Wrong but right, or is that right but wrong

[kenberg]

Oliver's lesson on doubles featured a number of interesting hands. P0stm0rtem and I chatted briefly about one of them, and I have thought a little more.

I believe my hand was
void
AKQJ932
KJ93
A5

I have just made up the spot cards but I think the honor cards are right and I think the 9 was there. I was dealer, I don't recall the vulnerability.

It's true that if partner has as little as the Q  I can take ten tricks. It's also true that if partner has the KQJx of spades, or even the AKQx of spades, and nothing else, I can only make 8 tricks. Different people approach this differently, but I opened 1 . This was greeted by 3 on my left, which they played as a black two-suiter. Things are looking up.

I'll give you more of the auction as I recall it.

1   3     P    3
4   4   5   5


I bid 6 here which I now think is a terrible call. But let's see where it goes.

I did not give as much thought as I should have to partner's 5D. Surely he has some heart support. It's very hard to think of a hand where he simply wants to play in diamonds, can come in with diamonds at the 5 level, but could not come in with diamonds at the 3 level. So he has hearts. Carrying this one step further, he does not need all that much length in diamonds. With heart support and the auction so far, he might very well expect more competition in the black suits. He is letting me know that if/when we decide to double some number of spades, we might well want to start the defense with a diamond.

As it turns out, partner has five diamonds to the AQ and three hearts. So we have 13 running tricks in hearts.

As the auction went (or as I think it went):

1   3     P    3
4   4   5   5
6      P    6   6
7      P      P       P



I believe that my 7 is wrong on two counts:
First, my LHO has at least ten black cards for his 3 . But wait.  He raised his partner's 3 call to 4!S. Since all my RHO said with 3! S is that he prefers spades to clubs, it seems likely that my LHO has 11 black cards. Which makes a red suit void likely. Which means I want LHO on lead against 7 , not his partner on lead against 7 .

But worse, where am I putting my losing club? Yes, on the actual lie, we have 13 tricks in either diamonds or hearts as long as there is no ruff at T1.  It's also true that if partner has only four diamonds, and as noted above I think that a four card holding is very possible since his 5 implicitly showed heart support, then we need to be in 7 not 7 since the play will be to pitch his clubs on my hearts and ruff a club for the 13th trick. So that's an argument for 7 . The problem is that this line requires diamonds to be 3-2 and while that my be a good bet sometimes, i think on the auction it is not all that likely.

I think my best call over 6   is X .
It's wrong on the hands as they are but 7 requires a fifth diamond from partner and I do not think that it is at all clear that he has it.

 
But!! Back to my call over 5 .  That's where the real mistake was.  My best call is 6 , not 6 . This should say a lot. The previous round I was ready to play at the four level in hearts, now I am forcing to 6 and inviting 7. Surely my partner will figure I have a diamond fit. Why else the sudden enthusiasm?   And if f I had a small spade to go with my club A surely I would have just bid 6 (going from a passable 4 to inviting 7 w/o a spade control is excessive) so 6   shows the spade void as well as the club A. If I do that, I can leave the decision to partner about bidding 7 .

A great hand.


 And another thought. It has been mentioned several times that it would be nice to have experts explain what they are thinking during the play of a hand. True enough. But I am hoping that having a non-expert explain postmortem what he now realizes he should have been thinking could be useful as well.

[OliverC]

Yes, Douglas might have made it a little easier for you by bidding 3 immediately over 3 . That must be 5 (if not 6) Diamonds and at least a decent Heart tolerance. Now you have no problems seeing the Club loser going away on the long Diamond.

Agree 100% with 6 (A clear GSF) instead of 6 (which is NOT) on the actual sequence.

The full hand:
                    64
                    1092
                    AQ652
                    Q32
  AQ9872                    KJ1053
  -                                865
  103                            98
  109876                      KJ4

                    -
                    AKQJ743
                    KJ74
                    A5

The actual bidding (Dealer South, Love All):
South    West    North    East
1          3 ⁽¹⁾   No         3
4          No         No          4
No           No         5        5
6 ⁽²⁾    X⁽³⁾       6        6
No⁽⁴⁾       No         7        No
No⁽⁵⁾       No

⁽¹⁾ "Black Suits"
⁽²⁾ 6   better here, a clear Grand Slam Force
⁽³⁾ Lightner
⁽⁴⁾ Showing 1st rnd Control of Spades (No Control-denying Double)
⁽⁵⁾ 7 better here to keep West on Lead.

