[pescetom]

MP

---

Unknown opponents open 2♠, described as natural and weak.
It gets passed around to you, what is your call?
Please reply to the poll and add any thoughts or explanation of your call here.

[helene_t]

This is the ideal hand for double followed by 3♥.

Maybe I'm not so thrilled about the prospect that partner might pass. If opps can be trusted to be lawful, partner has 5+ spades so will pass it more often than not. I think that's ok. With no low honours in hearts I have a reasonably low O-D.

[pilowsky]

I'm going for 2NT.
I want my partner to know that I have 15+.
There seems to be a fashion these days to open a weak two on almost anything (the 'unknown opponents' line is a tease). GIB tends to preempt heavy. Players under 30 tend to preempt with nearly nothing. I don't know how to bid at all...
Even if East has say AK6542, then odds are that QJT98763 will divide fairly between W and S.
I have the other suits well stopped and if partner has ♠ stopped and something else to offer they can up the ante.
Looking forward to the next instalment.

Edit: And of course, everyone else is right and I'm wrong - this is the next hand that came up!
Not quite the same, but this post was ringing in my eyes - as it were.
I make -1.3 IMP's for 2NT+3

---

Double gets people to 3NT or 6♦

[gszes]

enough defense to make 2sx a possible winner (at these colors) and x is far more flexible for slam bidding purposes if p has no interest in 2sx.

[johnu]

pilowsky, on 2020-September-03, 18:54, said:

I'm going for 2NT.

GIB is the only partner who would understand 2NT. Well, maybe not understand, but not make a nasty comment about your bidding.

[helene_t]

I find 2NT weird.

Of course it might work - partner will probably bid 3NT and sometimes this will be better than 2♠X.

But it is extremely misdecriptive. And if partner has a good 6-card spades, he might think that we have forgotten that U2NT doesn't apply here, since he can see in his own hand that we can't have a real 2NT call.

[mikeh]

Double seems clear, even though I strain to avoid doubling With a void in their suit. It is often very important to lead a trump through declarer at least once, in order to minimize the end plays that a sound declarer will be attempting in the trump suit.

But here, while my hand isn’t perfect for defending, there really is no other plausible choice. The hand is too strong and too flexible for 3H, and the heart suit isn’t good enough for 4H which, btw, shows a GOOD hand, not a preempt. A good rule is that one does not preempt over an opponent’s preempt. Make my hand the same as it is, but move a club into the hearts, and that would be a 4H call for me (tho on the heavy side)

Here, I hope we’re playing lebensohl, which not everyone plays by a passed hand. I say this because if partner bids a constructive 3C (yes, I’m dreaming), I’m driving to slam and looking for grand. Otherwise, unless partner passes, I’m pulling 2N or 3D to 3H, showing a flexible hand too strong to overcall.

I’m also pulling 3N to 4H, sending the same message, allowing partner to perhaps evaluate for slam

In essence, I’ve simply agreed with Helene, albeit (as usual) at considerably more length😀

[pescetom]

Thanks all who replied so far.
Here is the complete diagram:

---

This was the last board of a tournament that had not gone as well as hoped and the temptation to just declare 4♥ was strong. But I figured the hearts weren't quite enough and if partner had a strong black suit then I might be kicking myself, so better to get her involved in the decision. I doubled, partner passed and we collected 300 which was 35% at MP.

About half the scores were 420/450 for 48%/75%. That left me wondering if we had done the right thing, hence the post. Of course at many if not most tables North will get to open 1♥ here and at that point 4♥ is plain sailing unless they find the diamond lead.

[Cyberyeti]

The problem is not the auction, it's that you didn't extract the available 500 although it is tricky and in practice may demand a club lead. 4♥ is not great, but in practice will probably get help from the lead, if spades are never played and the defence go completely passive it will be a real problem to make.

[pescetom]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-September-04, 06:58, said:

The problem is not the auction, it's that you didn't extract the available 500.

Correct too. Partner led hearts.

[Vampyr]

pescetom, on 2020-September-04, 07:03, said:

Correct too. Partner lead hearts.

Does it really matter what partner LED? Declarer is never getting to dummy to enjoy the third heart.

In any case I wouldn’t even mind getting a bad board against a pair who consider this a weak two. On balance I will gain against this style.

[Cyberyeti]

Vampyr, on 2020-September-04, 07:35, said:

Does it really matter what partner LED? Declarer is never getting to dummy to enjoy the third heart.

In any case I wouldn’t even mind getting a bad board against a pair who consider this a weak two. On balance I will gain against this style.

