[thepossum]

Hi all

I don't know if this is system specific (2/1) or if I would have struggled to find what appeared to be an obvious game at IMPs
I was not alone and remarkably this didn't score that badly but it would have been better to have found the obvious game for a few extra IMPs

---

I ended up underbidding with a 3H attempt at continuation
I didn't feel confident about Spades or NT but surely there is a game
What should I have bid to find the obvious game?

[AL78]

A hand like that opposite an opening hand needs to drive to game so you need to find a forcing bid which will help investigate which game. I would bid 3♣ fishing for 3NT if partner holds a stop. If partner doesn't come up with a stop and bids a "nothing more to say" 3♦ I would bid 3♥ hoping partner will bid 4♥ with a doubleton. In the very unlikely situation partner holds 6-5 in diamonds and spades they will bid 3♠ and you can raise to game. If the whole deal is a hideous misfit and no game makes then hard luck.

[Cyberyeti]

AL78, on 2022-October-19, 01:00, said:

A hand like that opposite an opening hand needs to drive to game so you need to find a forcing bid which will help investigate which game. I would bid 3♣ fishing for 3NT if partner holds a stop. If partner doesn't come up with a stop and bids a "nothing more to say" 3♦ I would bid 3♥ hoping partner will bid 4♥ with a doubleton. In the very unlikely situation partner holds 6-5 in diamonds and spades they will bid 3♠ and you can raise to game. If the whole deal is a hideous misfit and no game makes then hard luck.

I think you can give up if it goes 3♣-3♦-3♥-4♦ something like Kxxx, void, AKxxxx, Jxx there is no game and even 4♦ is too many, one heart and 2 clubs it's enough.

[thepossum]

Thanks

I regretted not forcing more, perhaps with a cue, or making a gamble on the best game

I nearly gambled on spades. Not happy with NT

A few people made a bit of a gamble on one of the obvious possible games

Most of us ended in 3H

I will post the hand tomorrow. Give a few more people chance to comment. To me its remarkable

[DavidKok]

Cyberyeti, on 2022-October-19, 01:47, said:

I think you can give up if it goes 3♣-3♦-3♥-4♦ something like Kxxx, void, AKxxxx, Jxx there is no game and even 4♦ is too many, one heart and 2 clubs it's enough.

Depending on system this is a mistake. Is 2♠ forcing? And even if not, can partner still hold a nice 16-count? I think this is possible. Punishing partner for keeping the bidding low over our game forcing 3♣ sounds awful - for all I know partner has a slam try with 4=1=6=2 or the likes and is asking for our club control.

[Cyberyeti]

DavidKok, on 2022-October-19, 07:17, said:

Depending on system this is a mistake. Is 2♠ forcing? And even if not, can partner still hold a nice 16-count? I think this is possible. Punishing partner for keeping the bidding low over our game forcing 3♣ sounds awful - for all I know partner has a slam try with 4=1=6=2 or the likes and is asking for our club control.

Not playing what we play, he shows less than that.

[thepossum]

Hi

I am sure everyone is on the edge of their seats with excitement but here is the hand

---

I particular like the way 3NT+2 makes but also 4S+1 and 4H+1. I nearly went for the Moysian spades

As I said I knew/felt it was an obvious game hand but most of us were in 3H+2 which fortunately did not score too badly

[AL78]

3NT makes 11 tricks because the clubs are blocked, the hearts are 3-3 and the spade jack comes down under the top honors. It is not a game I would relish being in based purely on the NS cards. 4♥ makes thanks to the club blockage again and the hearts 3-3. You shouldn't be too disappointed about missing game on these cards, the thing you need to work on is how to make forcing forward going bids and enquiries when you know the partnership has game values.

