missing the obvious

[onoway]

I hold  43  KQ943  -      KQJ643    Sitting in third seat all vul.  MPs

 Bidding goes: pass  pass  1    X   XX   2   I'm not sure if p means the XX as support or what else you got?
Can't bid the because that would be a reverse and I'm nowhere near that and I've only got 5 so can't rebid those either, it's not THAT strong a suit.   So I pass.  LHO passes.

Partner bids 2 .   RHO passes.

Do I mention the ?  I think about it and bid them, if we have a double fit it might be one of those miracle hands, and at least the XX showed some few  points somewhere even if I still  don't know what it was for sure. The 2 sounds like a determination not to let them have it rather than anything enthusiastic about  .  ( Probly my first mistake. Next one coming up right away.)

I'm assuming p will put me back in if he doesn't like the , instead he bids 3NT.  Now we are going to be overbidding the hand, I think, and figure he has the other two suits.  Consider bidding 4 , not sure if he will think that's some sort of slam try.    So... may the bridge gods and my partner forgive me,  I pass.

P has AQ765 T76 Q932 and 9   It was not a happy hand.
How else  could this have been handled other than not trying to find jewels  in the sludge?


I assume I should just have passed the 2 ?  What about opening the  instead of the ? ( a point brought up for discussion after the tourney )

[kenberg]

I am off to bed soon, but a few thoughts for the moment.

After 1 - X I play XX as 10+ hcps with at most three hearts.often it is said that XX denies a fit, so let me explan:

1 -X -3 is premptive
1 -X -2 is a normalk call of 2 (unless you play bromad, but I am assuming not).
But sometimes we have LR values.
Usually 1 -X -2NT is played as a LR+. But it is very useful to have this promise four card support. Or, for some, 3 card support and extra shape but I will assume 4 card support.

Then what do we do with an 11 count and three hearts? We XX and then support hearts.

I would regard this as a reasonably standard approach.  If you want to add in some further conventional agreements, BROMAD is an acronym for Bergen Raises Over Majors  And Doubles (the meanings change, or rather there are add-ons, from what happens w/o the X). I would not expect it to be played unless we had explicitly agreed to do so, and I actually prefer not to. I think the basic setup described above is adequate.

NB The XX does NOT show three card support, it shows good values and AT MOST three card support.


Now a couple of comments about this hand. Personally, I have no problem with the 1 opening instead of 1 . If the hand were stronger I would open 1 , with the idea that if, say, the opponents come in with spades and the bidding is up to 3 on my right when it gets back to me, then I bid 4 . I don't think this hand is strong enough for that. You will get various opinions on this.

With the auction beginning as it did, 1 - X - XX -2 I have a comment or two.
Usually, after a XX, opener passes to let the redoubler describe his hand further. Often redoubler will double the run out for penalties. But here you have no interest in defending 2 X . Imo, if you bid 3 over 2 it does not show extra values, it shows extra shape. But maybe others disagree.

Last comment for tonight, bed is calling, the auction is a little weird. Where are the spades? You only have 2.  I would not expect four spades on my right. After the X and the XX, RHO usually is just looking for the safest place to play, and if he has four spades then, hearing the X by his partner, I think he would bid 1 .  So it seems your LHO and your partner have eight spades between them, probably split 4-4.  This si no big deal but when you have only two spades and everyone is in the auction, it's a little odd that only LHO has even suggested that he has spades.


That's all for now. Nite.

[kenberg]

OK, it's morning. A little more about bidding 3 !c over their 2 .


Compare it with 1 - P - 2   -?
On this I would not bid 3 . The difference is that partner's 1 showed four spades and a 6 count, and maybe he stretched a bit for the 8. So on this start, 3 should show more values.  But after 1 - X- XX -2 I know partner has values. One way of putting is that the XX announces that this is our hand. Sometimes we might ell to something without doubling it, but usually we will be declaring or we will be defending something doubled. On this hand I am pretty sure I am not interested in defending 2 X so I might as well get my club suit in. If I had known that the auction would only be at 2 when it got back to me then I  could have started with 1 and now bid 2 . But that's a little unexpected. 

No doubt regular partnerships have discussed the difference between bidding 3 right now versus passing 2 and then pulling a hypothetical double to 3 .  I have not had such discussions so I just bid 3 right away.

Btw: If you pass 2 , it will not be passed out. When partner makes his XX, he agrees not to let them play a 2 level contract undoubled.  So you can safely pass, as you did. 

Now what to make of his 2 . I would say three card support is likely but not absolutely certain.He had to do something, and possibly 2 is simply what he sees as the best of imperfect choices.  The problem now is that 3 , while it shows clubs, does not really show this pronounced 2-suiter.  The message of  a 3 call immediately over 2 is "Based on my hand, we belong in or " Having said your piece, you can now let partner choose. Here it is a little more ambiguous I think. The message is more akin to "Glad to hear of your heart support, I am now making a game try in hearts with some values in the club suit". That's similar, but different. partner will now play you for club values but not for any great club length.


