[Hanoi5]

Red vs White:

♠K6xxx
♥J
♦QJx
♣K9xx

1♥ Pa 2♥ ???

Would you bid differently under some other conditions (Vul, scoring)?

[Phil]

I like to compete in spots like this, but this is too rich for my blood. Maybe at NV at MPs.

Are we glad partner doubles in direct seat on 3343 13's?

[mtvesuvius]

I'd pass -- This is too much for even me.

[gnasher]

I'd bid 2♠. This isn't a particulalry dangerous action - LHO won't often have four spades, and if he doesn't they're unlikely to double us.

Quote

Are we glad partner doubles in direct seat on 3343 13's?

Does your partner double with 3433 13-counts as well?

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2010-December-22, 03:41

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

If you have discussed OBAR bids with p and agreed to play those,
X is certainly a reaonable bid.
Undiscussed / playing with a stranger - pass.

For what's it worth - my reg. partner expects me to bid.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[dake50]

2S.
Glad partner won't reopen on 3334-13. To get to 2S/3S.
And won't raise this 2S to 4S.

I would WEASEL my sub-minimum, shotgun my full-values.
How do you distinguish otherwise if quacky 9 w 5143 is in 2S and,
I assume also good 14? Good 17? When does partner raise?
When does partner not raise AND not BIT influenced provably.
Provably: methods are documented for wide-ranging 2S both bidding and passing responses.

[nige1]

Hanoi5, on 2010-December-21, 21:23, said:

Red vs White: ♠ K6xxx ♥ J ♦ QJx ♣ K9xx
1♥ Pa 2♥ ??? Would you bid differently under some other conditions (Vul, scoring)?

dake50, on 2010-December-22, 06:27, said:

2S. Glad partner won't reopen on 3334-13. To get to 2S/3S.
And won't raise this 2S to 4S.
I would WEASEL my sub-minimum, shotgun my full-values.
How do you distinguish otherwise if quacky 9 w 5143 is in 2S and, I assume also good 14? Good 17? When does partner raise? When does partner not raise AND not BIT influenced provably. Provably: methods are documented for wide-ranging 2S both bidding and passing responses.

Dake50 is right
WEASEL (David Stevenson's excellent web site) guarantees safety opposite an expert partner
Directors don't to rule against it
Here, you go into the tank... and eventually emerge with 2♠ to clamp ethical constraints on partner: He can't take any action without the nuts

[whereagles]

Definitely enter. Dbl or 2♠, depending on how hoggish I feel

[Fluffy]

I pass at IMPs, bid at MPs. Not sure what to bid, 2♠ will often lead to us playing 3♠ wich I don't particulary want, so double better.

[mfa1010]

Pass. I have a moth-eaten suit in a moth-eaten hand. If I bid with this there will be three opponents out there waiting to axe me.

[mikeh]

If I knew that partner would play me for this, I'd bid because I think being able to get in on this hand is winning strategy provided that partner will play me for it. But my partners will and imo should play me for a better spade suit and hence will compete too much on many hands. I'm going to go for a few 500's...not at the 2 level but at the 3 or 4 level...and even more 200's against 110 or 140.

OTOH, there is no doubt that the bidders will have a lot of small triumphs and the occasional big one as well. My gut sense is that the passers will, in the long run, have the better of it not only because of the results on this type of hand but also because when we do hold an 'everyone bids 2♠' type of hand, partner will do the right thing more frequently when he doesn't have to cater to this hand.

[OleBerg]

mfa1010, on 2010-December-22, 09:23, said:

Pass. I have a moth-eaten suit in a moth-eaten hand. If I bid with this there will be three opponents out there waiting to axe me.

You can get used to that.

[AlexJonson]

Pass for me. When I bid this sort of hand, I seem to get exactly the dummy I deserve. I don't deny that just occasionally I might struggle to +110.


As for other vulnerabilities and forms of scoring - might be different.

[gwnn]

2♠, luckily I keep a uniform tempo at the table and the quality of my overcalls is never too high.

[MrAce]

I pass, for the same reason Mikeh explained, especially his last paragraph.

[OleBerg]

Find 2♠ obvious at MP's. I'd still do it at IMP's, but feel less secure.

[mr1303]

I bid 2S only if pre-discussed with partner. It's not that I think that bidding will go for a number here (if it does, then they'll have game), it's more that partner will likely lead a spade, and my suit isn't good enough for that if this is meant to show a normalish overcall.

[l milne]

I think 2♠ at MP is 'obvious'...ly going for 200 a lot of the time. They don't need 4 trumps to double you, you're red and it's MPs!

At IMPs I think 2♠ is also ludicrous, not because of the 200s, but more the 1100s.

[ewleongusa]

Hanoi5, on 2010-December-21, 21:23, said:

Red vs White:

♠K6xxx
♥J
♦QJx
♣K9xx

1♥ Pa 2♥ ???

Would you bid differently under some other conditions (Vul, scoring)?

I would only enter the bidding if I was looking for the 500-800 save against the non vulnerable game.

Eric Leong

[han]

Very interesting hand and discussion. I think that at matchpoints it is very important that the partnership allows 2S on this, and even less. Even when red against white. At IMPs finding good games is a much more important issue and I think we have too little for 2S (though 2S would be automatic when white imo). So pass and hope partner finds an insprired reopening.