[Antrax]

Matchpoints, EW vul

---

Your bid? Partner doesn't have four hearts, a void or two aces

[mich-b]

4♠. On the previous round.

[Antrax]

What's the case for not going through Ogust?

[BunnyGo]

Antrax, on 2011-September-19, 00:51, said:

What's the case for not going through Ogust?

If you know you won't be in slam and won't stop short of game, just bid the game.

Edit: The opponents also won't know if you're weak or strong...as mich-b says, they may bid on.

[mich-b]

Antrax, on 2011-September-19, 00:51, said:

What's the case for not going through Ogust?

I am never going to play slam , part score , or 3NT , so why Ogust?
Bidding 4♠ directly gives away less info about opener's hand, and also may reap unexpected benefit if my LHO has a nice hand and decides to get into the bidding.

[Antrax]

Interesting. I actually thought 3NT is still an option. I also stopped in 3♠ after the Ogust response, expecting two trump losers as well as two minor aces

[nigel_k]

I assume the question is whether to bid 4♠ or 3NT. I don't claim to know what's best on these hands but would choose 4♠ at the table.

[aguahombre]

There should be a fifth and sixth response to Ogust: bids which say whether the opener looked at the vulnerability before opening.

[Antrax]

Meaning?

[mich-b]

aguahombre, on 2011-September-19, 05:18, said:

There should be a fifth and sixth response to Ogust: bids which say whether the opener looked at the vulnerability before opening.

I think he means that we expect a VUL against NV weak2 to have a good enough hand , and a good enough suit (even if "bad" in context) to provide reasonable play for 4♠.

[BunnyGo]

aguahombre, on 2011-September-19, 05:18, said:

There should be a fifth and sixth response to Ogust: bids which say whether the opener looked at the vulnerability before opening.

Aren't Ogust responses always "relative" to the expected strength?

[ArtK78]

It is clear that you want to play either 4♠ or 3NT.

I don't think Ogust or any other method is going to provide you with the information that you need to make a rational choice between 4♠ and 3NT. Based on the opening bid and your agreement, 4♠ is likely to be right. Only if partner has some values in hearts (which could be as little as Tx) is 3NT likely to make as many tricks as spades. You have at least two aces to knock out which means that the opps are going to get the lead 3 times.

And hearts may not be the weak point on this hand. Clubs could be the weakness. How would you like to play 3NT on a club lead opposite this hand:

KJTxxx
T9
Axx
xx

If the ♣A is on your left and the ♠A is on your right, you are at best making 9 tricks in NT and possibly down while 4♠ is easy (this assumes that clubs are 4-4 or 5-3 with the 5 in the leader's hand).

3NT could be right. I just don't think that it is the percentage action.

[aguahombre]

BunnyGo, on 2011-September-19, 07:04, said:

Aren't Ogust responses always "relative" to the expected strength?

They should be. But the 2-bid seems to frequently be not relative to the expected strength.

Modified Ogust:

3C=I didn't pay attention to the colors
3D=My hand is wrong on ODR because of side stuff.
3H=I have a weak 2-bid
3S=My hand is wrong od ODR because of extra offense.

Seriously, because of our opinions about disclipline I have advocated Ogust when not Vul, and Feature when Vul; though we haven't actually switched to that, yet.

[Antrax]

Okay, thanks. I see that stopping in 3♠ was crazy, which was my main concern. Also, I seem to be taking the principle of playing NT in matchpoints as much as possible a bit too far

[han]

If partner shows a good suit you could try 3NT. If partner has a bad suit I would just bid 4S.

[han]

By the way, a friend of mine often claims that the most important condition for having a hand suitable for a preempt is whether you have the queen of trumps.