[mike777]

Scoring: MP

(1NT)=2H=(2S)=3D
(3S)==P==P==?

---

[temp3600]

I double and lead the DK. None vulnerable, I think we have very good chances of setting this one trick, and fair chances of two down.
I would pass if ops were red vs white.

[Rebound]

I'm just gonna pass. I'm worried about diamond shortness in RHO's hand and the missing kings and heart A being with LHO.

[ochinko]

No way am I going to leave the opps undoubled here. Even at IMPs I would hardly pass.

Petko

[Gerben42]

Partner made a non-vulnerable 2♥ bid after a strong NT. Don't hang him by doubling this!

I Pass.

[ochinko]

Gerben42, on Nov 24 2005, 02:50 PM, said:

Partner made a non-vulnerable 2♥ bid after a strong NT. Don't hang him by doubling this!

I Pass.

It's not about hanging partner, it's about trying to achieve a decent score.

We both bid suits, and I have 2 Aces outside them. We have no heart fit, so opps don't have two fits, only a spade one. Besides, the opening doesn't suggest a possible crossruff.

I believe many pairs will stop at 2D making 3, but at most tables opps won't reach 3Sp. So not only I double, but I pray for -2, otherwise we have a bottom score anyway.

Partner must have an honor outside hearts, so in the worst case his hand would look something like this:

xx
KJTxxx
xxx
Qx

[Fluffy]

Actually partner could just have ♥KQJxxx and we would have no hope to defeat.

Can we rule out partner having a 2 suiter?

This is just a toss up. I will pass this time.

[mike777]

Fluffy, on Nov 24 2005, 04:23 PM, said:

Actually partner could just have ♥KQJxxx and we would have no hope to defeat.

Can we rule out partner having a 2 suiter?

This is just a toss up. I will pass this time.

Ya partner will almost never have a second suit here, if so maybe xxxx.
No one has considered 4d?

[cinvent77]

Quote

No one has considered 4d?

That is a good point. Let's see if I can actually apply the Law: partner probably has three diamonds and at most four. The opponents are likely to have nine spades. That means that there are at least 18 tricks. Apparently the Law suggests that you either bid 4♦ or double. Pass is not an option. But then I'm not sure if I understand this at all.

[mikeh]

I pass.

My hcp suggests that partner stretched to bid. So many will have an auction that starts with 1N P 2♥ transfer (if 1N is not 15-17, ignore this post ).

Many players will not bid with my hand. I am not saying that pass is correct, just that in a typical mp field, pass is going to be common (assuming partner passes as most will).

This means that a good percentage of the field is defending 2♠, wrong-headed tho that decision might seem.

So we are ahead of the field in two regards: the first is that we have them at the 3-level, and the second is that I am on lead, which rates to gain us a tempo if not a trick (I am leading a ♥).

So I estimate that if we beat 3♠ here, we are getting well above average. My ♥ lead rates to be more effective than partner's ♦ lead had we balanced with 3♦ and heard opener bid 3♠.

BTW, very few pairs will be playing this in 2♦, since RHO must surely have a hand with which he would get to 2♠, and clearly LHO fits ♠.

I expect to average about 0.5 a trick better than the field due to being on lead and I expect to be about 0.5 of a level higher than the field: in other words, half the field is defending at the 2 level. Put these together: I expect to beat half the field because they are at the two level, and of the other half, I expect to beat them half the time due to the lead. So I expect about an 80% result for defending a failing 3♠, which I can turn into 98% by doubling.

If they make, then I am probably getting about average if I pass (maybe more because my lead may help) and zero if they make.

So I stand to gain maybe 18% of a board and risk 50%. I don't like those odds.

As for 4♦, on a bad day, he has xx KQJxxx xx Jxx. We are far more likely to fail at 4♦ than we are to see 3♠ make, and if 3♠ makes, we may be 300 in 4♦. As for the LOTT, why do we think we know how many ♦ partner has.

-300 is a real possibility. At least estimating matchpoints would be easy

[Robert]

Hello everyone

Well everyone is not shy about bidding if those example hands of a 2H overcall over a strong 1NT are to be believed.

In my methods, this would be the slaughter of the 'not' so innocents. Turning the cube would be an easy call.

If I am playing with someone whose methods allow a 2H bid with the example hand, pass is my call. I agree with other posts that say we have an advantage because the bidding pushed the other pair to the three level.

Regards,
Robert

[cherdano]

mike777, on Nov 24 2005, 11:46 PM, said:

No one has considered 4d?

I have to admit it took me a full 0.3s to rule 4D out. I am sure you can tell by this that I am not an expert, because that an expert would only take 0.05s to do so.

Seriously, if 4♦ is right, then partner will bid it (and even sometimes when it isn't). 3♦ without a heart fit is a big bid.

Arend

[Winstonm]

If partner had shape and a 4 card fit he would raise; his pass says he does not have this; a double-check of LOTT says this is more than likely a 9/9 hand or a 9/8 hand - seems to me the lack of a sturdy enough fit and the defensive prospects argue toward the 9/8. Pass and hope you've driven them one too high.

Winston

[Winstonm]

cinvent77, on Nov 24 2005, 05:02 PM, said:

Quote

No one has considered 4d?

That is a good point. Let's see if I can actually apply the Law: partner probably has three diamonds and at most four. The opponents are likely to have nine spades. That means that there are at least 18 tricks. Apparently the Law suggests that you either bid 4♦ or double. Pass is not an option. But then I'm not sure if I understand this at all.

By the way, if the opponent's hold a 9-card fit you are guaranteed to hold an 8-card fit somewhere - not necessarily diamonds. Maybe pard got in with a weak 5/5 heart/club hand. Regardless, there is no guarantee of a known 9-card fit our way in any suit so it is hard to apply LOTT.

Another thing many believe to be true that isn't accurate is that if the opps have an 8-card fit then our side must hold one as well - but it isn't so - we may be likely to have an 8-card fit but the most we are guaranteed is 7. The only time we are assured of our own 8-card fit is when the opponents hold a 9-card fit.

Winston

[han]

Agree with pass, I think that mikeh has this all right.

I did not consider 4♦ at all, brrr! I've just bid 3D didn't I, we don't have the balance of strength and I am short in partner's suit. I don't know if not considering 4♦ at all makes me more or less of an expert than Arend.

[Kalvan14]

IMHO, it was quite lucky that LHO bid 3♠ I would not be surprised if CHO has a singleton diamond (for simmetry with my singleton heart ) and over 3♦ bids 3♥, confident to find at least tolerance in my hand.

This is one of those funny hands where everyone is bidding. The only sure thing is that my hand and LHO's hand total 3/4 of the deck's honors. CHO and RHO have to do with a bare 10- HCP between themselves. A very good hand for CHO would be xx KJTxxx x Q(orJ)xxx. Anyone cares to defend 3♠ doubled with that lot?
If EW can make 3♠, it is the normal par for the hand. If they go 1 down it is very good, doubled or not. 3♠X= would be an obvious zero.
Pass, be quick!!