Your reasoning for 6 and 7 spot on, Ken.

[kenberg]

I am not so sure that I would have taken 3 as heart tolerance, maybe it should be but sometimes a guy just has a decent hand with diamonds. I am not all that up on defending against the 3 as a black two-suiter so maybe I need to think about this.

Assuming that the 3 bid was understood by East it seems to me that he has a clear cut 4 call. I think we were vul and they were not, but even at equal vul I think it is a 4 call, and maybe even at unfavorable vul. If 3 promises 5-5 then E knows there is a 10+ spade fit and an 8+ club fit, and moreover all of his values are in those suits. Good on offense, not much use on defense. I, if E,  might well consider a direct jump to 5 depending on the vul.  Under which circumstances I would be better laced if partner had indeed bid 3 . With my hearts I hardly need support so I might well try   6 . Or, again, 6 if I am up for it.

If EW were playing Michaels I suppose it would begin 1 -2 .  If N bids 3 then E can pretty well infer W has the black and we are in the same place as before.

An interesting hand with many possibilities. EW can make 4 and NS can make 7 so 7 is theoretically a good save at any vul, although it presumably would not be bid if EW were red, NS white. But an immediate jump to 5 by E might keep NS from finding 7.

[OliverC]

You might want to have a look at the Bergin defence to 2-suited overcalls. If you've playing that, then 3 there would be "competitive", but would surely include a Heart tolerance since partner would be unlikely to compete with a weakish hand and a marked shortage in your suit. (3 would be limit or forcing raise in , and 4 would be either invitational in Hearts or more likely a forcing bid in Diamonds).

http://ocp.pigpen.org.uk/Defences.php if you're interested. Bergin works well over Michaels (especially if combined with Lebensohl), UNT and Ghestem as long as the original Opening is "natural".

[kenberg]

My persona bridge circumstances are that I have only one (somewhat) regular partner, my f2f partner with whom I play once a week when we can, and so far I have not even convinced him of the merits of unusual over unusual. But one can think to the future, and anyway I find these things interesting.

I thought a little about partner's problem after the 1 -3   (blacks) beginning. Even with agreements, the cheapest cue is 3 and  that forces us to the 4 level. I don't see the hand as having the values for it.So I think it comes to 3 , 3 or pass. Sme might choose a nebulous double but the problem with that is that it is nebulous. A call of 3 would work great here, but with N not knowing of partner's self-sufficient hearts, I would see problems. N can figure there will be 3 bid (at least) on his left so he has to ask himself if he is ready to then bid 4 at his next turn, providing that option even exists. My guess is that playing natural, I would bid 3 .  I have support, I have some values, nothing is perfect, but 3 should help partner decide what to do next.

Would it work?  Maybe.

Let's say that over 3 E bids 4 , a reasonable call. S likes the auction a lot. It's not so much the heart support but rather that the opponent's values seem to be in the black suits. S has first round control in both those suits, all the hearts he could possibly hope for, and some pretty good values in diamonds. N must have something for his 3 call so we are certainly going on, the question is how. A 5 cue sounds right.

Maybe we get to 7 maybe not, but we are off to a reasonable start. I still think that they need to find the 7 sac. Neither has any defense at all against 7 . Neither holds the club Ace, and with 11 spades between them it is optimistic to think that they have a spade trick especially so if one of us indicates a spade void. We could be faking it, but I think 7 is the way to go. Otherwise put: If NS go on to 7 when EW are bidding spades then eiutherNS are nuts, NS are pulling a gigantic bluff, or one of them has a spade void.

With this natural approach, I would say that a 3 call is forcing, maybe with about the strength that N has except perhaps six diamonds and two hearts instead of five diamonds and three hearts.

If the auction had begun 1 -2 (Michaels) we have more room and I think 2 has some appeal. It's a bit pushy, I would like to have either four trump or a bit more in values, but I might do it.

Over 1m-(2m) Michaels I play a U/U style if partner agrees. Thus 2 shows a good hand with clubs, 2 shows a good hand with diamonds, while a direct call in either minor is competitive. Nothing comes for free, we give up on cues that might help us find 3NT when playing this way, but I think it is usually worth the price.

