[MrAce]

---

IMPs

[Stefan_O]

At imps, i probably raise but very borderline...wish I was vulnerable :)

[akwoo]

Vulnerable at IMPs, you want to be in game opposite

♠ xx
♥ xxxxx
♦ xx
♣ Axxx

Of course you're worth a 3♠ invite. Partner knows to devalue quacks in the rounded suits. I would seriously consider 4♠ vulnerable at IMPs.

[MrAce]

akwoo, on 2016-September-08, 17:59, said:

Vulnerable at IMPs, you want to be in game opposite

♠ xx
♥ xxxxx
♦ xx
♣ Axxx

Of course you're worth a 3♠ invite. Partner knows to devalue quacks in the rounded suits. I would seriously consider 4♠ vulnerable at IMPs.

You lose 4 tricks with the hand you constructed when spades are 3-2, diamond finesse works and K doubleton and when no body ruffs anything.

[akwoo]

MrAce, on 2016-September-08, 18:27, said:

You lose 4 tricks with the hand you constructed when spades are 3-2, diamond finesse works and K doubleton and when no body ruffs anything.

Okay - against good opponents I have to worry about a trump lead or a trump shift after a heart lead. Otherwise, I should be able to ruff at least one diamond on board.

[kenberg]

I raise to 3S. I am not claiming I am right, but I am sure that I would do so.


I am 6-4 and my values are in those suits. I just can't bring myself to pass.

[Kaitlyn S]

kenberg, on 2016-September-08, 19:27, said:

I raise to 3S. I am not claiming I am right, but I am sure that I would do so.


I am 6-4 and my values are in those suits. I just can't bring myself to pass.

I can hear the whines from the players at a bridge club I used to play at: "I only had 13 points!"

I also have 5 losers. 3S seems pretty clear.

[Tramticket]

I'm passing - but I play Acol and 1NT doesn't promise a lot (maximum: a poor 9).

I would be more tempted to invite if vulnerable

[eagles123]

it's close but I think we're just about worth a 3s bid - for a 13 count our hand could hardly be any stronger.

[ahydra]

3S

ahydra

[manudude03]

NV I'm passing. We could be cold opposite the king of diamonds and an ace, but it is likely the opponents would have bid already if that was the case. Meanwhile, even 3S might be too high (xx QJxx xxx KQxx) and the IMPs scale doesn't make it that profitable to try for games (+420 vs +170 is +6 IMPS, -50 vs +140 is -5 IMPS and -50 vs +110 is -4 IMPS). If the opponents come in, I'll compete to 3S.

[billw55]

3♠ for me, plenty of hands partner can have that make four.

[ggwhiz]

I'm passing and prepared for it to be wrong.

If partner has a club suit or soft values there game feels like 50-50 at best, a take it or leave it game at these colors. With this shape the opponents may balance to their regret if partner makes any encouraging noise over it.

[mike777]

sure 3s.


If you dont really like your hand then I would rebid 2s not 2d.

[MrAce]

Thanks all. I raised to 3♠

Pd had ♦K and ♥A and he bid 4.

[Stefan_O]

Kaitlyn S, on 2016-September-08, 19:48, said:

I can hear the whines from the players at a bridge club I used to play at: "I only had 13 points!"

I also have 5 losers. 3S seems pretty clear.

5.5 if you count adjusted.
It's really the Jacks -- ignored by LTC -- that make this hand so darn good-looking.

[rmnka447]

With a 5 loser hand, I'm raising to 3 ♠.

Partner is likely to have at least 2 ♠, but can't take further action because your hand could be something like ♠ AQxxx xx AJxx xx.

So, it's important to invite with this big player you hold and give partner a chance to bid on with useful values.

If 1 NT is NF (as seems to be indicated here), partner could have up to a decent 9 count. Partner will know you've got something like a chunky 5-4 or the player you have to invite game, so is well placed to go on with helpful cards.