[thepossum]

Dear all

Recently Ive started becoming a bit more aggressive competing over premptive bids such as weak 2s and 3s. Recently I had to bid the following over a 3-level response to a weak two. I was quite sure I had a bid and most of the guidelines I have read suggest that with a hand like this, strong hcps, no shortage of opponents suit, no long suit, stoppers in opponents suit that many of the bids are not available to me (eg cues, leaping michaals etc). Also most advice is for direct seat bids. I took that as possibly still applying over a relatively weak response.

I decided I had three options - pass, 3NT or double (penalties or takeout). I wasnt sure about the double and felt that there was a chance of game and didnt want to pass.

What do people think of the options. How would a double have worked with North (I think it ends in 4S, tricky with this deal). Fortunately 3NT worked welll on this hand but I wasnt confident with short clubs despite a good hand. Are there options for N if they dont like 3NT - for example transferring to a major.

Note it was last hand in an IMPs tourney and I needed some points but I would happy for any good guidance since im not very confident competing against preempts

regards P

---

[The_Badger]

Obvious comment: pre-empts (and raising pre-empts) are designed to make life difficult for the intervening players. This is a good hand for illustration in my view as your in the 4th position, the most difficult one even though you have some clues about the distribution. From your ♥ holding there's a very good likelihood that North will have at least a five card suit, maybe two, in ♣s, ♦s or ♠s.

However tempting it is to double, I don't believe it's right to try to bid North's cards for them: you haven't got shortage in ♥s so double would be telling a lie. I'm a firm believer of the late Rixi Markus's maxim of bidding what is in your hand, so I, too, would be bidding 3NT with your hand.

[TylerE]

The problem with 3N on this hand is that you know the defense is gonna start off by playing 4 heart tricks, which gives you zero room to maneuver. It could work, but I'm not feeling that great about it. Basically need to catch partner on a max.

[thepossum]

Thx Badger

P

[rmnka447]

3 NT might not play so good if the ♦ Q and ♣ Q were switched.

[Cyberyeti]

 rmnka447, on 2019-January-26, 16:07, said:

3 NT might not play so good if the ♦ Q and ♣ Q were switched.

While 6♠ is decent if trumps are 3-2 or stiff J.

I wouldn't criticise the auction particularly.

[thepossum]

 TylerE, on 2019-January-25, 22:29, said:

The problem with 3N on this hand is that you know the defense is gonna start off by playing 4 heart tricks, which gives you zero room to maneuver. It could work, but I'm not feeling that great about it. Basically need to catch partner on a max.

Yes, it was lucky that it worked on this hand. Under different circumstances I may well have passed. It was a bit of a risk take to recover a bad IMP score. It was a case of bad -> worse score or a bad -> acceptable score. In this case I was lucky

Depending on situation, tournament, partner I would consider a pass.

I guess its also risky being 4th hand since the stoppers (despite being quite good) under long suit may not work. I think they needed to be very solid stops and JTxx I felt was good enough

[thepossum]

Thx everyone

It was a definite calculated risk. Even with such a good hand I knew there was a chance of at least -1. It would still have scored reasonably well, or not scored badly I think but I was looking for a reasonable positive score

Quite a few tables doubled (off shape) and ended up in 4S which I think does have a play but must be quite difficult since it tended to go down 1 trick, and I was concerned that north may leave a double for penalaties

[Cyberyeti]

 thepossum, on 2019-January-26, 20:32, said:

Thx everyone

It was a definite calculated risk. Even with such a good hand I knew there was a chance of at least -1. It would still have scored reasonably well, or not scored badly I think but I was looking for a reasonable positive score

Quite a few tables doubled (off shape) and ended up in 4S which I think does have a play but must be quite difficult since it tended to go down 1 trick, and I was concerned that north may leave a double for penalaties

4♠ should make most of the time if you're careful and don't draw trumps (diamond lead cramps your entries somewhat, but easy on club or heart, if E doesn't split his honours when you play a club and return a trump I think you can make 11 on a heart lead), but you will make 10 tricks in no trumps so will beat the score in spades almost all the time.

[pescetom]

If partner can't double then 3NT shows your cards, you probably have a spades or diamonds fit anyway.
I doubt this was the most difficult decision of the evening

[neilkaz]

 TylerE, on 2019-January-25, 22:29, said:

The problem with 3N on this hand is that you know the defense is gonna start off by playing 4 heart tricks, which gives you zero room to maneuver. It could work, but I'm not feeling that great about it. Basically need to catch partner on a max.

