BBO Discussion Forums: Responding to opener's jump rebid of her suit - BBO Discussion Forums

On a recent post I asked how I should have responded. The general consensus was that partner should have reversed into hearts and I should not have passed with 3 card sopport and 9 HCP. We found the BBO responses very helpful.

Last night (playing duplicate) we had a similar situation. The bidding went 1♥-1♠-3♥. Partner had 6 hearts and 17 HCP. I had ♠9876 ♥AJ9 ♦653 ♣Q64. With my 7 HCP and 10.5 losers I passed. We made 5♥.
I ran the hand through Jack, which bid 4♥ and made 11 tricks. That surprised me. Should I have bid game? Am I still being too conservative?

NB. corrected - Q♣ missed off original post.

Liversidge, on 2019-January-15, 02:50, said:

I assume you are playing Acol, ..., due to bidding 1S instead of raising the 1H opening.
I would have passed with your hand, an additional Queen would not have changed a lot, I only count 5HCP,
the 4333 shape is a minus.
Finally making 11 tricks, could be due to anything the good feature, the responding hand has 2 entries.

On a side note: It seems you are using the LTC for hand evaluation. The LTC works fine, but if you hold a bal. hand
it is better / more precise to look at cover cards instead of loosers.
You have 1 cover card, the Ace of hearts (maybe 1.5), a jump rebid showes a hand with roughly 6 (at most 5) loosers,
you need 2-3 cover cards for partner, so you should pass.
Acol used to make thee jump suit rebid on fairly light opener hands ( at the time I learned it, ... 20 years ago, so this
may or may not have changed), if you strength the requirement, you need to adjust the estimation.


With kind regards
Marlowe

Liversidge, on 2019-January-15, 02:50, said:

I think it is 5 HCPs?

You are playing Acol I think? The jump to 3♥ in Acol is non-forcing with an expectation of around 7 playing tricks. Partner's trumps are not particularly robust since partner is missing the AJ, so I would expect at least a seven-card suit. Your ace of hearts and three-card support are certainly useful and should ensure no heart losers, but you have no other trick-taking potential and no ruffing values. So game needs partner to supply three tricks outside hearts. This is not impossible, given that only five of his points are in hearts and you have got a couple of likely entries (maybe three?), which would allow partner to take finesses and not lead away from tenaces.

It's close, but I would raise at IMPs, less clear at MPs.

Tramticket, on 2019-January-15, 03:49, said:

Sorry, I had a ♣Q. I have corrected the original post.

This also depends on what partner will bid 3♥ on, when he will fake a reverse etc. I would pass 3♥ on your hand, but our 3♥ can be weaker than for some people, and more importantly is capped in strength. Axx, KQ10xxx, AQx, x would be plenty for 3♥ for us, and he won't be an ace or ♦K better than that.

I agree it's marginal, but you can construct all manner of hands where only 3♥ makes, and where 4♥ is cold. In fact, you can analyse and analyse until the cows home, but bridge bidding is not a precise science as we all know, despite the many ways of evaluating hands and counting tricks.

My opinion is, for what it's worth, if you are going to be a scary cat every time a situation like this crops up (no disrespect intended here, just an observation of club players who tend to be a bit cautious around the edges and don't wish to overbid) you will not win in the long run.

Occasionally you will end up in a winning part score when every one else bids a failing game, but bidding games when everyone else is in a part score is a winning strategy overall.

If there was a bidding box card for a bid of 3 and a good tad over a 1/2 ♥s, then that's what you'd be pulling out. There isn't so it's got to be 4♥

I should probably not comment on an Acol situation: I last played a form of Acol some 40 years ago:)

However, in a NA context, the problem is that one is too weak to bid 1S while holding these hearts. 1H 1S 1N 2H is constructive, and it is arguable that your hand just meets that, but you are overstating your spade holding which may influence opener the wrong way. More importantly, opener will often bid something other than 1N.

If he bids 2m, for example, 2H is just a preference and contains no inkling of 3 card support, let alone AJx.

And what if he raises spades on a 3 card holding? Now we play, say, Kxx opposite Jxxx instead of KQxxx opposite AJx as trump:(

All of this means that in a NA context (ie 1H is 5), one should 'support with support' and bid 2H.

Given that, I suspect, 2H would be seen as misguided, in a 4 card major method, I'd consider 1N rather than 1S, but appreciate that this probably isn't mainstream. So let's go with the 1S response.

Now, 3H is non-forcing, and the question is: do we have enough to raise?

Let's start with a basic proposition: the fact that, opposite partner's hand, game makes...or even 5 makes...does not mean that raising is 'therefore' the right action. Bridge is about probabilities...influenced, especially at imps, by magnitude of result. At mps, it's all frequency of result, and the question is whether game will make 50% of more of the time opposite the foreseeable ranges for partner.

I don't know your partner's proclivities, but I would suspect that he would rate to have a maximum given that his heart suit will be (for this auction) weak.

Personally, and bearing in mind my lack of experience with Acol and my complete ignorance of your partner's style, I would see the raise to game as borderline at mps.

At imps, technically one needs the same arithmetic as at mps to bid a nv game, but my preference is to be slightly more aggressive at imps, even nv, than at mps. Not only is a 50% game a break-even in theory but, if partner can play dummy better than the opponents can defend, there is usually more chance of misdefence than of misplay, and so a 50% contract will sometimes be allowed to make when it should fail. If vulnerable at imps, then bidding game is clear. Note that one imp factor is that with this heart holding the opps are never doubling 4H.

Just treat the jump rebid as GF if holding either 3 card support for the primary suit or 7HCP.

Many English pairs would jump rebid a suit with almost any 15 count, while many 17 counts would qualify for a Benji 2♣ opening or similar. In that context, I think you should pass. Jack presumably plays a system with a slightly strong 3♥ rebid (not a huge difference but maybe 15+ to 18- rather than 15- to 17), so it sounds correct that Jack raises.

So this is very close. It is good to have a discussion with partner about the strength of the 3♥ bid, and what you do with hands that are too strong for that (2♣ opening, 4♥ rebid, fake a new suit, maybe fake a 2NT rebid, maybe rebid 3NT whatever that means).