even then I probably could not say for sure what I would have done. But I would be more inclined to bid 5♥ if partner had said 4♠ than I would be if partner had said 3♥. For me this was always the issue. Looking at my hand, I expect the opponents will be playing spades, probably at the four level. Which call, 3♥ or 4♥, will be most helpful to partner when he has to decide whether or not to bid 5. Looking at the long heart hand, it looks to me like rather often 5♥ will lead to -500.

However. It sounds as if 5♥ is, in practical terms, the right call. At least, that is, if this Ace underlead has to be at trick 1. Might happen. Perhaps if Justin or Meckstroth or such is on lead it would happen. But most times it won't happen, and the score will be a good matchpoint score of -300.

So, at least this time, perhaps 4♥ would have produced 5♥ from pard, and most likely this would have been good. But I am sticking with my 3♥ call. And I never was advocating going on to 4♥ at my next turn, even should that be an option, which I wouldn't expect that it would be.

As mentioned, I have no real quarrel with 4♥. But I don't think 3♥ is totally dumb.

generally there are no right answers at bridge
sometimes you are lucky sometimes your arent

[cherdano]

Ok, I probably chose language that was too strong to describe the stance of the more thoughtful 3H bidders. (Though I should point out that up to my post, almost every 3H bidder mentioned hoping to make a more informed choice later, which in my view is day-dreaming.)
There is nothing illogical to bidding 3H and selling out to whatever opponents or partner bids. It's taking the view that you can't accomplish much in this auction. This is just a judgement call. But it's still a judgement that I strongly disagree with - I am happy with the risk/reward ratio of 4H.
Put yourself into opponents' place: wouldn't you rather play against someone who bids 3H on this hand?

I still disagree with the following:

CSGibson, on 2013-January-10, 12:31, said:

The argument that partner has a better idea of our hand after 4♥ rather than 3♥ is disingenuous at best. Game bids tend to be wildly variant in nature, bid both with single-suited powerhouses as well as preempts. I don't think partner will "know" our hand type any better or worse after 4♥ than after 3♥.

It's true that 4H is wide-ranging in terms of strength. But that's also true for 3H - could be anything from a great 10-count to an 18-count. That's hardly wider than the hands that bid 4H and don't double if the opponents compete to 4S. But 4H is much more clearly defined in terms of hand-type - it's a one-suited hand that knows it wants to play in hearts, period. Whereas 3H could be one-suited, two-suited, semi-balanced hoping to play 3NT, really any hand not suitable for a takeout double and not strong-enough for double-and-bid. For example, you would bid 3H also on some 3532 hands that can't bid 3NT, but are too strong to pass.

[CSGibson]

To be fair, at favorable vulnerability I would bid 4♥, and I don't think its horrible to do so here; I certainly considered it.

I do think that partner will continue on with too many hands where the sac is unprofitable over 4, and I still disagree with the view that 4♥ gives a narrower description of hands than 3♥, and will therefore give partner a better idea of what to do - I might bid 4♥ with KQ eighth in hearts and out, or a two-suited hand with longer hearts and good playing strength, or a good single-suited hand that does not believe slam is likely after the bidding to this point, etc.

[JLOGIC]

If you think partner will make bad sacs when you bid 4H then obviously you shouldn't, the whole point of bidding 4H is to induce partner to save.

It is hard for me to imagine he is saving with only 1 trick for us unless he is unlucky (like a doubleton in our stiff)... I know rules are dumb but we match the rule of 2/3/4 perfectly, we have 7 tricks and jump to 4 at equal vul. Surely if he saves he will be hoping for 2 tricks in his hand usually. Saving with like xxx xxx Axxx xxx seems strange to me, I would expect to go down 3 often with that hand. But maybe this is circular, if you won't bid 4M with 7 solid 7321 then maybe your partner should save with that, and if you won't then maybe he shouldn't.

Random side note but I think the common treatment of jumping to 4m as leaping michaels is bad because it is a very useful natural bid for the same reason, it tells partner to save. Partner has never saved when I have good 7 card suits and bid only 3 from what I've seen.

[ggwhiz]

I have played an impossible 3nt (alerted as a might be such) ie. white vs red, 3♣ - dbl - 3nt where the 3nt bidder scurries off to 4♣ if necessary with the message that I would like to sac at the 5 level but am afraid of -800 unless there is some extra offence/shape over there.

Might work here, they either take you at 50 a trick or pard knows you are inviting a sac over 4♠ with reservations. He just won't know what in if they bid game directly so might not work here.

[kenberg]

Ok; After 1♠-Pass-2♠- some number of hearts-4♠ suppose partner has three hearts. If he has nothing outside we should hope he passes since the opponents are cold for at least 6♠. I suppose partner, if he has two spades in his hand, might decide that it is an indicator he should take it easy on the sacrificing. I dunno. It's his problem. If he bids five and I go down 3, it can be an ATB post. It's his fault.

An aside, brought to mind by the fake 3NT post:
Yesterday I was watching a team match and the auction went something like 1♥-(2♣)-3♣-(4♠) -passed out. The 4♠ bidder had T9xx for trump. -300 or so against 680 in the other room for the heart bidders. Should have been only 650 but they lost an ace. The club/spade pair I was watching had been squabbling and I am not at all sure that this resourceful move was intended in the manner it turned out.Although it's hard to imagine what else was intended. Seems someone should have doubled.

[lycier]

I would like to bid 3♠,if partner have a stopper in ♠,he will bid 3nt as a final contract,otherwise 4♣,then I bid 4♥ without some defensive tricks in this hand.

[Zelandakh]

JLOGIC, on 2013-January-11, 13:01, said:

Random side note but I think the common treatment of jumping to 4m as leaping michaels is bad because it is a very useful natural bid for the same reason, it tells partner to save. Partner has never saved when I have good 7 card suits and bid only 3 from what I've seen.

If I remember correctly from previous threads, you play 2NT in this spot as Michaels with hearts, right? I was wondering how you play 3♠; also if there is an Expert Standard for it. Assuming I remember correctly about 2NT, do you have any extra alternatives if holding both minors? I have been interested in this (1♠) - (2♠) auction for a while now (after a kenrexford thread on it) and am still trying to collate together various ideas and work out what I like.