As it happened, partner bid 3NT over your 3 .  Uh oh. The problem with 3NT is that partner needs to be able to stop both diamonds and spades, and then he still needs 9 tricks. Suppose he has Ax of hearts. That might have seemed enough for his 2 if he was stuck. That hear suit is unlikely to be running. Unless he has the club A, the club suit is not ready to run. There could be some problems. I would probably pull 3NT to 4 . This might be wrong but I think 3NT just needs too much.

As you can see, it is easier if I get my shape described (approximately) early on. A 3 over 2 does that.

This is an interesting hand (most are).  Most people have some way to show four hearts and invitational values after 1 -X, whether it is a Bergen 3m or a Jordan 2NT.  Given that, then the XX denies four hearts but neither denies nor shows three hearts. With good values in partner's hand, this hopefully is our hand. With the shape you have, it seems likely that it should be played in one of your two suits.. So my view is that you get that second suit out there at your first opportunity. Then you can sit back and let partner do as he thinks best.

[kenberg]

Added: I will speculate a little on what your partner has. I am guessing a flat 11 count with four spades, three of everything else. That's consistent with his XX followed by 2 . Then, over  your 3 , he decided to take a shot at 3NT thinking that if he is going to play in game, it might be easier in 3NT since he has no ruffing value. Of course maybe it makes 3NT but with this much shape, my guess is you want to be in a suit. Just possibly it will make 4 . It will take a little luck, but it's not impossible. First a hand he cannot have, given his NT bid:  Give partner the Axx in hearts, the Axx in clubs, and suppose hearts are no worse than 4-2. Ruff the opening diamond lead, play a heart to the A, back K and Q, leave the last heart out and start running clubs. They ruff in, they cash their two spades, you claim. 

Ok, he doesn't have that since he needs something in diamonds and spades for his NT call. Maybe he lacks the club A but has the diamond ace and the heart A,  and the opening lead is a diamond. Win the D, play 3 rounds of trump. leave the last trump out and go after clubs. It would help if he had the   T . And it will help if there isn't a club A and a club ruff to start things off.


Anyway, you are light on high card points but 4 might stumble in. If he has , say, the Txx in clubs, the Axx in diamonds, the Axx in hearts, and maybe Kxx in hearts this seems like it might fit with the bidding, and if they don't find the club ruffs ( A,  ruff, spade back, ruff) you might survive.


One mre comment: It's true  that since he bid 3NT he is unlikely to have the A and the A   .  So after 3NT you are sort of stuck. But at the time you bid 3 this pair of aces in his hand was a live possibility. His 2 was passable so he will not have  a huge hand, but I think a 3 call is reasonable. If he has a good fit for and , like Axx and Axx,  then he can bid 4 .  And if not he can sign off in 3 .

[OliverC]

Maybe times have changed in ACBL-land, but classic bidding tactics always used to be:

1 - (X) - 2 = Any hand containing 13 cards and no shortage (    )
1 - (X) - 3 = pre-emptive, definitely not an invitation unless Opener really strong.
1 - (X) - 4 = pre-emptive, but might conceal some quite reasonable values
1 - (X) - XX  = 11-12+, Heart tolerance (xx or Hx) but short of actual support. Smells Blood!
1 - (X) - 1NT = 8-10 balanced with no good Heart support.
1 - (X) - 2NT = genuine inv+ raise in Hearts. Opener assumes 3-level limit raise and bids accordingly.
...Pretty much anything else is natural and initially forcing if involving a change of suit.

Back to Pam's sequence:

If Partner redoubles then it ought to be because they're prepared to play in 1 !HXX and expect it to make comfortably, but they're short of full support for Hearts and smell blood in the water, to passing over 2 is "de rigeur", because a Double by Partner at that stage ought to be 100% for penalties given the redouble.

Given what Partner actually had, a redouble by them was totally inappropriate: They're (1) not strong enough, (2) have the wrong kind of Heart holding and (3) are not in a position to penalise the Opponents except in Spades. Moreover they have a perfectly good natural bid of 1 or 3 given their hand. Their redoubles sends a specific message, and unfortunately it's the wrong message.

In the actual sequence Pam had, where Partner bids 2 over 2 , 3 ought now to be a long-suit trial bid with Hearts agreed as trumps, so whatever I thought the meaning of 3NT was, there is absolutely no way in a zillion years I'd have let partner to actually play in 3NT unless they bid 3NT directly over 2 (or a "slow" 3NT via Lebensohl if we're playing it).

[kenberg]

I had not actually gotten tot eh point where partner's hand appeared, Iwas just looking at the auction and at Pam's hand. In some ways, my not seeing the opposite hand might be useful.


