Stopper or no stopper, that is the question
#1
Posted 2019-March-04, 00:55
Qxx
AQ
AJxx
Kxxx
Partner transfers to H, you duly bid 2H, and she bids 3D, nat GF, 4+ cards and probably a side singleton (given the 1st pass, she cant have a slammish hand, and with a 5422 average hand she just bids 3NT).
The stoppers are a bit weak, arent they? Just want to check if what I did was fine!
#2
Posted 2019-March-04, 03:48
#4
Posted 2019-March-04, 06:49
#6
Posted 2019-March-05, 00:28
HardVector, on 2019-March-04, 12:42, said:
x Kxxxx Kxxxx Ax
Ha ha true, but she would not get too excited usually if she xouldnot open a 55 hand.
Feeling my stoppers were not enough facing a low singleton and having an almost fit with AQ, I jumped to 4H, showing 3-cd support. Anyway after 3H, partner would raise to 4 most of the times, so...
Making 10 tricks (DQ finesse) gained us 10 IMPs while 3NT goes down 2 with 5 spades + an A to cash, and the other table stopped at 2H.
Partner actually gameforced with a very marginal hand x KJxxx Kxxx JTx. I think she could have used Stayman jumping to 4 if I have 4, and correcting 2D to 2H and crossing fingers with 2NT if I bid 2S. Yes, this trick works better when you have 5 spades😅
What would you have bid with her hand?
#7
Posted 2019-March-05, 00:40
nige1, on 2019-March-04, 06:45, said:
Without specific agreement, over 3♦, I rank
1. 4♥ = NAT The 5-2 fit might be OK if we can keep trump control.
2. 4♦ = NAT. Allows partner to suggest 4♥ as an alternative.
3. 5♦ = NAT. 5♦ might have 3 losers. Anyway, no point in investigating slam,
4. 3N = NAT. Slow black cards might be adequate stoppers.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
#8
Posted 2019-March-05, 02:24
HardVector, on 2019-March-04, 12:42, said:
x Kxxxx Kxxxx Ax
I see an opening bid.
London UK
#9
Posted 2019-March-05, 02:27
nige1, on 2019-March-04, 06:45, said:
Without specific agreement, over 3♦, I rank
1. 4♥ = NAT The 5-2 fit might be OK if we can keep trump control.
2. 4♦ = NAT. Allows partner to suggest 4♥ as an alternative.
3. 5♦ = NAT. 5♦ might have 3 losers. Anyway, no point in investigating slam,
4. 3N = NAT. Slow black cards might be adequate stoppers.
This feels the wrong way around: if you are going to by-pass 3NT, you might at least give honest information about the relative lengths of your suits.
One agreement I've had for these situations is to play that rebidding the major artificially shows four-card support for the minor (and says nothing about the major). Then you can find out how serious partner is about the minor.
London UK
#10
Posted 2019-March-05, 06:46
Maarten Baltussen
#11
Posted 2019-March-05, 10:12
1N 2D
2H 3D
??
is:
3H: Agrees hearts as trump, allows responder to bid game or cue or use serious 3NT
3N: No good support for either suit, or support for one but a hand suited for NT
3S: Agrees diamonds, allows for 3NT to play, or cue or 4D minorwood, or cuebids.
#12
Posted 2019-March-05, 10:53
#13
Posted 2019-March-05, 11:28
The normal way is that it is an offer to play in 5D or higher, should partner fit diamonds and have only a doubleton heart. 3N is still on the table, but opener is not supposed to bid 3N with a hand containing either 3+ hearts or 4+ diamonds (one can make exceptions, for example with AQx Qx Jxxx AKxx, 3N is obvious)
The other way to play it, probably more attractive by a passed hand, which is unlikely to have aspirations for even an 11 trick contract let alone a slam, is to use it to avoid a bad 3N, as would have been the case here.
As it happens, South's action here seems pretty clear regardless of how North intended the bid. 4D allows North to offer 4H as a contract, which she ought to do here, while preserving 5D or even slam should north had a pronounced 2-suiter.
FWIW, the normal way makes far more sense to me than the 'other way'.
For one thing, it isn't always possible to land on one's feet: so North says 'I'm worried about 3N' and South now has to guess the nature of the worry. Opposite North's hand, what South needs was good spades and a little something in clubs, but what if he had good clubs and a little something in spades? He's guessing where North's problem is.
For a second thing, the defenders don't always make the winning lead, and the less we tell them about our hands, the more likely it is that they will fail to find that winning lead.
Finally, if one uses 3D as primarily an attempt to avoid a bad 3N, one loses much of the benefit of establishing a force while exploring strain. One can quite often make 5 or 6 of the minor, but opener is going to have trouble showing enthusiasm for the minor if responder isn't necessarily aiming for the minor contract.
On the hand itself, North made a serious overbid with 3D. She ought to have bid 2N over 2H, and South would probably play 3N, failing.
3D here ought to promise more by way of strength. Stretching is ok if one has compensating strength: which means 5-5 or better, and responder has a sub-minimum 5-4 with a weak second suit.
It is a terrible mistake to design bidding methods or style merely because the method or style being considered will sometimes lead to the wrong contract. No bidding method is perfect, and allowing hands, that are bad for the system, to cause us to change leads to madness, because one is shortly going to encounter a hand where the 'new' or modified method leads to a bad outcome, and now one has to change that....ad infinitum.
Yes, consistently poor results should make one reconsider, but one doesn't do so based on single hands. What one should do is to take advantage of the experience of very skilled pairs who play the same basic method. So look at 2/1 pairs if that's your method, or meckwell lite pairs if you prefer big club. See how they deal with these situations.
#14
Posted 2019-March-05, 12:00
https://www.youtube....hungPlaysBridge
#15
Posted 2019-March-05, 12:45
gordontd, on 2019-March-05, 02:27, said:
I like a rebid scheme similar to GordonTD's. e.g. after 1N -2♦ - 2♥ - 3♦ - ?
- 3♥ = S/T, 3 ♥s. (Slam interest).
- 3♠ = ART. 2 ♥s, 4+ ♦s .
- 3N = NAT.
- 4♣ = S/T 3 ♥s. 4+ ♦s. (Slam interest)
- 4♦ = NAT. 3 ♥s 4 ♦s. (No slam interest).
- 4♥ = NAT. 3 ♥s. (No slam interest).
#16
Posted 2019-March-05, 18:39
4c
Diamond support and at best iffy 3n cards. The club bid acts as a cue in case responder is near max for a passed hand and still allows for 4h to be the final contract. The heart AQ almost convinces me to try 3/4h but if partner is x Kxxxx Kxxxxx x I see no good reason to risk a 42 or 51 heart split especially if this was IMPS where 5d is still quite a good contract. Change partners hand to x Jxxxx KQxxxx x and would much rather be in 5d. The nice part about the 4c bid is that it still allows for slam bidding if partner is short in spades void Kxxxx Kxxxxx Qx.
Without specific agreement, over 3♦, I rank
1. 4♥ = NAT The 5-2 fit might be OK if we can keep trump control.
2. 4♦ = NAT. Allows partner to suggest 4♥ as an alternative.
3. 5♦ = NAT. 5♦ might have 3 losers. Anyway, no point in investigating slam,
4. 3N = NAT. Slow black cards might be adequate stoppers.