[whereagles]

IMPs, V vs NV, adv pard. You hold:

♠ T
♥ AK97x
♦ AQ9874
♣ x

Right or wrong, you decided to open 1♥ (I'll tell you later what happens if you open 1♦). It goes..

You pard
1♥ 1♠
2♦ 2♥

What do you bid now?

[mr1303]

Wrongly I'm afraid, since this hand is strong enough to reverse in my opinion.

Anyway, I'm going to try 3D here, which should show extras.

[FrancesHinden]

I would have opened 1D and reversed.
Now I pass 2H. I've made my bed - treated this as a minimum- and I shall lie in it.

[Al_U_Card]

FrancesHinden, on Jun 2 2006, 08:49 AM, said:

I would have opened 1D and reversed.
Now I pass 2H. I've made my bed - treated this as a minimum- and I shall lie in it.

I concur, pass away or open the hand 1D as you should.

[jdonn]

Hello, we are vul at imps! You don't pass when you could easily have game.

Partner could have AQxxx xx Kxx xxx.

3♦, showing extras (normally about a 5-5 16 count)

[FrancesHinden]

jdonn, on Jun 2 2006, 04:36 PM, said:

Hello, we are vul at imps! You don't pass when you could easily have game.

Partner could have AQxxx xx Kxx xxx.

3♦, showing extras (normally about a 5-5 16 count)

If I decided to open this hand 1H, then I decided it didn't have the values to reverse. I don't think I can now change my mind half-way through the auction when nothing good has happened. If I make another move now then partner simply won't work out I am 5-6, because I can't be strong enough to move again but not strong enough to reverse.

So I may as well hope to gain from downgrading the hand and play for a horrible misfit opposite.

[jdonn]

FrancesHinden, on Jun 2 2006, 11:41 AM, said:

If I decided to open this hand 1H, then I decided it didn't have the values to reverse.

Says who? Maybe you decided the risk of being blasted in spades was too great to not get the hearts in early. And anyway I don't think the 3♦ bid promises quite as much as a reverse does, so there is no contradiction.

[mikeh]

I agree that 3♦, in the given sequence, does not promise the values that I (and, I assume, Josh) would require for a reverse, and I would rate this hand as worth a try.... I would be showing a goodish 5-5... xx AKxxx AKJxx x would be a typical hand.

Of course, I would not have opened 1♥. I play reverses as either a great deal of additional hcp strength or as 5-6 with decent playing values. Thus after an ingberman advance by responder I would rebid 3♥, to clarify the nature of the reverse. Nothing is perfect, but I believe in showing shape whenever the decision is close.

[FrancesHinden]

All right I've been persuaded into bidding 3D. Under protest at having mis-sorted my hand on the first round!

[pclayton]

3D for me. This hand started with 3 1/2 losers and it still has that. Wouldn't pard give a false preference on: Axxx, xx, KJx, xxxx? SIX diamonds is excellent. Maybe 4D is a better call now - now that we know pard has a doubleton heart.

I would have opened with 1D and I assume the auction would start: 1D -1S - 2H.....

I understand Frances' idea about staying consistent if you don't call this hand a reverse, but somehow it feels that notion is burying one's head in the sand and not reevaluating after a round or two of bidding.

[FrancesHinden]

You only re-evaluate when you learn something good (or bad) from the auction.

In fact, all we've learnt is bad: partner doesn't have 3 hearts, he doesn't have four diamonds, he doesn't have any extra values. I see no reason at all to evaluate our hand _upwards_.

He doesn't even have to have a doubleton heart, though it's not unreasonable to play him for one. Kxxxx x x Kxxxxx, say.

In fact, what's persuaded me to bid 3D is that he could have a bit extra with a singleton heart: I would bid 2H on Axxxx Q Kxx xxxx as the alternative is passing out 2D.

[pclayton]

There are nightmare 5-1-1-6 distributions to worry about, I agree. Add some 5-1-2-5's to the mix too.

If we catch pard with a doubleton heart, I think that's excellent news for diamonds, assuming we have a fit.

I was toying with the idea that pard might give false preference in hearts with FOUR card support in diamonds, but its not MP's (I think) and the requirements for a 3D call have gone done in the past few years, and pard will pass 2D frequently. I might take a false preference on: Axxx, Qx, xxxx, Kxx however.

Sorry Frances, our posts crossed, so I won't flog you anymore since you are a recent 3D convert LOL. I'll even grab you some punch (not Jim Jones) and cookies .

[Walddk]

whereagles, on Jun 2 2006, 10:44 AM, said:

Right or wrong, you decided to open 1♥ ...

I did not, *you* did. If you're not allowed to bid your hand in a sensible manner, you might just as well find a game where partners don't matter. I have the most obvious 1♦ opening and an easy reverse into hearts. And I do not buy jdonn's argument about the risk of being blasted in spades.

Sorry, but I really can't worry about that when I try to describe my hand. They do not always bid lots of spades or clubs in front of partner. Coincidentally, they did not as we see. LHO didn't bid over 1♥, so he wouldn't have bid over 1♦ either (unless he has a heart suit).

OK, so we have dug a hole for ourselves to fall into. Excellent; I shall try to get out of it by bidding 3♦ next.

Roland

[whereagles]

Roland, not everybody bids the same way you do, so if you don't like the conditions of the problem, just don't answer.

[helene_t]

I tend to agree with Frances but maybe you have other agreements with partner than I have. If partner can make some sense out of 3♦, I should probably bid that.

[whereagles]

Pard would take 3♦ as a strongish bid, though not necessarily a 65.

[mcphee]

I suppose you have no option but to bid 3D after pulling 1H out first. The auction seems odd with no opposition bidding and such minimum responses from partner.

The idea of being pre-empted in S is over rated I think while it may be so if you open 1D and hear 4S come around to you that you are shut out of H and maybe D also if you elect to open 1H.

I want to see the story where you get to open 1D as some of players would choose.

[whereagles]

Ok, here's the story for 1♦:

x
AKxxx
AQxxxx
x

You pard
1♦ 1♠
2♥ 2NT (natural, around 6-8 hcp)

And now, will you try 3♥?

[hrothgar]

whereagles, on Jun 4 2006, 01:37 AM, said:

Ok, here's the story for 1♦:

x
AKxxx
AQxxxx
x

You pard
1♦ 1♠
2♥ 2NT (natural, around 6-8 hcp)

And now, will you try 3♥?

Lets ignore the question of whether its reasonable to use 2NT to show a balanced hand with 6-8 HCP...

Assuming that this is our agreement, partner should have three card support for one of our suits. (I suppose, in theory, he could be sitting on a 4=2=1=6 or some such, however, the odds are unlikely)

[Walddk]

whereagles, on Jun 4 2006, 01:37 AM, said:

Ok, here's the story for 1♦:

x
AKxxx
AQxxxx
x

You pard
1♦ 1♠
2♥ 2NT (natural, around 6-8 hcp)

And now, will you try 3♥?

Yes, 5-6 in the reds, forcing.

Roland