XX would never occur to me with his hand. It's a pretty good hand,, there is a fair chance the spade Q will be taking a trick. I have now looked up the hands and the spade Q loses to the A, but that's too bad, I would not quarrel with him assuming that the Q is a likely trick after the X.

The opposing hand is good enough that I think raising 1 to 2 is too weak an action. Partly this is because the spade Q is apt to be valuable, and partly there is the stiff . So 2 is out.  And for 3 I would want fewer points and more hearts. Maybe three card support will occasionally work, but if I do that I want my values in hearts. And definitely a weaker hand.

But! As O says, 1 is a perfectly reasonable call.  It's forcing, at least most people play it as such, and the plan is to then rebid 2 if possible.

If If If for some reason I had XX on the first round (as Pam's partner) and then rebid 2 as happened, I would under no circumstances bid 3NT over 3 . I have already overstated the value of my hand and I am not accepting any invitation to do anything. And really the 3 call did not make my hand better. Not for NT, not for hearts. In NT I see no reason to think I have 9 tricks, in hearts my Q is worthless. As for trumping clubs, I knew before partner bid 3 I could trump clubs. The only new ting I learned from 3 is that partners length is in a suit that is unlikely to establish.

The hand belongs in hearts, and not at the 4 level.

I am not so sure I agree, well I don't agree, that we need Hx to XX. That would be a +, but I can imagine XX w/o it. But I certainly agree that the actual hand is not at all suitable for XX. It's a 1 call.

But to get back to Pam's choices.
After
1 X -XX -2 I still like an immediate 3 for the reasons mentioned. Even with this very bad XX, we end up, or we should end up, in 3 and I have been in worse contracts. The hands fit very badly and the cards lie badly but that's life. If partner had a more reasonable XX we should be fine. And, as mentioned, I have no interest in 2 X . Partner may be smelling blood but I am smelling disaster.


Usually, often, almost always, however we put it, the pass by opener is automatic after the XX. Not here, I think. .

[OliverC]

You don't need exactly Hx to redouble, but that is the "classic" holding.


The thing is you're saying you're quite happy to be in 1!HXX (because that's going to force Opps to bid something and now hopefully you can get a juicy penalty. You don't, therefore, want to have a shortage in Hearts, in case partner opened on J9xxx. Similarly, you don't want to have really great Heart support, because now you're better off bidding Hearts.


So Hx or xx is "just right".

[kenberg]

We probably pretty much agree. Part of is that you have to have something. In the case at hand, the redoubler had AQxxx of spades. Certainly he should  his spades. If he has only AQxx of spades, he could still bid hos spades. If his heart support is crummy, bidding his spades would be preferable to XX. (Depending on his hcps, 1NT might be better than either.)  I usually play that 1 - X -2m shows a decent five card minor and decent values, a passable bid since it is pretty well defined.

The end result is that it would be pretty rare for my to find myself looking at a hand with bad heart support where I couldn't find a better call than XX. Maybe I have never seen such a hand, I have not thought carefully about it. In theory XX could be followed by three passes and the contract failing. I can't recall it. Opener has values, doubler has values, redoubler has values, so even if fourth hand has, say, five trump it is unlikely they will be high trump. With, say, QTxxx he is going to be uneasy about passing,  knowing that dummy will have entries and, since doubler is probably short in trump, dummy probably has one or two. 

It's true that if I am going to XX I should give some thought to the fact that partner needs to take 7 tricks if everyone passes.  And this can lead to rejecting the XX in favor of another call. So I guess I am saying that it pretty much falls into place just in the normal course of things. I have tried to think of a time when I XXed with a stiff. I think I have done so but I can't recall with certainty. I wouldn't rule it out, I doubt it happens often, almost certanly I would find a preferable call.

I am interested in your view, and that of others, about my thought that with Pam's hand, after 1 - X -XX -2   I would bid 3 . I grant that the expected call after the XX is a pass. But this is an unusual hand.  When I have 11 cards in two suits I rarely if ever want to sit for a penalty double at the 2 level of some other suit.

It's hard to use this hand as an illustration because the XX was seriously misguided, in my opinion and in yours as well. My thinking is that if I am not going to sit for a penalty double, bidding my clubs right away will be clearer than doing so later. In this case, passing the 2 led to 2 @H. Now a 3 bid shows clubs, and is a game try in hearts. But I think the clubs, on that auction, might well be KTxx. Something where if the redoubler can say, oh yes I have something in clubs and a little extra in values, could bid 4 . An immediate 3 does a better job, I think, of saying that as far as I am concerned, we want to play this in clubs or hearts. It would show a hand with extreme shape and a hand much more suitable for offense than defense, which is what Pam has. Certainly 3 !Cover the 2 would not be an everyday call but I think it should be a possible call and I think this is the time for it.

I am thinking the forum might be picking up speed. I find these discussions both interesting and useful.

[OliverC]

If you bid rather than passing over 2 , it carries a very specific message that you have an extremely distributional hand totally unsuited to defence, as here.