[rhm]

mikestar13, on 2015-March-10, 16:44, said:

I nominate West's 1♦ opening as the worst bid. Yes he is 3rd seat, but is red vs white, has a a bad 11, and has a bad diamond suit. The reasoning for light 3rd seat openings is much like the reasoning for overcalls:

1. Could there be a game our way? Not on an answered prayer, especially if the partnership deems East's initial pass borderline.

2. Could we make a partial? A low one if the enemy allows us to.
3. Will I obstruct their auction? I might even help them.
4. Will we find a paying sacrifice? I don't even ask this with indifferent flat hands.
5. Do I want a diamond lead? If I think I do, I've peeked at partner's hand.

I beg to differ.
My experience opening the bidding in third seat at any colors and scoring on any excuse has shown a clear profit over the years, sometimes in unexpected ways.
Profit means that other tables passed with my hand.
Giving a free run to my opponents or worse coming in later did not.
So it is usually the last chance for your side to contest
How do you like it when third seat opens the bidding when you hold a strong hand in fourth seat?
Of course the corollary to my approach is, that a passed hand does not get stronger simply because he passed already and Drury is one of favorite conventions.

So I feel this critic is very much colored by the actual result. Here a 3♦ contract for your side does not look like a calamity to me.
3♦ for us, maybe on less than double dummy defense, and 2♥ for them making is a likely outcome.

Rainer Herrmann

[Smiles3usa]

Like most others, I don’t like W opening in 3rd seat with the flat 11 HCP hand. That said, it is not a serious error, but a matter of style. I take E’s double to mean 10+ HCP, 4♠︎, which rather accurately describes the hand. W’s 2♠︎ bid is in error, because he has a more descriptive bid of his hand. From my perspective 2NT would describe the hand — and he would not lose out on the ♠︎ bid if P had 5♠︎. (P has the 3♣︎ checkbook bid available to ask for 3♠︎) If one is going to open a light hand, he must be willing to continue to bid it — not overbid it, but bid it as if the opening was correct! 2♠︎ miscommunicates the shape of the hand to p. I find no fault with E’s 3♠︎ bid, he has 4 pieces and 11HCP. N has shown a weak bid, so E could incorrectly assume that P has a full opener…in such cases it would be error not to support p’s bid.

If W is to open 1♦︎, I think the bidding should go: 1♦︎-2♥︎-X-p-2NT-p-3♦︎-p-p-p

In sum, the fault lies not in the stars, or in E's bidding but in W's continual misrepresentation of his hand (first in opening then in 2♠)

[shermangao]

East sucks, west did nothing wrong,, 2S is only choose after the dbl, east should correct to 3D after 2S, somebody talk about 2N, that's a poor bid after a neg dbl, for me it shows at least 16+( to encourage partner make more aggressive neg dbl). 2S just say I was forced to bid and that's what I can say. Yes it could be 4 but if I have only 3 I maybe have to bid it. 2N and 3 C/D require more.

[Zelandakh]

Phil and Rainer's posts are probably a good summary. The opening bid is wrong but not as bad as many are making out. It was the combination of this with the further inaccuracies of 2♠ and 3♠ that ended up being slightly too much.

[Zelandakh]

As an extra aside, the "best" opening bid fro West here was probably 1♥. That probably shuts North out on the first round and then it goes 1♠ - p - p back. E-W have thus disrupted the auction at low risk. It may not be to the taste of the gallery but I use gambits of this type quite often within an Acol context, with mixed results but a general trend similar to that that Rainer reports. Admittedly I would probably not have found it on this hand though...

[JmBrPotter]

Since partner and I open balanced 10-14 counts with 7+ 3-2-1 points with 1NT, our auction would have been either:

Pass-(Pass)-1NT-All Pass

. . . or . . .

Pass-(Pass)-1NT<1>-Pass
2♣<2>-(Pass)-2♦<3>-Pass
2♠<4>-(Pass)-2NT<5>-All Pass

<1> 10-14 HCP in a balanced hand
<2> Do you have a 5-card major?
<3> No
<4> I have 0-3 ♥ cards with 4 ♠ cards and game invitational or stronger values
<5> I have a minimum with 2 or 3 ♠ cards

Opposite a passed partner, the West hand is not going past a partscore. Using 2/1, Acol, SAYC, or similar methods I would pass (likely at unfavorable vulnerability) or open 1♣ (likely at equal or favorable vulnerability). 1♣ is probably a more useful lead director than 1♦ in the likely event that North has a good hand and North-South buy the contract. If partner responded to a 1♣ opening, I would pass.