Yes it does, he has a diamond entry by force (overtake the J with the K after playing small to the 9), and if partner leads a low diamond at trick 1, you have to win the Q and if declarer unblocks the J return the 8 to prevent it being useful at the right time.

[pescetom]

Vampyr, on 2020-September-04, 07:35, said:

Does it really matter what partner LED?

It certainly does. It's fairly trivial for defence to take 8 tricks after a lead of A♠, impossible after a lead of hearts (and tricky after diamonds as cyberyeti says).

Vampyr, on 2020-September-04, 07:35, said:

In any case I wouldn’t even mind getting a bad board against a pair who consider this a weak two. On balance I will gain against this style.

I wasn't impressed, although I have seen worse. The opening was announced as "weak" which in our RA is reserved for 6cards 6-10 HCP, so I had some ground to protest but decided against it.

[pilowsky]

pescetom, on 2020-September-04, 06:55, said:

Thanks all who replied so far.
Here is the complete diagram:

---

This was the last board of a tournament that had not gone as well as hoped and the temptation to just declare 4♥ was strong. But I figured the hearts weren't quite enough and if partner had a strong black suit then I might be kicking myself, so better to get her involved in the decision. I doubled, partner passed and we collected 300 which was 35% at MP.

About half the scores were 420/450 for 48%/75%. That left me wondering if we had done the right thing, hence the post. Of course at many if not most tables North will get to open 1♥ here and at that point 4♥ is plain sailing unless they find the diamond lead.

So, what call did others make to achieve a better result?

[pilowsky]

pescetom, on 2020-September-04, 09:46, said:

It certainly does. It's fairly trivial for defence to take 8 tricks after a lead of A♠, impossible after a lead of hearts (and tricky after diamonds as cyberyeti says).



I wasn't impressed, although I have seen worse. The opening was announced as "weak" which in our RA is reserved for 6cards 6-10 HCP, so I had some ground to protest but decided against it.

Is the call a 'gross misstatement' of the hand? I suspect you didn't protest because you knew how far you would get!

[mikeh]

pilowsky, on 2020-September-04, 15:04, said:

So, what call did others make to achieve a better result?

Why do you think that the result was driven by the call made by the big hand?

In any mp field, those who open 2S on that hand will be in the minority. Had dealer passed, the field breezes into game and will usually be allowed to make, specially since most easts would lead a spade. Thus scoring less than the value of a game will be a bad r3sult


FWIW, my lead against 2S x’d would be a top spade, since I want to see dummy. See8ng dummy, I cash all 4 trump, and partner will direct me to switch to a club. Careful defence thereafter easily nets 500

[pilowsky]

mikeh, on 2020-September-04, 15:21, said:

Why do you think that the result was driven by the call made by the big hand?

In any mp field, those who open 2S on that hand will be in the minority. Had dealer passed, the field breezes into game and will usually be allowed to make, specially since most easts would lead a spade. Thus scoring less than the value of a game will be a bad r3sult


FWIW, my lead against 2S x'd would be a top spade, since I want to see dummy. See8ng dummy, I cash all 4 trump, and partner will direct me to switch to a club. Careful defence thereafter easily nets 500

I have no idea. But someone else did a similar thing to me once. The Director was Australia's number 1 player. He was impressed by the call.
Why do you think it is unreasonable to know what the rest of the field did to inform your thinking about the result?
Don't you examine the traveller at the end of a tournament?

[mikeh]

pilowsky, on 2020-September-04, 15:31, said:

Don't you examine the traveller at the end of a tournament?

No

[Vampyr]

pescetom, on 2020-September-04, 09:46, said:

It certainly does. It's fairly trivial for defence to take 8 tricks after a lead of A♠, impossible after a lead of hearts (and tricky after diamonds as cyberyeti says).

Yes, I was thinking about this earlier today and realised that the heart lead deprives North of an exit card.

Quote

I wasn't impressed, although I have seen worse. The opening was announced as "weak" which in our RA is reserved for 6cards 6-10 HCP, so I had some ground to protest but decided against it.

In that case they should definitely improve their disclosure. It would be a good bid if the honours were in ♠; I wish players were expected to disclose deviant preempt style.

[sfi]

pescetom, on 2020-September-04, 09:46, said:

I wasn't impressed, although I have seen worse. The opening was announced as "weak" which in our RA is reserved for 6cards 6-10 HCP, so I had some ground to protest but decided against it.

Is there really no latitude for judgement, where a player can decide an extra trump makes up for a missing stray jack? Or is it simply that you would want them to announce it slightly differently?