[antonylee]

---

28-board KO.

How do you rate South's idea? What's your plan on a diamond lead?

[gszes]

The main problem with 1s is that it will quite often cause opener to over evaluate
their hand because they "suspect" there is a trump fit. Much prefer 2c (sayc) or
1n(2/1). Another problem is that if you try and ruff more than 1 heart it seems quite
probable you are creating a trump loser.

Why the hurry to "mix it up" when there is a totally "standardish" route you can take?
The other downside is what will p think next time they raise your suit? If you want to try
something talk it over with p and see it they agree do not spring it on them except in an
emergency (not present here). IMHO I would rate the 1s bid as 3 but really dislike 4s rather
than at least trying to bid 3n so I would rate the 4s bid around 1.5.

[kuhchung]

take a bunch of winning finesses and then ruff

[antonylee]

Getting out in 3N was not possible as it would be non-serious there (we can get to 3N with a fit only after 1H-1S-2S-2N-3N).

[sfi]

 antonylee, on 2015-February-09, 02:13, said:

How do you rate South's idea? What's your plan [...]?

What's the plan? That's the question I want to ask South in the bidding. I can't see how 1S will accomplish anything useful compared to bidding the hand in a normal way.

On the face of it, the bid is really bad if you can't suggest 3NT after a raise.

[fourdad]

silly bid as it....
1. misleads partner
2. fails to accurately describe hand
3. is not in any published system I have seen and therefore
4. Qualifies as a psychic...was it alerted?

[daffydoc]

NO huge problem with either the 1S or 4S bid - do you really want to bid 1nt(2/1) and then 2NT on a misfit when pard has a random 11 count with 6H. Will not turn out well I suspect. As to play - win D A and take club hook running the Queen, if it wins now play a heart and proceed accordingly. daffydoc

[Zelandakh]

 fourdad, on 2015-February-10, 06:13, said:

4. Qualifies as a psychic...was it alerted?

Why would anyone alert a psychic call? The whole point is that the unusual meaning is not agreed and therefore an alert would be wrong.

Not fond of the bidding, not least because some PUPs will even raise to the 3 level on 3 card support making a 3-3 fit a realistic possibility. How bad it is depends on which system is agreed and how well N-S know each other. Playing SAYC with a PUP is probably the worst (2/10, or about a 5 on the nige scale) while playing 2/1 with Ken as regular partner might raise it to a 5 (nige: 8/10).

[Giangibar]

I've been experimenting with bidding a 3-card Major in the past to some success, but IMO this is clearly not the right time to do so. I would bid 1♠ over 1♦/♥ with a hand like ♠AJ10 ♥x ♦xxxx ♣xxxxx, where:

1) I have few HCPs (but enough to keep the bidding alive), and they're all concentrated in the Spade fragment;
2) I have an unbalanced hand which rates to produce more tricks in a Moysian fit than in a NT counterpart;
3) I don't want to misplace a NT contract.

In this case, all three points are false: I have more than enough HCPs to keep the bidding alive (in fact, I'm a tad short of a 2/1 GF). Those points are fairly distributed among the suits, and I'm full of tenaces so I'd love to be declarer to conceal my cards. As a side note, I suggest that 1♥ - 1♠ - 3♠ - 3NT should be played as natural and non-forcing: too many times responder has 10-11 with a 42(34)/4144/41(35) shape and 3NT is the winning spot, especially at MPs.

As far as the play is concerned, I would win the lead and immediately play a Club to the Jack. If the finesse wins, I'm playing a Heart to the King in an attempt to establish the suit by ruffing. If the finesse loses, I'm winning any return in hand (if West plays another Diamond, I discard a Heart from dummy) and proceed with Hearts as before.

[PLimprove]

DA is your first trick so you need 9 more tricks. First, go CQ to try to take 2tricks on C. And then use your spades to overtake D&H. With generally distribution, trumps can all be used for 7tricks.

If W has CK to overtake and then break trump, you will lose one trick when doing D&H. So the only way is to go 3rd of clubs before doing D&H for one more trick.

It is still dangerous if W has CK. But the original cause is the idt south, 1S&4S with only 3 cards.

[steve2005]

 Zelandakh, on 2015-February-10, 07:04, said:

Not fond of the bidding, not least because some PUPs will even raise to the 3 level on 3 card support making a 3-3 fit a realistic possibility.

