[jillybean]

---

[DavidKok]

.

[DavidKok]

Spoiler

It's probably just game, but I'll bid 3♥ to not get in the way of a slam try.

[jillybean]

Tell me about your hand evaluation

[Cyberyeti]

jillybean, on 2025-March-21, 13:50, said:

Tell me about your hand evaluation

Opposite a 5 card major, I bid 3♠ first time

[jillybean]

Cyberyeti, on 2025-March-21, 13:52, said:

Opposite a 5 card major, I bid 3♠ first time

Yeah, ok, but you didn't. 3♠ would be weak and you don't have a method to show this 4 card raise.

[DavidKok]

Spoiler

For a baseline, simple Modified Losing Trick Count. 3 in spades, 1 in hearts, 1.5 in diamonds, 3 in clubs, makes 8.5. Adjust by 1 for the extra trump, 7.5. Partner's opening shows 7.5, that makes 15, 25-15=10 tricks, I want to be in game.
2♠ last round was too conservative, but other calls don't appeal too much either. At any rate, we survived.

Now for the more nuanced hand evaluation. Our ♠J is positive, but not included in MLTC. Partner not bidding our short suit is positive. Having three empy clubs is negative. The ♥A is positive, the rest of that suit is complicated. We will get back to it.

Two questions: why is nobody bidding diamonds, and what is partner's shape? The first question: we have 9 (or more) spades, so the opponents have an 8(+) card fit. We know it's not in spades or clubs. It is very unlikely to be in hearts. So it's in diamonds. They aren't bidding it because they're weak, or West has the longer suit and didn't dare to brave the 3-level.
That's good news. It increases the expected points partner has.
Now for the second question, the shape. Partner's most likely distribution is 5=1=3=4, but other shapes (notably 5=1=2=5, 5=0=4=4, 6=0=3=4 and 6=1=2=4) are plausible, as are even more extreme shapes with decreasing likelihood. Opposite those hands the ♥Q is likely wasted. Bad news. But the singleton of diamonds is useful.
Adding this all up, I think there's slightly more negatives than positives. We have a 'bad 7.5 loser hand'. I think a 4♦ splinter last round would have been too aggressive.
Final inference: 3♣ is two-way: game try or slam try. If partner has the game try I'm bidding 4 - I've got too much. If partner has the slam try I'm cooperating but not forcing to slam - it's a bad 7.5 loser hand for slam. We likely need the clubs to come in in 6♠, as it is improbable that we can set up the hearts to pitch partner's clubs. But I'm still cooperating, our hand is very strong for 2♠. The hand evaluation for slam purposes is more complicated than what I've said so far, but we'll cross that bridge if partner makes a slam try next round.

[mw64ahw]

jillybean, on 2025-March-21, 14:00, said:

Yeah, ok, but you didn't. 3♠ would be weak and you don't have a method to show this 4 card raise.

3♠ is pre-emptive & 3♥ shows this weak mixed raise for me.

[jillybean]

mw64ahw, on 2025-March-21, 16:52, said:

3♠ is pre-emptive & 3♥ shows this weak mixed raise for me.

This is the N/B forum, you are limited in your agreements.
Think Std Am YC
https://web2.acbl.or...y/sayc_card.pdf

[bluenikki]

mw64ahw, on 2025-March-21, 16:52, said:

3♠ is pre-emptive & 3♥ shows this weak mixed raise for me.

This is not repeat not a weak mixed raise.

[mw64ahw]

bluenikki, on 2025-March-21, 20:05, said:

This is not repeat not a weak mixed raise.

It is for me; it says nothing about ♥. It sounds like the op. doesn't want me to use this type of raise, but is happy to talk about game tries in the N/B forum.

I bid a straight 3♠ as per SAYC so game tries don't come into the equation. The hand has 9 points to start plus an extra one+ for the 4-card suit and singleton after revaluation, so limit raise territory.

[Cyberyeti]

mw64ahw, on 2025-March-21, 16:52, said:

3♠ is pre-emptive & 3♥ shows this weak mixed raise for me.

Then your hand evaluation is way off, this is well worth a limit raise and possibly more, you really don't need that much opposite. AKQxx, Jxx, xxxx, x is plenty, I would prefer 4♠ to 2♠ or 3♥.

[mw64ahw]

Cyberyeti, on 2025-March-22, 04:03, said:

Then your hand evaluation is way off, this is well worth a limit raise and possibly more, you really don't need that much opposite. AKQxx, Jxx, xxxx, x is plenty, I would prefer 4♠ to 2♠ or 3♥.

No it's spot on. I distinguish a mixed from limit raise by the number of HCP, but both will have at least 8.5 mod. losers and at least 4-card support. Occasionally the differentiation can be key when considering a slam try.

[jillybean]

mw64ahw, on 2025-March-21, 21:59, said:

It is for me; it says nothing about ♥. It sounds like the op. doesn't want me to use this type of raise, but is happy to talk about game tries in the N/B forum.

I bid a straight 3♠ as per SAYC so game tries don't come into the equation. The hand has 9 points to start plus an extra one+ for the 4-card suit and singleton after revaluation, so limit raise territory.

These hands have been sent to me from improving players in my game.
Some use few conventions and are moving from 1M 2M 3M game tries to 1M 2M 3x natural game try. If they chose to bid 2M with this hand and partner makes a natural gt, they need to reevaluate their hand. This is an automatic game for me and I can explain how I evaluate my hand but I find it helpful to hear and perhaps share how others evaluate their hands.
And perhaps too, we need to talk about the initial response. I remember how I struggled with SAYC , 1M 3M is awful

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

you have a max. for a single raise, which showes 6-10, you have 7HCP + shortage + 9th tump,
..., you accept.
It is as simple as that.

The game try first anfd formemost asks, are you min or max.
The type of the game try only comes into play in the borderline cases, when you need to decide,
what to do, if you happen to be in middle, which would be 8, assuming the simple raise showes 6-10.
The shortage and the 9th trumps raises you above the middle.
If you want you could sell the hand as inv. raise, but this is another discussion and opening
style comes into play.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[bluenikki]

mw64ahw, on 2025-March-21, 21:59, said:

It is for me;

It covers four potential losers. Only the opponents need to know whether that is from high cards or shortness.

It is nothing weak.

[blackshoe]

Bergen game try.

[jillybean]

P_Marlowe, on 2025-March-22, 13:10, said:

Hi,

you have a max. for a single raise, which showes 6-10, you have 7HCP + shortage + 9th tump,
..., you accept.
It is as simple as that

I will stick with this and not complicate things.
I should have been clearer with my question, this isn't about game tries but rather to reevaluate your hand after partner makes a game try.
Sorry if I shut some contributors down.

---

2♠ is already conservative, accept the game try!

Much like defences to nt, I've tried many game tries and I like the kokish game try with the added 1M 2M 3M - I've opened on 5 to the 10, can you help?

[pescetom]

Just read the thread, find myself somewhere in the middle for once.
I would have bid the 4♦ splinter, not so worried as DavidKok about their reluctance to bid diamonds.
I do not like 2♠ but if partner did bid 3♣ then Wild Horses (@mikeh do you still read here?) would not make me bid game at MP.

[jillybean]

pescetom, on 2025-March-22, 16:45, said:

Just read the thread, find myself somewhere in the middle for once.
I would have bid the 4♦ splinter, not so worried as DavidKok about their reluctance to bid diamonds.
I do not like 2♠ and if partner did bid 3♣ then Wild Horses (@mikeh do you still read here?) would not make me bid game.

"would not make me bid game."

Huh? please explain your wimpiness