[ArtK78]

You were doing well in the Barometer Final in a Regional Open Pairs. After having qualified by the skin of your teeth, you moved up from 26th best carryover score (out of 28 pairs) as high as second place about 14 boards into the 26 board final. Unfortunately, things haven't gone so well lately, and you are back down to 7th place with 4 boards to go.

At both vul, you pick up this hand:

Scoring: MP

(1♣) - 1♥ - (2♣) - 2♦
(3♣) - ?

---

Your action?

[Jlall]

How far back from first am I? Do I care about any position other than first? Hard to say what to do without knowing those things.

If I judged that I absolutely needed a top and didn't care about anything else I would crack them.

[ArtK78]

Unfortunately, one pair is so far out in front of everyone else that, when you were second several rounds earlier, you were closer to 15th than you were to first.

Second place is about a board in front of you.

[ArtK78]

I am disappointed that this problem did not generate any responses other than Justin's conditional response. I found this problem to be very interesting. And while I am sure that not too many South's faced the problem that my partner faced, many got this one wrong.

Here is the whole hand:

Scoring: MP

(1♣) - 1♥ - (2♣) - 2♦
(3♣) - 3♥ - All Pass

---

As Deep Finesse accurately pointed out, the winning contract is 4♠ by EW which is cold for 5 on any defense. But that contract was not in play at our table. The key was South's action at his second turn to call.

I was sitting North. I made the lead directing bid of 2♦. Whether you agree or disagree with that call, note that it takes a diamond lead to beat 3NT and it also takes a diamond lead to hold clubs to 10 tricks.

My partner bid 3♥ over 3♣, resulting in -200, a below average score. This result was duplicated by over half of the field. I find the 3♥ call to be bidding the same values bid by the 1♥ overcall (except perhaps for the 6th heart), so I would not have made that call if I held my partner's hand. My partner said he expected my hand to be better. Of course, no mention was made of the fact that I did not raise hearts.

Any comments?

[hanp]

I partly agree with you. I wouldn't bid 3H because the hand has too many losers in the black suits.

As far as "bidding the same values twice", I don't agree with that. South definitely has more values than the 1H bid showed, but more importantly, the heart suit is much better than what 1H showed. With xxxx KQJxxx Ax x I would gladly bid 3H.

I don't play that double of 3C is penalty, and besides, we don't have any tricks.

[whereagles]

confess I would have replicated your pard's error, though I agree afterwards pass is more sensible.

[rhm]

ArtK78, on May 4 2010, 08:56 AM, said:

I am disappointed that this problem did not generate any responses other than Justin's conditional response.  I found this problem to be very interesting.  And while I am sure that not too many South's faced the problem that my partner faced, many got this one wrong.

Here is the whole hand:

Scoring: MP

(1♣) - 1♥ - (2♣) - 2♦
(3♣) - 3♥ - All Pass

---

As Deep Finesse accurately pointed out, the winning contract is 4♠ by EW which is cold for 5 on any defense.  But that contract was not in play at our table.  The key was South's action at his second turn to call.

I was sitting North.  I made the lead directing bid of 2♦.  Whether you agree or disagree with that call, note that it takes a diamond lead to beat 3NT and it also takes a diamond lead to hold clubs to 10 tricks.

My partner bid 3♥ over 3♣, resulting in -200, a below average score.  This result was duplicated by over half of the field.  I find the 3♥ call to be bidding the same values bid by the 1♥ overcall (except perhaps for the 6th heart), so I would not have made that call if I held my partner's hand.  My partner said he expected my hand to be better.  Of course, no mention was made of the fact that I did not raise hearts.

Any comments?

Given your ♦ call, still do you really believe that there are many who would lead a ♦ from the South hand against a black suit contract from East, particularly when North did not raise ♥ ? Do you really believe any one would lead the ♦ ace against 3NT?

The true answer is that, single dummy, game is cold in either black suit or 3NT, if played by East and I sympathize with poor South, who expected this to be a part-score battle after you joined in the bidding. East-West underbid and South reasonably expected more in North's hand.
I am not saying 3H is automatic with the South hand. His ♣ holding is defensive and argues against bidding on.
However you can also argue, that there are 18 total trumps and if they can make 3C why should North/South not make 3H then?
South may not know about 3 card support with North, but he has a good suit and they have a good fit, so North-South should also have one, most likely in ♥.

Unfortunately East will take 11 tricks in clubs.
This is a major problem in the bidding:
How do you distinguish lead-directing bids from genuine value bids?
The true answer is: You often can not.

Rainer Herrmann

[Free]

I'd be glad I didn't get doubled!

[Jlall]

hanp, on May 4 2010, 09:16 AM, said:

I partly agree with you. I wouldn't bid 3H because the hand has too many losers in the black suits.

If partner didn't have a yarborough he would be able to cover some of those losers!

2C is not a strong bid so you can't just bid on yarbs and hope to get away with it, partner is entitled to think you have something.

[Fluffy]

I am a bit late, but I find 3♥ kinda automatic, perhaps I need to think more about this hands in the future

[ArtK78]

rhm, on May 4 2010, 09:35 AM, said:

Given your ♦ call, still do you really believe that there are many who would lead a ♦ from the South hand against a black suit contract from East, particularly when North did not raise ♥ ? Do you really believe any one would lead the ♦ ace against 3NT?

Clearly, the diamond lead is not automatic even after the diamond bid on my part. However, without the diamond bid, the diamond lead would be virtually impossible. And whether or not the diamond bid will produce the desired diamond lead, it will almost certainly prevent the opps from bidding 3NT since they have no diamond stopper.

If pard's 1♥ overcall were slighly weaker (Jx of clubs instead of Qx) then there would have been a realistic chance that the opps would try 3NT. My diamond bid certainly gets in the way of that.

I am interested in opinions about the 2♦ bid. Would you risk it in this situation?

[flytoox]

Fluffy, on May 6 2010, 09:18 PM, said:

I am a bit late, but I find 3♥ kinda automatic, perhaps I need to think more about this hands in the future

You are not alone in this forum, I am sure:)

but I really dont like 2D. it accomplishes nothing.

[helene_t]

I think I would have bid 3♥ also, or maybe double which p will take out to 3♥.

Not so keen on the 2♦ bid but obviously it gave us the chance of avoiding the -200, and it did attract the right lead against 3♣.

[paulg]

I don't blame partner when I make a tactical call that causes him to misjudge.

As many on these forums would consider overcalling on ♥KQJxx and little else, I think that the 3♥ bid is automatic.

Paul