[FelicityR]

Playing a small IMP match (4 teams) at the club yesterday with my regular partner, I had the following

---

We were playing 5M Acol with a weak 12-14 NT. Quite expecting partner to rebid ♥s he surprised me by supporting ♦s. What bid do you think is best for us here and, as always, thank you for your replies.

(I won't tell you what I bid as it had disastrous results, but at least my partner and I learnt a valuable lesson from the board.)

[Tramticket]

I would bid 3♠. Partner will initially take this as looking for 3NT, but I will then pull a 3NT bid to 4♦ - partner should get the message that I am worried about club controls.

[Cyberyeti]

Unless you're going to psyche a club void in the hope of inhibiting the lead, 3♠ seems reasonable.

[pescetom]

I would rather psyche a heart fit (to investigate ♥KQ and keycards) than a club void.
But my preference would be 4♦ if that is forcing and invites a control-bid.

[mikeh]

I cannot imagine anything other than 3S.

Now, the main problem with this is that one could argue that this is how one bids with, say, AQJx x KQxxxx xx, since partner might have something like Kxxx AJxxx Axx x, and feel that rebidding 2S would lead to problems (as often it would: it rarely pays to suppress primary support for partner).

There is no clearly 'right' answer to whether 3S shows real spades or is a try for 3N or, as tramticket seems to see it, a move towards slam. However, my view is that one bids 3S not really caring one way or the other. If partner raises spades, he is marked with 4=5=3=1...with a club void he'd likely do something more than 3D the first time, and with more than 1 club he can't have 5 hearts, a diamond fit and a spade raise.

Here, the main decision is over 3N by partner. Do we pass, hoping that he can run 9 tricks, a virtual certainty if he holds the diamond Ace, or do we move on?

To me the answer is close but clear: we pass 3N.

He should not be bidding 3N, in my opinion, with most hands that make slam reasonable. On the other hand, picture Qxx KQxxx Axx Kx. Any quarrels with the bidding to the point of 3N? Anyone want to play 5D?

Now, once in a while partner will have something like Axx Jxxxx Axx Ax and we miss a slam, but the odds are that he has cards in hearts, and if he has a minimum it is more likely than not that his club stopper is not the Ace.

[hrothgar]

To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women!

[Tramticket]

mikeh, on 2019-September-03, 10:26, said:

On the other hand, picture Qxx KQxxx Axx Kx. Any quarrels with the bidding to the point of 3N? Anyone want to play 5D?

This looks like a weak NT opening to me, although I concede that some might choose to upgrade out of 1NT.

I take your point, but I feel that it is worth a try for slam at IMPs, raking the risk of playing a less comfortable 5D.

[Cyberyeti]

mikeh, on 2019-September-03, 10:26, said:

I cannot imagine anything other than 3S.

Now, the main problem with this is that one could argue that this is how one bids with, say, AQJx x KQxxxx xx, since partner might have something like Kxxx AJxxx Axx x, and feel that rebidding 2S would lead to problems (as often it would: it rarely pays to suppress primary support for partner).

There is no clearly 'right' answer to whether 3S shows real spades or is a try for 3N or, as tramticket seems to see it, a move towards slam. However, my view is that one bids 3S not really caring one way or the other. If partner raises spades, he is marked with 4=5=3=1...with a club void he'd likely do something more than 3D the first time, and with more than 1 club he can't have 5 hearts, a diamond fit and a spade raise.

Here, the main decision is over 3N by partner. Do we pass, hoping that he can run 9 tricks, a virtual certainty if he holds the diamond Ace, or do we move on?

To me the answer is close but clear: we pass 3N.

He should not be bidding 3N, in my opinion, with most hands that make slam reasonable. On the other hand, picture Qxx KQxxx Axx Kx. Any quarrels with the bidding to the point of 3N? Anyone want to play 5D?

Now, once in a while partner will have something like Axx Jxxxx Axx Ax and we miss a slam, but the odds are that he has cards in hearts, and if he has a minimum it is more likely than not that his club stopper is not the Ace.