3♠ is always 4 in standard bidding (but have seen 3 card raise) so at least you have 4-3. but after 2♠ you could be in 3-3. Course 1♠ in standard is 4+ lol.

Agree with everyone, this hand isn't special, no need to make non-system bid.

[jdgalt]

 antonylee, on 2015-February-09, 02:13, said:

---

28-board KO.

How do you rate South's idea? What's your plan on a diamond lead?

I can't accept the 1S bid, it promises four. If we're playing standard I bid 2C and pass opener's likely 2H or 3H rebid. In 2/1 I have to say 1NT forcing (ugh), and still pass opener's likely heart rebid.

Playing this - I lead the CQ from dummy at trick two. If it holds I try to cash the jack and ace, then cross-ruff the hand. I don't expect to make it.

[antonylee]

Yes, this was in a 2/1 setting. Obviously there's no problem otherwise. We also raise virtually never on 3 cards in this auction (whether that's a winning style or not is not the issue there (and yes we'll raise more often after 1m-1M as there are more problem hands for opener)), so I (yes, I was South) wasn't too worried about the 3-3 fit.

I'll thank Giangibar for his thoughtful comments

[Zelandakh]

 antonylee, on 2015-February-11, 00:41, said:

We also raise virtually never on 3 cards in this auction

This is important information and should have been included. In parts of the world where this is standard (France, Germany, etc) the idea of bidding a 3 card major on awkward hands is well known. Indeed, when they have foreigners on their expert panel on such hands they invariably get low marks for using a different solution to this.

[rhm]

I like it

The ones, who criticize it, leave me unperturbed. Good Bridge is more than being able to count up to four.
I remember getting raised on three and making 2♠ for a top score.
I can also imagine opening the South hand 1♣ and rebidding 1♠ over 1♥.

 Zelandakh, on 2015-February-10, 07:04, said:

Not fond of the bidding, not least because some PUPs will even raise to the 3 level on 3 card support making a 3-3 fit a realistic possibility. How bad it is depends on which system is agreed and how well N-S know each other. Playing SAYC with a PUP is probably the worst (2/10, or about a 5 on the nige scale) while playing 2/1 with Ken as regular partner might raise it to a 5 (nige: 8/10).

I don't know what PUP stands for but I guess not for an imaginative Bridge player.
Playing 3-3 fits is character building and nothing is more satisfactory than getting a good result that way.
It happens.
Anyway a bid should not solely be judged on whether it might possibly misfire.
Most clever bids can.
Here you have 26 HCP combined.
Show me the game, which has better prospects single dummy than 4♠ after an unrevealing auction?
I am sure Adam Meredith would have approved of the auction.

Rainer Herrmann

[Zelandakh]

PUP is pick up partner. Bad bids often work out well on a particular deal, especially one that gets posted here. Playing bad contracts might be character building but that does not make it good bridge. As you play in Germany, 1♠ is for you better than for a typical American counterpart. This is one of the differences between Forum D and SA.

[rhm]

 Zelandakh, on 2015-February-11, 07:09, said:

PUP is pick up partner. Bad bids often work out well on a particular deal, especially one that gets posted here. Playing bad contracts might be character building but that does not make it good bridge. As you play in Germany, 1♠ is for you better than for a typical American counterpart. This is one of the differences between Forum D and SA.

It is true I live in Germany.
But this does not mean I like Forum D. In fact I do not and my Bridge is much more influenced by American ideas than anything else.
I do not believe this has much to do with system, because almost no system will recommend that 1♠ over 1♥ may be bid on three cards.

This is not the point of the exercise.

Rainer Herrmann

[jmcilkley]

 antonylee, on 2015-February-09, 02:13, said:

---

28-board KO.

How do you rate South's idea? What's your plan on a diamond lead?

I rate South's idea of bidding 1s as a zero! What'#s the point in misleading partner when there are other sensible bids to make? For me the correct response is 2c after which you will probably get to the best contract of 3nt. Were you proud of 1s? Surely you can't have been proud of 4s!

[Zelandakh]

 jmcilkley, on 2015-February-11, 08:11, said:

For me the correct response is 2c after which you will probably get to the best contract of 3nt.

2♣ also in a 2/1 context, Mike? Are you really happy playing game opposite a misfitting minimum here?

[kuhchung]

 kuhchung, on 2015-February-09, 13:46, said:

take a bunch of winning finesses and then ruff

did i make it?