The Bergen defense would seem to work better after 1 -3 , assuming that 3 is two-suited showing clubs and hearts. Now one can cue 3 showing LR+ in spades w/o forcing to the 4 level. But I would take 3 as LR+ just as sort of general practice,  as long as the 3 showed hearts. Again it could be a cue looking for 3NT but I would take it as spade support. When, as on this hand, our major is hearts rather than spades, it gets more crowded.

[OliverC]

Yes, With Bergin, it does depend on whether the 2-suited overcall shows 2 specific suits, or one anchor suit and the other one unspecified. eg: 1 - (2 ) - ??. If 2 shows Hearts and Diamonds, then we have 2 cue-bids available, but if it shows Hearts and one of the Minors, then we only have 1 cue-bid available. With Bergin, if 2 cues are available, then the cheapest one is a limit or forcing raise in partner's suit, and the more expensive cue is an invitational raise in Partner's suit or a forcing raise in the 4th suit. Other bids are just competitive. Where there is only one cue-bid available, it's always the limit/forcing raise in partner's suit. It does, therefore, depend on exactly what the 2-suited overcall is showing.

[kenberg]

I want to check to see if I understand.

We start 1   - 3 , showing clubs and spades. Then 3 by N  would be  a game force in hearts while 4 by N would be  a strong bid in diamonds? With the 4 call available to show a strong hand with diamonds, then  a 3 call over 3   can be non-forcing. It could show just diamonds, or diamonds and a heart tolerance. I think I prefer that it only show diamonds. I will get hands where a non-forcing 3 showing diamonds will be useful. I think I like this. The logic is  similar to U/U. And  maybe a jump by N, directly over 3 to 4 , could be a fit showing jump with a heart fit, good diamonds, and slam interest? 

With the actual N hand I probably still just bid 3 .    A little pushy, or maybe a little ambiguous, but preempts are designed to crowd the space. I have a heart fit, and I have a reasonable expectation on the auction that my diamonds will be useful, making up for my marginal values. With a truly bad hand and heart support I could happily pass their 3 and hope that they fail to find their 4 contract. Or just figure we are out-gunned. With heart length and shape, i could consider a direct 4 . Since 3 was available as a strong heart bid, this would not promise much.

[OliverC]

1 - (3 = Blacks) - ??
...3 is just competitive
...3   -ditto-
...3 is either a limit or a forcing raise in Hearts (Opener assumes limit raise)
...3NT is natural and "to play"
...4 is either invitational in Hearts or a forcing bid in Diamonds (usually the latter, but Opener normally assumes the former)

1 - (2 = Spades and a Minor) - ??
...2 is either a limit or a forcing raise in Hearts (Opener assumes limit raise)
...3 is just competitive
...3 is just competitive
...3   -ditto-
...3NT is natural and "to play"
...4 is forcing in Clubs
...4 is forcing in Diamonds
...4 is just pre-emptive

Don't forget that here we're initially considering Responder's action (ie: the hand with AQxxx in and 109x in ).

[kenberg]

The first one, 1 - 3 , is the one where I am not understanding. I copy it:

1 - (3 = Blacks) - ??
...3 is just competitive
...3   -ditto-
...3 is either a limit or a forcing raise in Hearts (Opener assumes limit raise)
...3NT is natural and "to play"
...4 is either invitational in Hearts or a forcing bid in Diamonds (usually the latter, but Opener normally assumes the former)

How can 3 be a LR? We are committed to the 4 level now. Similarly, how can 4 be invitational in hearts? it seem to be one of those offers I can't refuse. 


Am I missing something? This is had in mind  when I was saying that it matters a lot whether our suit is hearts or spades. If our suit is spades than over 3 showing and we can use 3 as a LR for spades. But when our suit is hearts and it goes 1   - 3 showing clubs and spades, we cannot really use the 3 in any invitational way. At least not invitational to 4 .

[OliverC]

In cases where you're forced to the 4-level, then clearly it's a forcing raise rather than a limit one. The more expensive cue-bid is now always going to be higher than the 3-level in your suit, though (Mod Ghestem is an extreme case and relatively few people play it anyway). Think in terms how how it works over 1 -(2!H) Michaels, showing Spades and Diamonds, or 1 - (2NT) UNT, showing both Minors.