[AL78]

---

MPs, playing with an inexperienced (but not beginner) player. System is Acol with 3 weak twos, weak NT, little in the way of conventions. Would you bid the spade game or 3NT here, or something else (if so, what)?

[DavidKok]

You could try 3♣, confirming the fit. If partner bids 3♦ a rebid of 3NT looks more attractive, whereas over any other bid you plunk 4♠. The two downsides are leaking information and partner may play you for a slam try.

If you wanted to be precise you could ask if 2♣ promises 6 at these colours, but at MPs I figure it usually won't. North has KJ9xx(x) at best, so the bid was probably not lead-directing. That increases the chance that partner has 2 clubs and we can take a double finesse in clubs - partner's likely shape is 5=2=4=2. Ideally we'd get partner to bid 3NT, but I don't see how to do that. So I guess 4♠ for me. I'm too worried about losing control of the diamonds in 3NT in our hand.

[Cyberyeti]

I'd be inclined to bid 3♣ to see if partner can bid 3♥ as I'd much rather play the game to protect the clubs, if he bids 3♦ I might bid 3N, not sure what I do if he bids 3♠.

[Winstonm]

It could work out to bid 3C but it might confuse, also. I think a straightforward 4S is best. After all, pard could hold AKQxxx, Jx, xx, xxx while overcaller has x, xx, AKQx, KJxxxx and everyone has his bid.

[Cyberyeti]

Winstonm, on 2021-September-15, 08:51, said:

It could work out to bid 3C but it might confuse, also. I think a straightforward 4S is best. After all, pard could hold AKQxxx, Jx, xx, xxx while overcaller has x, xx, AKQx, KJxxxx and everyone has his bid.

Note system is Acol, partner would not raise hearts with 3 and a hand good enough for 2♠, there is still room for this, 4♥ could easily be a better spot than 4♠.

[Winstonm]

Cyberyeti, on 2021-September-15, 09:00, said:

Note system is Acol, partner would not raise hearts with 3 and a hand good enough for 2♠, there is still room for this, 4♥ could easily be a better spot than 4♠.

Thanks. I have no experience with Acol so defer to your judgments there.

[Cyberyeti]

Winstonm, on 2021-September-15, 09:27, said:

Thanks. I have no experience with Acol so defer to your judgments there.

4 card majors being the key point in standard Acol

[AL78]

I dind't think of 3♣ at the time, was trying to engineer a way of finding out if 3NT or 4♥ by me was viable, I'm not sure if she would have understood what I was asking with the cue bid. I bid a direct 4♠ reluctantly knowing the club lead was coming through my holding. She unfortunately went two off although I think she misplayed it.

---

She went up with the club ace at trick one and played three rounds of hearts, pitching a club and a diamond when North ruffed low. She ended up losing a couple of diamonds along with the top spades. I think she should have either not played a third round of hearts or overruffed then try to engineer a diamond ruff or two. I think it should be possible to hold the losers to just two spades and a diamond. One pair was in 3♠+1 and the other pair was in 2NT+2. A four table movement makes the scores almost meaningless.

[akwoo]

I would've thought that too weak for a forcing 2♠ bid even in Acol.

[Cyberyeti]

AL78, on 2021-September-15, 10:05, said:

I dind't think of 3♣ at the time, was trying to engineer a way of finding out if 3NT or 4♥ by me was viable, I'm not sure if she would have understood what I was asking with the cue bid. I bid a direct 4♠ reluctantly knowing the club lead was coming through my holding. She unfortunately went two off although I think she misplayed it.

---

She went up with the club ace at trick one and played three rounds of hearts, pitching a club and a diamond when North ruffed low. She ended up losing a couple of diamonds along with the top spades. I think she should have either not played a third round of hearts or overruffed then try to engineer a diamond ruff or two. I think it should be possible to hold the losers to just two spades and a diamond. One pair was in 3♠+1 and the other pair was in 2NT+2. A four table movement makes the scores almost meaningless.

The problem is in the play not the bidding, 4♠ is cold, overruff the spade and play a top diamond, you will ruff the third diamond and pitch the fourth on the ♥10

[TylerE]

I'm going to make the bid which most resembles my hand, which is 2NT.

[Tramticket]

This is an interesting sequence in Acol.

A 2NT rebid would usually show a strong NT hand (15+) and would be forcing to game because the two-level response shows 10+. However things are interesting if the interference forces responder to bid at the two level in a higher ranking suit. Some players would still rebid 2NT with 15+, which means that they would need to rebid 3H with a semi-balanced minimum and a four-card club suit as the second suit.

I prefer that 2NT shows this minimum and 3NT shows 15+. But this does make it difficult to check for an eight-card major fit after the 3NT rebid. Definitely a discussion to have with your partner. With this agreement that you need to bid 3NT with a balanced 15+, I think that 3C is best.

[Tramticket]

akwoo, on 2021-September-15, 10:56, said:

I would've thought that too weak for a forcing 2♠ bid even in Acol.

I agree

[nige1]

AL78 'She went up with the club ace at trick one and played three rounds of hearts, pitching a club and a diamond when North ruffed low. She ended up losing a couple of diamonds along with the top spades. I think she should have either not played a third round of hearts or overruffed then try to engineer a diamond ruff or two. I think it should be possible to hold the losers to just two spades and a diamond.
+++++++++++++++++++
Agree with AL78: Declarer should over-ruff the 3rd ♥ winner and lead a top ♦ making easily, as the cards lie.
However, GIB shows that the contract can still make, if declarer leads a small trump, instead,

---

[akwoo]

I realize I forgot to actually answer the question:

I think, more often than not, your small doubleton will produce the extra trick that makes the spade game better.

Now, if your LHO is one of those types who will forget the auction and lead away from KJxxx when you play 3N, then by all means bid 3N.

[Gilithin]

Cyberyeti, on 2021-September-15, 11:59, said:

The problem is in the play not the bidding

Except that this was presented as a bidding problem, so it is fair to assume that partner has bid according to the system. This is not a 2♠ response.

[Cyberyeti]

Gilithin, on 2021-September-15, 19:22, said:

Except that this was presented as a bidding problem, so it is fair to assume that partner has bid according to the system. This is not a 2♠ response.

It's not but it's quite close, I think a few pairs agree to shade 2♠ a bit in this sort of sequence, QJ10xxx, x, KQxx, xx I wouldn't argue with.

[Tramticket]

Cyberyeti, on 2021-September-16, 00:15, said:

It's not but it's quite close, I think a few pairs agree to shade 2♠ a bit in this sort of sequence, QJ10xxx, x, KQxx, xx I wouldn't argue with.

It is closer, but I would still double with this second holding.

[TMorris]

What it is is a 2 ♠ opener which make sthe bidding to game quite easy

[Douglas43]

I agree with TMorris. It's worth looking again at partner's initial pass as dealer. You are playing Acol with three weak two's so that is a pretty routine non-vul weak 2♠. Now the auction is an easy 2♠- 4♠. I think the later 2♠ was an attempt to compensate. So I would mainly focus on what constitutes an acceptable weak two.

In this situation you "know" that partner has not got an opening bid. So they are limited to 11 hcp and don't have six spades. With an experienced partner I'd bid 3♣. With a beginner I'd hog with 3NT if trying to win matchpoints or bid 4♠ if wanting to give them practice.