OP specifies they play a weak NT, your example hands may be impossible

[mikeh]

hrothgar, on 2019-September-03, 10:41, said:

To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women!

While the movie was fun (I was much, much younger then), I don't think it offers us much useful advice on how to live our lives these days

[nekthen]

After 3♠ 3N, I do not believe we can pass. Surely, partner could have bid 2N instead of 3♦ or even 3♣.
BTW would 3♣ show or deny a stopper or is it a GF ♦ raise?
Partner could also have bid 4♣ as a splinter
So slam does seem to require a bit of luck, but I agree with those who bid 3♠ and 4♦ after 3N

---

This seems consistent with partner's bidding and 4♦ is the limit

Of course I do wonder why opps have not bid ♠, but maybe East has all opps points and West does not feel able to bid his 6 card suit. However, passing 3N is still too rich for my taste.

[mikeh]

nekthen, on 2019-September-04, 04:47, said:

After 3♠ 3N, I do not believe we can pass. Surely, partner could have bid 2N instead of 3♦ or even 3♣.
BTW would 3♣ show or deny a stopper or is it a GF ♦ raise?
Partner could also have bid 4♣ as a splinter
So slam does seem to require a bit of luck, but I agree with those who bid 3♠ and 4♦ after 3N

---

This seems consistent with partner's bidding and 4♦ is the limit

Of course I do wonder why opps have not bid ♠, but maybe East has all opps points and West does not feel able to bid his 6 card suit. However, passing 3N is still too rich for my taste.

I do not believe that it makes any sense at all to allow for a contract of 4D. Yes, one can construct hands where 4D is the limit. Btw, on the example you gave, 4D has no play: on a club lead they get 3 clubs and a spade or, in the unlikely event they can't cash 3 clubs (say LHO has the stiff A or K), they get 2 clubs, and a ruff and the spade Ace. Meanwhile, ironically in light of your post, 3N is almost surely making.

It is wrong in principle to pull a voluntarily bid 3N to play in a partial. 4D over 3N would be a slam try, and since one did not pull to 4C, it implies something like Ax Ax KQxxxxx Qx...note that we expect safety in terms of the club suit, since partner won't be bidding 3N with less than Kx(x)....now, if he has Kxx, we are at risk for a club ruff, but when we pull to 4D, we can still play 4N (at least, we should be able to play 4N but I suspect a lot of pairs would unthinkingly take 4N as keycard)

Now, in the examples I gave I overlooked that opener denied a weak 1N, but some weak 1N bidders don't like opening with a chunky 5 card major, and many (including me) would never open 1N with 5=4 in the reds, since there is no rebid issue to worry about. Thus xx KQxxx AJxx Kx is eminently reasonable, and once again one wants to be in 3N...even more so if partner has Qx KQxxx AJxx Kx, and so on.

The point is that pulling 3N is correct only when partner has the club Ace. On no other club holding is pulling 3N logical.

[msjennifer]

A lot depends upon the meanings you give to the bids 1)3H (2)3S and (3)4D. As also the interpretation one gives to the sequence 3S-3NT-4D is doubtful.What does one bid if the HA ie made SA and Hx replaces . say AK-x- etc.Does one bid 3S or not? Its not easy.Personally ,few others may agree, we would bid 4D which is easy for us to interpret as showing 3 outright losers in clubs. Chose the bid according to your agreements and judgement.

[delliam]

After the 2c bid, I would take 3d as a minimum hand with possibly only 3 diamonds.
This being the case, the best chance of game is 3nt and so 3s is my choice asking partner to bid 3nt with a club stop. I would PASS 3nt.

[nekthen]

mikeh, on 2019-September-04, 11:43, said:

I do not believe that it makes any sense at all to allow for a contract of 4D. Yes, one can construct hands where 4D is the limit. Btw, on the example you gave, 4D has no play: on a club lead they get 3 clubs and a spade or, in the unlikely event they can't cash 3 clubs (say LHO has the stiff A or K), they get 2 clubs, and a ruff and the spade Ace. Meanwhile, ironically in light of your post, 3N is almost surely making.

