Help
I wonder what 3NT bid from overcaller really is. In some constructive auctions it shows solid suit and something little on the side. I wonder if that would make any sense here. Some AKQxxxx Qx Kx xx or similar. If it was something like that, passing 3NT wouldn't even be so terrible. Of course there's a fine line when I have already bid 4♠ with that type of hand.
If it's more like natural call, question is again when we start doubling first. 18, 19, 20bal ? Maybe there is some 18-19 balancedish hand that wants to blast game and possibly play in NT. With the hand in question, it's definitely invite, suggesting NT if possible.
A set from 4/6/11
#21
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 475
- Joined: 2008-March-07
- Gender:Male
- Location:Oulu, Finland
- Interests:How to find out shape below 2NT.
Posted 2011-April-09, 03:53
#22
- Andy Bowles
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 11,993
- Joined: 2007-May-03
- Gender:Male
- Location:London, UK
Posted 2011-April-09, 04:32
I wouldn't bid 3NT on the overcaller's hand either. It seems likely that I'll be able to ruff at least one of my small diamonds in dummy, so 4♠ will make at least one more trick than 3NT.
What would I bid 3NT with? One possibility is a hand with eight fast tricks, hoping for a ninth in dummy, something like AKQxxx xxx AQ xx or AKQxx xxx AQJ xx. Another is a scattered 17-count with a double diamond stop, say AQxxx KJx KQx Kx. Those hands argue for a pass.
When is 4♠ better? I don't think he should bid 3NT with a diamond holding that includes two small cards - Axx, Kxx, AQxx, etc. We might belong in 4♠ if he has a single slow diamond stop and an ace to knock out, eg KQJxx AQx QJx Kx.
One answer is that 2NT should be forcing. Then partner can bid 3NT when he just wants to play there, and 2NT followed by 3NT to offer a choice. I might just assume this without discussion - it will almost never be right to play in 2NT when we have an eight-card major-suit fit.
No. Partner has said he thinks he can make game opposite a normal minimum. We have a normal minimum (or, if anything, a bit more than a minimum).
What would I bid 3NT with? One possibility is a hand with eight fast tricks, hoping for a ninth in dummy, something like AKQxxx xxx AQ xx or AKQxx xxx AQJ xx. Another is a scattered 17-count with a double diamond stop, say AQxxx KJx KQx Kx. Those hands argue for a pass.
When is 4♠ better? I don't think he should bid 3NT with a diamond holding that includes two small cards - Axx, Kxx, AQxx, etc. We might belong in 4♠ if he has a single slow diamond stop and an ace to knock out, eg KQJxx AQx QJx Kx.
One answer is that 2NT should be forcing. Then partner can bid 3NT when he just wants to play there, and 2NT followed by 3NT to offer a choice. I might just assume this without discussion - it will almost never be right to play in 2NT when we have an eight-card major-suit fit.
Quote
Are we bidding 4S expecting it to cost less than 3NT typically?
No. Partner has said he thinks he can make game opposite a normal minimum. We have a normal minimum (or, if anything, a bit more than a minimum).
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
#23
- Limit bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,482
- Joined: 2004-November-02
- Gender:Female
- Location:England
- Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those
Posted 2011-April-10, 13:54
I agree with gnasher on the first one. I wouldn't bid 3NT with overcaller's hand; I think it shows something like a solid spade suit and soft stuff outside. I passed because I was worried about four top losers. On the actual hand I would have expected overcaller to go more slowly.
But it's hardly unusual to be given one hand, say I'll do X, discover that Y would be successful and say well I wouldn't have bid that way with partner's hand!
On the second I'm still gloating about the fact opener had only three hearts.... anyway, I only play 'maximal' (or game try) doubles after the opponents have bid and raised. So for me this is a penalty double. I thought it was quite an interesting question whether a penalty double is the right call or not, as you mention. If I'm the only poster who can double for penalties it becomes less interesting.
But it's hardly unusual to be given one hand, say I'll do X, discover that Y would be successful and say well I wouldn't have bid that way with partner's hand!
On the second I'm still gloating about the fact opener had only three hearts.... anyway, I only play 'maximal' (or game try) doubles after the opponents have bid and raised. So for me this is a penalty double. I thought it was quite an interesting question whether a penalty double is the right call or not, as you mention. If I'm the only poster who can double for penalties it becomes less interesting.