[whereagles]

IMPS

---

2♦ = weak, classic style

North can now bid:
2♥ = neutral relay, asking for side major. (You can stop in 3D/M later.)
3♦ = pree raise

Bid?

[ahydra]

2H asks for side 3-card majors?

Even then, I think I'd rather pass.

ahydra

[whereagles]

It asks for side 4-card majors, not 3-card.

[mike777]

pass

[kgr]

Pass.

[gszes]

The opps are most likely headed to game/slam and what we really need to
try to do is keep clubs out of the picture where the opps are favored to
have a massive fit. 3d will go a long way toward accomplishing that goal
and maybe we will get lucky and steer the opps into a major suit where we
will undoubtedly be much happier than in a club contract.

Raising a weak 2 with 2 small carries some risk especially if your partner likes
to bid with 6 small. Is the risk worth the tactical advantage? while I think so
not all will agree and pass rates to be a popular choice.

[mikeh]

I wouldn't call a weak 2♦ with a side 4 card major 'classic'

I happen to like the method...I played this style (including allowing for 5♦ plus 4 card major) in what I consider to be the strongest partnership I have ever played in and it worked very well.

Having said that, the odds are definitely against his having a major on this hand, and we don't really have the diamonds to make playing in 3♦ that attractive. Meanwhile, our major suit length is such that it is possible that the opps can't both reach and make a game. I suspect they can make 3N, but even that isn't clear. Give partner a classic weak 2 and they could easily fail: AQxxxx in diamonds, and the K on our left: I bet they don't have 8 major suit winners!

So I pass smoothly.

I'll probably regret this if partner has a major, but I don't like the odds and we might not make game anyway.

[whereagles]

Well, classic in the sense that you can rely on partner having 6 decent diamonds and an offensive hand.

But yes, possible presence of a side major isn't really "classic" style.

[MrAce]

Where is Philking? PASS

[boosterbbh]

gszes, on 2014-November-27, 10:25, said:

The opps are most likely headed to game/slam and what we really need to
try to do is keep clubs out of the picture where the opps are favored to
have a massive fit. 3d will go a long way toward accomplishing that goal
and maybe we will get lucky and steer the opps into a major suit where we
will undoubtedly be much happier than in a club contract.

Raising a weak 2 with 2 small carries some risk especially if your partner likes
to bid with 6 small. Is the risk worth the tactical advantage? while I think so
not all will agree and pass rates to be a popular choice.

I agree. It's an aggressive bid that even if we go down two doubled it will probably be a good score. I believe it's a risk worth taking in this situation. If we we switch the clubs with one of the majors, the 3 level preempt wouldn't do much, then I'd pass. I can also understand a pass response

[nige1]

whereagles, on 2014-November-27, 08:31, said:

IMPS
2♦ = weak, classic style
North can now bid:
2♥ = neutral relay, asking for side major. (You can stop in 3D/M later.)
3♦ = pree raise
Bid?

---

IMO Pass = 10, 3♦ = 9, 2♥ = 8.

[the_clown]

Pass, but dont think 3♦ is horrible.

[whereagles]

Full hand:

---

I realized opps had a club fit, but were extremely likely to be in trouble over a preemptive 3♦. This is off LTTC bounds, but it should be correct tactically.

And sure enough, it materialized: East could do nothing but cueing his major 5-5, leaving West, and his side, in big trouble.

We would have set it -3 down doubled.... had pard not made a gigantic blunder which shall remain undisclosed

All I could say at the end was "next time pls open it 1♦ kthx".

[mikeh]

what is the point of this?

Sure, your 3♦ worked well, until your less-than-expert partner presumably bid 5♦.

However, one reason it worked so well was that your partner had a full opening bid at favourable!

I really don't like posts the main purpose of which seems to be to say: look at me! See how wonderful my 3♦ bid was!

[whereagles]

I don't want you to look at me.. lol. I'm ugly.

My point is that 3♦ is arguably a good tactical bid, that's all. You may disagree ofc, but it certainly has its merits. At least I think so.

Just so you know, it didn't came totally out of my head: I read the idea in Robson/Segal. My only merit was to realize I could try the trick here. Nothing special about that.

[Jinksy]

What is 'the trick'? Always raise P's preempts on 2-card suits?

[WesleyC]

The problem with raising to 3D on this hand, is that you're likely to push the opponents into a skinny 3NT/4M which rolls home on a diamond lead.

Make the hand [Qxxxx Jxxxx Ax x] and you would get my vote!