[Wackojack]

---

MP pairs

[eagles123]

I would just bid 4d of course X could be right but so could 3n which would be my 2nd choice - anything other than 4d seems like a fairly wild punt to me

[sfi]

I double in the hopes that partner bids 3NT. If partner bids 4C I just have to overbid with 4D (although maybe I can pretend we're playing equal-level conversion and it's systemic). Over 3S I'm probably going to pass, but this is the worst-case scenario.

It seems like the frequency of a succesful 3NT bid from partner, along with the chances of getting to spades when it is right, outweigh the frequency of missing diamonds when that's the right spot.

[ggwhiz]

sfi, on 2016-July-16, 09:53, said:

It seems like the frequency of a succesful 3NT bid from partner, along with the chances of getting to spades when it is right, outweigh the frequency of missing diamonds when that's the right spot.

4♦ for me and no, I don't like it. Double followed by a heart raise on my left is something I like a LOT less. All of partners options after a pass by lho, including pass are potential disasters given that owning a 3nt bid is wildly unlikely.

[Jinksy]

+1 for 4♦. Constructively I suspect it's the wrong bid, but if I do anything else, I'm not going to be happy when 4♥ comes back around to me.

[gordontd]

Jinksy, on 2016-July-16, 15:17, said:

4♦ again. Constructively I suspect it's the wrong bid, but if I do anything else, I'm not going to be happy when 4♥ comes back around to me.

That sounds like an argument for 5D but that wasn't given as an option.

[Jinksy]

gordontd, on 2016-July-16, 15:49, said:

That sounds like an argument for 5D but that wasn't given as an option.

I don't know if they're making 4♥ - I'd like to include partner in the decision.

[sfi]

ggwhiz, on 2016-July-16, 14:34, said:

4♦ for me and no, I don't like it. Double followed by a heart raise on my left is something I like a LOT less. All of partners options after a pass by lho, including pass are potential disasters given that owning a 3nt bid is wildly unlikely.

Wildly unlikely? I would have thought partner having a stopper and a 9 count is fairly normal. True, if they raise it's somewhat annoying and I may wind up misrepresenting my hand. I'm still not convinced the double is anti-percentage though.

[Winstonm]

I've got 6 losers and a suit that is not totally solid - what do you want me to do? Pass.

[sfi]

Well, good news (for me at least) is my regular partner doesn't think it's clear that I am totally lunatic, and may be intrigued enough to run a simulation to determine whether or not I actually am. Basically, the question of whether the three good things that can happen:

• Partner bids 3NT and it's right
  
• Partner has 5+ spades and it's better than diamonds
  
• Partner has 4 spades and the Moysian plays well enough

outweigh the bad things, particularly:

• Not finding a diamond fit when it's right
  
• Getting too high when partner bids clubs

The bad news is he's likely to be trying to show how bad my double is, so I'm starting off behind even before the simulation is run.

[mathboy]

3NT

[rmnka447]

Winstonm, on 2016-July-16, 17:25, said:

I've got 6 losers and a suit that is not totally solid - what do you want me to do? Pass.

Sorry, but most people who play Gambling 3 NTs would have no trouble opening 3 NT in 1st chair with this hand.

I'm bidding 4 ♦. If LHO has enough to punish me in 4 ♦, they probably have enough so 3 NT or 4 ♥ are a good bet. If they bid 4 ♥, I want partner to be able to take the ♦ sac if appropriate rather than have it go 3 ♥ - Dbl - 4 ♥ - P - P - ? and guess what to do.

[ggwhiz]

sfi, on 2016-July-16, 16:14, said:

Wildly unlikely? (3nt response to double)

Hmmm, Heart stopper, 2+ diamonds, <4 spades and a club holding more suitable for notrump as opposed to bidding them. That's a 4-way parlay.

[robert2734]

4 ♦ and be worried its an underbid. My second choice is 5 ♦ .

[msjennifer]

This hand in my opinion deserves a pass.Opponents are vulnerable against not and yet RHO has opened 3H ! If I bid 4D does it describe a good hand ready to play in four diamonds or does it show a desire to sacrifice? My opinion is the first choice.The third reason for bidding 4 diamonds is prevent LHO from biding 3S,3NT.( partner is not going to lead a diamond when you pass.The most likely lead is a spade or rarely a club).What to bid and with what intentions when a minor suit comes into picture is unclear.LHO's life is also not easy .I may consider to bid 5 D if LHO bids a game and partner passes.Double shows a four card spade suit when it is made ,in the second direct seat, at 3 level.My hand does not have a decent three card support for spades and since ,presumably,RHO is short in spades they are going to be stacked with LHO.And after a a double partner bids 4 Club what am I supposed to do.? I feel it is 'safer' to pass right now and decide later presuming the opponents are strong ones.Lastly, I don't mind losing a hand once In a while.!

.

[The_Badger]

The late great Rixi Markus usually advocated bid what's in your hand, so I go along with that and bid 4♦.

Dbl might work out well, and both 3NT or 4♠ might be on but...knowing that two hands are unbalanced, you can bet your bottom dollar (or pound) that the suits are more likely to split horribly if you arrive in a contract.

I believe Dbl could backfire horribly too if partner has to take a decision, thinking that your hand is a bit more meaty than beyond the ♦ suit.

Yes 4♦ for me. And if we get the wrong result, we sure won't be the only ones.

[MrAce]

4♦>Pass>3NT>Dbl

[helene_t]

If you don't bid 4d with this hand when will you ever?

[sfi]

helene_t, on 2016-July-19, 01:45, said:

If you don't bid 4d with this hand when will you ever?

This question lies behind the reason people are willing to play non-leaping Michaels in these sorts of situations.

My response is when I don't have a solid or near-solid suit that is likely to provide tricks in 3NT.

[cherdano]

helene_t, on 2016-July-19, 01:45, said:

If you don't bid 4d with this hand when will you ever?

When your suit is NOT solid?

Edit:
Oops. Just what sfi said.