You mean 3♥ tricks since declarer will split his honors.

[neilkaz]

 thepossum, on 2019-January-26, 20:32, said:

Thx everyone

It was a definite calculated risk. Even with such a good hand I knew there was a chance of at least -1. It would still have scored reasonably well, or not scored badly I think but I was looking for a reasonable positive score

Quite a few tables doubled (off shape) and ended up in 4S which I think does have a play but must be quite difficult since it tended to go down 1 trick, and I was concerned that north may leave a double for penalaties

North is often void in ♥ on this auction and had better not leave in a T/O double for penalties at the 3 level. I'd try 3NT with your hand also.

[TylerE]

 neilkaz, on 2019-January-27, 18:21, said:

You mean 3♥ tricks since declarer will split his honors.

No, 4 heart tricks. The defense only wins 3, but odds are if the defense gets in again it'll be the hand with the 5th (6th) heart.

[Stephen Tu]

Uh no, 2 heart tricks, if opener doesn't have entry, if the defenders are at all competent. Why would they freeze themselves out of running the suit? They take 2 tricks then switch assuming likely case of rho 3 to one honor.

But regardless it's a hope that somehow there are nine tricks off the top in the other suits. Would probably take a simulation to figure out whether 3nt wins or not on average vs double.

[thepossum]

 Stephen Tu, on 2019-January-27, 22:06, said:

Would probably take a simulation to figure out whether 3nt wins or not on average vs double.

I just did a very crude simulation (out of interest). I gave West 6 hearts and 5-10 HCPs and East 3 hearts and no constraints on HCPs, with heart lead, 4th highest

After a 1000 hands mean number of tricks in NT is approx. 9.2 and chance of making contract is approx 74%. But as I said it was a crude sim (and overestimate) so true chance would be lower and depend on better parameters and more accurate constraints on distribution (eg location of high cards, and leads). Also there is a large variance of number of tricks with standard deviation of 1.6 and range from 4 to 13 tricks. However obviously the extremes are unrealistic

P

EDIT If W has AQ and E has K, average tricks is approx 9, chance of making is approx 73%, range is 4-10 tricks. Better sim

Even giving East 7+ points still gives approx 65% with mean 8.75

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

3NT is a practical bid.
It still leaves open the possiblity to find 4S, e.g. if partner has 5+ spades (*),
and it avoids some awkward situations, if partner responds 4m to my TOX, he
cannot have a heart stopper.

(*) Since you asked:
A common agreement after a 3NT overcall is to play system on, i.e. 4C would be
Stayman, 4H would be xfer.
If you want to go scientific, 4D is also a xfer.
The difference between the xfer in their suit, and the other:
The xfer in our suit is either weak or really strong, the xfer in their suit is
inv. strength, whatever this means in the given context.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Cyberyeti]

 P_Marlowe, on 2019-January-30, 06:13, said:

Hi,

3NT is a practical bid.
It still leaves open the possiblity to find 4S, e.g. if partner has 5+ spades (*),
and it avoids some awkward situations, if partner responds 4m to my TOX, he
cannot have a heart stopper.

(*) Since you asked:
A common agreement after a 3NT overcall is to play system on, i.e. 4C would be
Stayman, 4H would be xfer.
If you want to go scientific, 4D is also a xfer.
The difference between the xfer in their suit, and the other:
The xfer in our suit is either weak or really strong, the xfer in their suit is
inv. strength, whatever this means in the given context.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Interesting, I'm used to bidding 3N as often as not with a running minor and a heart stop, making few guarantees about my spade holding and would not expect partner to move with a 5 card spade suit

[thepossum]

 P_Marlowe, on 2019-January-30, 06:13, said:

Hi,

3NT is a practical bid.
It still leaves open the possiblity to find 4S, e.g. if partner has 5+ spades (*),
and it avoids some awkward situations, if partner responds 4m to my TOX, he
cannot have a heart stopper.

(*) Since you asked:
A common agreement after a 3NT overcall is to play system on, i.e. 4C would be
Stayman, 4H would be xfer.
If you want to go scientific, 4D is also a xfer.
The difference between the xfer in their suit, and the other:
The xfer in our suit is either weak or really strong, the xfer in their suit is
inv. strength, whatever this means in the given context.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Thankyou

Regards P