Note that the powder puff 1NT opener has good preemptive value and probably leads to a sane to semi-sane contract with good chances to avoid the -200 result for -2 vulnerable. 1NT might even go +90 or +120 for a very good score on a board that will pass out at many tables. The possible 2NT contract is more problematic. It might easily go -100 for a zero, but +120 for a top is not an impossible outcome. Defending 2NT on 22 HCP with 18 HCP may give the 8th trick away on the opening lead.

If the IMPs are a team event (not IMP Pairs), the third seat powder puff 1NT opening may put irresistible pressure on North to do something that turns out poorly. That opening will certainly make the board more interesting than the fairly likely "All Pass" auction at the other table.

Thus, I blame neither player while casting stones at the bidding methods which forced West into the distasteful choice between passing and opening 1♦.

[Cyberyeti]

JmBrPotter, on 2015-March-11, 22:40, said:

Since partner and I open balanced 10-14 counts with 7+ 3-2-1 points with 1NT, our auction would have been either:

So what do you do with KQJx x2 J109, Jx ? pass the 14 count with 6 3-2-1 points ? or open something else ?

K&R gives the hand you open in 3rd seat where double is more likely as 9.65 points, the hand you passed as 10.00

[MrAce]

I really disagree with the "opener should bid 2 NT" idea.

• Dbl could be made with 7+ hcp and 2 NT would play very poorly.
• Playing a 4-3 ♠ fit is not that bad, we all play frequently in our daily bridge life.
• Responder can have 5 card spades which was not good enough to bid 2♠ at the first place.
• It is easy to bid 2 NT by W, when we know that pd will rescue us with 3♦ and he will always make a good judgement and won't raise to 3 NT with 11 hcp.

To me bidding 2 NT with W hand would be much worse than his initial opening, even if you decided that opening was a mistake.

[MrAce]

Fwiw, i set up a poll in BW, to see what people bid with W hand over the double, when they don't see their pd's hand.

http://bridgewinners...g-problem-7405/

[rhm]

MrAce, on 2015-March-12, 10:54, said:

I really disagree with the "opener should bid 2 NT" idea.

• Dbl could be made with 7+ hcp and 2 NT would play very poorly.
• Playing a 4-3 ♠ fit is not that bad, we all play frequently in our daily bridge life.

Yes we do. The difference is that I raise with three cards and ruffing values, when responder has shown at least 4 cards in a major, but I will bid 3 card suits when partner shows less than five only as a last resort.
Three card support in a 4333 hand tends to play poorly, in particular if you are outgunned and one opponent has preempted and bad splits are more likely.
Assume we are outgunned. I can see no good reason why 2♠ should play better on average than 2 NT.
I see plenty of reasons why it could play much worse.
If we got a jack or a queen more with the same distribution everybody would bid 2NT. It is the normal rebid with a weak notrump in a strong notrump system.
Accordingly if a passed hand doubles at the two level with 7 HCP he must be prepared for this response. Either he has a second suit or he had no business doubling 2♥.
Who forces responder to bid with a balanced 7 count and 4 spades. Why can't he not wait for a reopening DBL or 2♠ bid?
As I said a passed does not get stronger, because he passed already.
The biggest danger is what actually happened: A spade raise. You claim East should bid 2NT or 3♦. But there are plenty of hands where responder has enough for a raise but can bid neither.
For 2NT he needs a suitable hand and for 3♦ he needs diamonds.

Quote

Responder can have 5 card spades which was not good enough to bid 2♠ at the first place.

This is barely possible given that responder is already a passed hand. Maybe one time in twnety will responder have 5 cards in spades.

Quote

It is easy to bid 2 NT by W, when we know that pd will rescue us with 3♦ and he will always make a good judgement and won't raise to 3 NT with 11 hcp.

To me bidding 2 NT with W hand would be much worse than his initial opening, even if you decided that opening was a mistake.

I expect to be rescued if responder has a minor. Given his double of 2♥ I expect this to happen often. It will always happen if responder is short in hearts.
If not I expect more than 7 HCP and I understand I will play 2NT and might very well go down. But I also expect to go down in 2♠ and certainly in 3♠.

A raise to 3NT is nearly impossible and certainly less likely than a spade raise from a passed hand when we show at best 11-14.

Rainer Herrmann

[mikeh]

rhm, on 2015-March-13, 02:58, said:

A raise to 3NT is nearly impossible and certainly less likely than a spade raise from a passed hand when we show at best 11-14.

Rainer Herrmann

That depends on style. If, like me and, I think, Timo, 2N is a constructive call, showing a good 13-14, then responder should, in fact, raise to game with the hand he held. Your argument is circular...2N could be a non-opening hand, therefore responder won't raise. Mine is also circular, with a different starting point: I assume opener has an opening hand and I require him to have a reason to bid 2N.