[awm]

Partner opens 1♦ (standard, usually 4+ but could be 3 if balanced). RHO bids 3♣ preemptive. You're favorable at IMP scoring.

Scoring: IMP

---

[mike777]

pass....no problem...yet

[pbleighton]

Clearly there is a story here. Pass seems so obvious.

Peter

[hrothgar]

awm, on Dec 16 2006, 10:35 AM, said:

Partner opens 1♦ (standard, usually 4+ but could be 3 if balanced). RHO bids 3♣ preemptive. You're favorable at IMP scoring.

Scoring: IMP

---

Mark me down for pass as well, though I'm a bit worried.

I have short Clubs and a Diamond fit.
Its going to be very difficult for partner to balance.

My Diamond length will probably prevent him from being able to bid 3NT
If he has good shape and good values he might be able to bid bid 3♠ say a 4=1=5=3 hand. However, here once again my Diamond length makes me suspicious.

My real worry is that he has a balanced 19 count. Possible a 3=2=4=4 pattern (worse yet a 2=3=4=4 pattern). We could easily be missing 4♥ is the latter holds true.

I think that pass is the right thing to do. I just don't have the strength for a negative double. Hell, I'm too light to show my Diamond support. However, I have a very ugly feeling that we're going to defend 3♣ when 4♥ is cold.

[awm]

After considering 3♦, I (like the majority on the poll so far) decided to pass. At this point LHO jumped to 6♣! Everyone passed, and the full hand was:

Scoring: IMP

---

Our result: -1390. Is this a good score? Well it's hard to say. The opponents are cold for seven in either black suit. We are losing only three tricks in a diamond contract. So the question becomes whether the opponents would bid spades (and how high) if we tried to sacrifice in diamonds. If I were to have bid 3♦, partner would take the 6♦ sacrifice over 6♣, which would either get us a -300 (great score) or just push the opponents into a spade contract or 7♣ (likely a bad score).

In any case, what happened at the other table was truly unfortunate. The auction started the same, 1♦-3♣ (does everyone bid 3♣ on this hand? I might've bid 2♣ myself). In any case, for some unknown reason the person holding my South hand (a not-very-good client playing with a pro) decided to bid 3♥. West bid 3♠ and North jumped to 4NT (RKC). Now the East player decided that with both opponents showing good hands, partner's 3♠ bid must've just been lead directional with a club raise, and holding so much defense for her preempt she decided to pass. South bid 5♦ (zero keycards) and this passed out. So our teammates brought back +50, for lose 16 on the board! We lost this match in the swiss teams by 4 IMPs with this being the only substantial minus.

There are a lot of possible criticisms of the various actions (at both tables) although I think 6♣ was honestly a pretty good bid (partner could have ♥A or K for a vulnerable preempt without the top trump honors, in which case 6♣ is cold, and if not South will have a hard opening lead problem with few values and no obvious reason to lead a heart). In any case it seems a psych (or was it a psych? it seems maybe south just didn't know what he was doing) payed off big time. Quite an exciting board!

[mike777]

hmm pard bids 3clubs at unfav vul and I pass 5d with 7-4 and ak of clubs?

[cherdano]

mike777, on Dec 16 2006, 07:22 PM, said:

hmm pard bids 3clubs at unfav vul and I pass 5d with 7-4 and ak of clubs?

Yeah this seems a big position. I don't understand why Adam starts explaining East's pass over 4N. Yes, he hasn't described his hand very well, but certainly he isn't entitled to bid anything.

Re the 3♣ bid: I think you are a lighter overcaller at the 2-level than most, Adam, and in the style I prefer it's a bit too weak. While 3♣ is extremely ugly, I think it would be my choice.

[the hog]

Alice in Wonderland bidding again. 3C is awful with that C suit and the defensive Queens. A 2C overcall would be no better. 6C is another very average bid instead of showing the S.

[helene_t]

6♣ is a good bid imho. A more descriptive auction may help opps find the heart lead when that is necesary to beat the contract.

[Cascade]

The_Hog, on Dec 17 2006, 10:26 AM, said:

Alice in Wonderland bidding again. 3C is awful with that C suit and the defensive Queens. A 2C overcall would be no better. 6C is another very average bid instead of showing the S.

6♣ is worse than average.

3♠ seems to be an easy choice. You can easily imagine even bidding a grand slam after 3♠ and a raise and then there is plenty of room to find a first round heart control. This is all from West's perspective over 3♣ not the actual auction and hand.

About 3♣ I'd be unhappy passing with 10 points and a six-card suit so I would have to bid something. 2♣ is better than 3♣ saving a lot when it is doesn't work out. Actually I can't bid 3♣ since that shows a two-suiter for me.

[mikeh]

Jlall, on Dec 16 2006, 01:54 PM, said:

wow...3C...wow...

a perfect descripton of a bad call... I'm surprised that the 3♣ call (unfavourable with those side Qx holdings.... ) got treated so lightly in the comments.

[reisig]

a few "nice" pills would be needed

[awm]

As always a lot depends on preempt style. As for bidding 6♣:

(1) If partner has nothing in hearts, then bidding 6♣ directly will usually make. The person on opening lead is unlikely to have any real reason to lead a heart over a spade or diamond. Starting with 3♠ eliminates one suit as a possible lead, and the subsequent bidding may steer the opening leader towards a heart.

(2) If partner has Kx or singleton in hearts, then you'll probably get to 6♣ (and make it) no matter what. The only danger is that the opening leader has spade length and manages to give his partner a ruff at trick one (with or without a lightner double) to set. A direct 6♣ avoids this possibility.

(3) If partner has ♥A, then the direct 6♣ misses a grand.

There are also some cases where you play 6♣ instead of 6♠ (both making) but I think this is a very small IMP difference and there is a danger of the trick one club ruff in a spade contract.

Honestly I think bidding 3♠ has relatively little to recommend it. An interesting suggestion though, is to bid 5♥ exclusion, which should virtually eliminate the chances of a heart lead, and then follow it up with 7♣. Then again, clever opponents may be on to this ploy.

[whereagles]

mikeh, on Dec 18 2006, 04:25 PM, said:

Jlall, on Dec 16 2006, 01:54 PM, said:

wow...3C...wow...

a perfect descripton of a bad call... I'm surprised that the 3♣ call (unfavourable with those side Qx holdings.... ) got treated so lightly in the comments.

I'm sure Zia would be delighted to bid 3♣ in order to make all of his Qx's