[thepossum]

I was rather getting at the unusual nature of the hand, given the obviousness of a game being there, but not being able to find it
Wish I had gone 4S


I don't know if asking for help in clubs would have worked in the system I was playing

The only contract that upset me somewhat was the one table that made 3NT

I need to check if anyone bid 3C and what happened

[Cyberyeti]

thepossum, on 2022-October-19, 21:16, said:

I was rather getting at the unusual nature of the hand, given the obviousness of a game being there, but not being able to find it
Wish I had gone 4S


I don't know if asking for help in clubs would have worked in the system I was playing

The only contract that upset me somewhat was the one table that made 3NT

I need to check if anyone bid 3C and what happened

You are resulting, game is poor on this hand, 3N requires a singleton club AKQ (or void if played by S) in the W hand and still is not cold although is good. 4M requires something similar, quite poor if 3 clubs are cashed, 4♥ requires 3-3♥, 4♠ is more complicated but not great.

That said as soon as partner opens you will be in game in most sensible systems eg 1N(12-14)-2♦-2♥-3N.

[thepossum]

Please I think everyone is misunderstanding me
I was happy in 3+2

Was I not correct in my view that there was an obvious game?

[Cyberyeti]

thepossum, on 2022-October-20, 01:10, said:

Please I think everyone is misunderstanding me
I was happy in 3+2

Was I not correct in my view that there was an obvious game?

Depends on what you mean by obvious, everybody should be in game even if it's not good (you have a nice 13 opposite an opening bid), which one is not clear, and partially system dependent.

I would end up in 4M, but not clear which on your auction.

[dokoko]

thepossum, on 2022-October-20, 01:10, said:

Please I think everyone is misunderstanding me
I was happy in 3+2

Was I not correct in my view that there was an obvious game?

If you want to reach game you have to either bid it or make a forcing rebid.

3♥ is wrong for two reasons:

1. It promises additional heart length. Your partner would have raised with support, so it seems you belong elsewhere.
2. It is nonforcing. So partner will pass when he has no extras. As you (should) want to be in game, you should bid something else.

There is a solution to that. When you want to force and have no good natural bid to do so, bid opponent's suit. This asks partner to help you. It does not say that you are super-strong, but enough for game and looking for the best strain. Partner should then bid 3♥ as he has denied 3-card support before and has neither extra length in his suits nor a club stopper. You may then choose between 4♥ and 4♠. What you shouldn't do in such situations is pass 3♥ after your cuebid; partner has not denied extras.

[thepossum]

The majority using the system were in 3+2. I think many struggled
I am happy with those who took a plunge into one of the majors
I almost went for spades but my system would have required spades to show 4 not 3 - that was where I went wrong
I was less happy with the one who who gambled on 3NT and managed to make

Its easy to say force but into what

But I reckon, given the nature of the hands 3+2 isn't bad

[nullve]

---

3♣: cheapest GF bid (2N, 3♦ and 3♥ would all be NF)
3♥: 2c support, definitely fewer than six diamonds, likely 4243 (but could have bid 3♦ with 4252, I guess)
3♠: likely 3c support and doubts about 3N (but maybe Responder would bid this way also with 4c support if worried that 1♦-(2♣)-2♥; 2♠-3♠ would have been NF)
4♠: spades good enough even opposite 3c support, doubts about 3N, no significant extras (so 12-14 hcp if 4243)

[AL78]

thepossum, on 2022-October-22, 05:45, said:

The majority using the system were in 3+2. I think many struggled
I am happy with those who took a plunge into one of the majors
I almost went for spades but my system would have required spades to show 4 not 3 - that was where I went wrong
I was less happy with the one who who gambled on 3NT and managed to make

Its easy to say force but into what

But I reckon, given the nature of the hands 3+2 isn't bad

You make a bid which is forcing to game, then you can have a discussion about which game. 3♣ forces to game and asks partner for more information about their hand. Nullve's example auction shows how to narrow in on a game, you choose game in one of your seven card fits once it becomes established the clubs are wide open (i.e. when neither of you can bid 3NT).

[bluenikki]

nullve, on 2022-October-22, 06:20, said:

---

3♣: cheapest GF bid (2N, 3♦ and 3♥ would all be NF)

Cheapest shmeapest. It's the only forcing bid. Period.