It is wrong in principle to pull a voluntarily bid 3N to play in a partial. 4D over 3N would be a slam try, and since one did not pull to 4C, it implies something like Ax Ax KQxxxxx Qx...note that we expect safety in terms of the club suit, since partner won't be bidding 3N with less than Kx(x)....now, if he has Kxx, we are at risk for a club ruff, but when we pull to 4D, we can still play 4N (at least, we should be able to play 4N but I suspect a lot of pairs would unthinkingly take 4N as keycard)

Now, in the examples I gave I overlooked that opener denied a weak 1N, but some weak 1N bidders don't like opening with a chunky 5 card major, and many (including me) would never open 1N with 5=4 in the reds, since there is no rebid issue to worry about. Thus xx KQxxx AJxx Kx is eminently reasonable, and once again one wants to be in 3N...even more so if partner has Qx KQxxx AJxx Kx, and so on.

The point is that pulling 3N is correct only when partner has the club Ace. On no other club holding is pulling 3N logical.

To be clear I agree that 4♦ is forcing whether bid direct or via 3♠. I just think that 3♠ is pushing partner to bid 3N on a hand he may not feel comfortable with. After all he has had the chance to bid 2 or 3N and not taken it and there is no guarantee that the A♠ is with the 2♣ bidder. I would be very surprised anyway if partner actually bid 3N as that would surely imply opps have 9+ spades and not mentioned them. At pairs scoring I might be tempted to gamble on 3N +1, but at imps I am thinking, yes there are hands where 3N makes and 5♦ fails, but there are also hands where 3N fails by a lot and 5♦ only fails by one.

[Largolia]

FelicityR, on 2019-September-03, 07:51, said:

(I won't tell you what I bid as it had disastrous results, but at least my partner and I learnt a valuable lesson from the board.)

Are you going to tell us now what you bid and the disastrous result?

I'm curious

[PhilG007]

FelicityR, on 2019-September-03, 07:51, said:

Playing a small IMP match (4 teams) at the club yesterday with my regular partner, I had the following

---

We were playing 5M Acol with a weak 12-14 NT. Quite expecting partner to rebid ♥s he surprised me by supporting ♦s. What bid do you think is best for us here and, as always, thank you for your replies.

(I won't tell you what I bid as it had disastrous results, but at least my partner and I learnt a valuable lesson from the board.)

Pass 3♦ You might have combined points for a Game contract but that alone doesn't mean you can make a game contract(!)

[johnu]

PhilG007, on 2019-September-05, 13:34, said:

Pass 3♦ You might have combined points for a Game contract but that alone doesn't mean you can make a game contract(!)

Pass 3♦? Might as well pass 2♣ as well since I can construct hands where 2♦ gets doubled and goes down 2 or 3 tricks vulnerable. Didn't somebody once say that bridge is a game for passers?

[rmnka447]

Tramticket, on 2019-September-03, 11:34, said:

This looks like a weak NT opening to me, although I concede that some might choose to upgrade out of 1NT.

I take your point, but I feel that it is worth a try for slam at IMPs, raking the risk of playing a less comfortable 5D.

On this side of the Atlantic, I don't think many people would bid a weak NT with a 5 card major -- slightly deferent context.

[rmnka447]

As to OP question, I don't any alternative to 3 ♠. mikeh covered all the issues with the bid. But you do hold an opening hand and likely 7 or 8 tricks. Passing 3 ♦ is extremely pessimistic IMO.

[Cyberyeti]

johnu, on 2019-September-05, 15:37, said:

Pass 3♦? Might as well pass 2♣ as well since I can construct hands where 2♦ gets doubled and goes down 2 or 3 tricks vulnerable. Didn't somebody once say that bridge is a game for passers?

Unfortunately Phil's partner had AQx, Qxxxx, Axxx, x and he made an easy 6 with 2 wasted Qs