[Fluffy]

---

2♥ constructive (7) 8-10 bal

[gszes]

At IMPS I would give 100% to east for not inviting game via whatever
your methods are. At least 9 trumps and a probable ruffing value in spades
along with 9 full value hcp more than enough to invite. This especially
true since it would be a vulnerable game.
If this is MP and you like to open light then 2h is reasonable and it
is a systemic hole that neither can easily fix. Going down (more than most)
too often in 3h loses a lot of mp that bidding a game once in a while will
not make up for.

[wank]

east. extra trump, good honour structure. no points wasted in trumps [aka trump richness]

[awm]

West. They already play constructive raises and game is good even if you change a heart to a club. Better to be conservative on 3-level invites.

[whereagles]

North, for not having balanced.

[ArtK78]

IF there is any blame, it goes to East. East has a hand which is very good even for a constructive raise. I like to judge major suit raises by MLTC. East has 4 potential cover cards - ♠K, doubleton spade, ♦A and ♦Q. 4 cover cards is a game force if all the cover cards are working, which they are in this case. Furthermore, the fourth trump has the potential to cover a loser, which it apparently did - hearts must have broken 2-2. So, essentially, East's hand covered 5 losers for West - the 2 spade losers, the heart loser and 2 of the three diamond losers. The last diamond loser disappeared on the successful finesse. You don't see 9 counts eliminate that many losers very often.

West has a clear pass of a constructive raise. Even 3♥ could be too high - give East:

xxx
QJxx
KQx
JTx

Personally, I would not assess any blame. The hands fit like a glove, and obviously the diamond finesse worked and the hearts were 2-2.

To get to game, someone has to take a rosy view of their hand. If either player makes a move towards game, the other will bid it.

[Jinksy]

Looks like no blame to me. As long as we're constructing pessimal hands, give W QJx KQJxx Kx Jxx, and 3♥ is too high. Make that the AQx in ♠s, and you end up in a no-play game.

[ggwhiz]

If that's a constructive raise in your methods with no Bergen or something added (forcing 1nt and a jump?) then I blame the methods or west owes a 3♦ game try and that comes with great risk so I'm back to the methods.

[rhm]

A constructive raise is not the same as a limit raise.
East has a limit raise.
West is blameless

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

Jinksy, on 2014-December-11, 11:04, said:

Looks like no blame to me. As long as we're constructing pessimal hands, give W QJx KQJxx Kx Jxx, and 3♥ is too high. Make that the AQx in ♠s, and you end up in a no-play game.

If you have a limit raise you can almost always construct hands for opener where the three level is too high.
If that is your worry I suggest go back to the old culbertson days where raising immediately to the three level was a slam invite.
Bridge is a game of percentages and calculated risks. Avoiding a negative score in all circumstances is losing Bridge.

Rainer Herrmann

[ArtK78]

rhm, on 2014-December-11, 13:22, said:

A constructive raise is not the same as a limit raise.
East has a limit raise.
West is blameless

Rainer Herrmann

You must have a very low floor for your limit raises. The East hand doesn't look like a limit raise to me. Playing Bergen, I would consider it to be a mixed raise (admittedly, a good mixed raise).

[aguahombre]

ArtK78, on 2014-December-11, 13:37, said:

You must have a very low floor for your limit raises. The East hand doesn't look like a limit raise to me. Playing Bergen, I would consider it to be a mixed raise (admittedly, a good mixed raise).

Maybe you are right. But, the blame is still on East. West would have accepted an invite, but doesn't have the goods to invite opposite a typical constructive raise, which is 3-card support and around 8-10, I think. East didn't invite; that might have been the correct long-run evaluation of East's hand, but it wasn't successful this time. Credit to East if game doesn't make; blame to East if game makes.

[rhm]

ArtK78, on 2014-December-11, 13:37, said:

You must have a very low floor for your limit raises. The East hand doesn't look like a limit raise to me. Playing Bergen, I would consider it to be a mixed raise (admittedly, a good mixed raise).

I am not a result merchant, but if opposite this West hand you get all the tricks and even best defense would have delivered twelve, maybe just maybe evaluating the East hand as a limit raise could be right?
As someone else observed if I had only 3 hearts and say another low minor suit card, game would still be good, but I would agree with a constructive raise and assign no blame for missing game.

Rainer Herrmann

[johnu]

3 to 3-1/2 cover cards plus 4 trumps is good enough for a limit raise by my standards. IMPs or MPs? If I had a short suit game try available, I might try that with the West hand.

[mike777]

atb to east.

East has an easy mixed raise 8 loser hand.
West with roughly an adjusted 6.5-5.5 loser hand can either then bid 4 or at the very least bid 3d as an unspecified game try.

[WesleyC]

2H feels like the wrong choice, even if it is constructive.

West's pass is also slightly conservative. If I thought there was a chance of some helpful defense, i'd make a game-try.

[benlessard]

If you open agressively east hand look like a WTP constructive raise to me, I tend to be on the sound side so I could see myself make a limit with east hand.

Qxx
AQJxx
Kx
xxx

or any hand with Kxx(x) or Qxx(x) in clubs and you will have a lot of poor 3H and 4H contract.
Making a light limit will often lead you to a sub par 4H. Sound invite light accept is clearly the way to go at imps.
If you cant stand missing these game you should use 2C as any hand with a fit constructive or better.

There is a point i want to make about having 4 little trumps is that yes you are less likely to have trump waste however partner will stretch to open light if hes got a good suit so 3H is not totally safe.

[mike777]

agree 100% 3h may not be safe


Not sure that is the real issue.


looking at that east hand not sure 4h is 100% safe.

[mcphee]

East 100% for failure to make a limit raise. If he held no control values, more QJ 's for the raise, then I could understand the nervous raise. Good things happen on 9 card fits and we want to be aggressive with good control cards. No brainer limit raise. There may be a few who feel west could have made a game try, but facing 3 trumps this could turn a plus to a minus easily.

[PhilKing]

Some of it is down to bad luck - the hands fit perfectly. I don't think opener has a move - he needs East to have four of his seven losers covered, which I doubt will be the case more than one time in four. Since 3♥ will often go down and partner may accept a game try with the wrong hand, West is off the hook.

As for East, I just can't see any excuse for not making a constructive raise to three. All the points seem to be working hard - the hand would be much weaker if you altered the minors slightly: ♠KT ♥T853 ♦A732 ♣Q52, but even then I would judge it a tad too strong, since the fourth trump is such an asset.