[jmcw]

Partner was not too happy with my bidding here!. I wasn't too happy with his!
Ofcourse 5♠ rolls the scoring was IMPS.
Maybe we're both a bit to blame, I look forward to the responses. Tx folks.

---

[mgoetze]

2♣ and the first double are both stretching a bit. What would 2NT instead of double have meant? Looks like a better bid to me if it shows a shapely takeout!
But the really crazy bid was 5♦, IMHO. It could even be a 5-2 fit...

[mr1303]

In order:

2C - very fruity at this vulnerability with 3 small spades.
X - just about I guess with 3 card club support, but still fruity
3D - no need for this over the redouble, unless pass suggests defending
5D - WTF?!? - You are vul against not here....
X - You have 1 defensive trick and no reason to suspect bad breaks.

So I guess 5D, but no bid is particularly brilliant.

No offense intended by the way...

[rduran1216]

2C starts the chain of very questionable calls.

5D is ridiculous

I chose 3D because partner isn't leaving in 2S xx and will bid either 3C or 3D.

I'm guessing both players are BBO experts

[jmcw]

mgoetze, on 2011-January-10, 16:43, said:

It could even be a 5-2 fit...

How on earth can it be 5/2, South did not need to bid anything over the XX.

[mgoetze]

jmcw, on 2011-January-10, 17:24, said:

How on earth can it be 5/2, South did not need to bid anything over the XX.

Aha, so you were the one to bid 5♦.

Perhaps not everyone would show preference with Jxxx x Ax KQJTxx, but some might.

[jmcw]

mgoetze, on 2011-January-10, 17:24, said:

Aha, so you were the one to bid 5♦.

You may be reading too much into that. No admission was intended

[rduran1216]

do you guys not know a responsive double when u see it. The only call which is close to normal is the responsive double.

[655321]

In order

2♣ is courageous opposite a passed partner and with 3 small spades
X - I prefer 3♣, double isn't insane though
3♦ - I like this bid, 3♣ is possible although you already told partner you have a club suit like this. Passing is not an option because -1240 is a bad score.
5♦ - insane, partner was supporting your diamonds under pressure, not introducing a suit of his own
X - insane

Anyway, after all this you just lost 5 IMPs for -650 instead of -450 and you did push them to the 5 level, could have been a lot worse!

[nigel_k]

It's ok up to 3♦, though I might have chosen differently. Passing the redouble should be to play so that is not an option for South.

I disagree with 5♦ and the final double. I don't know which contributed more to the bad result but the 5♦ bid is definitely the worst call of the auction.

North 75%. South 25%.

[wank]

i'm much more against north's double than most people here - opps have only raised 1S to 2. partner can easily have a decent hand with 4 spades in which case with 3 clubs and at most 1 defensive trick, you expect to write down a large score ending in 70.

3C would be a perfectly fair call.

i don't like south's 3D call either though - often north will not have diamonds here in which case you're just pushing the bidding higher on your shitty hand. best just bid 3C and hope the auction ends.

obviously the rest of it's just absurd.

[the hog]

The 2C bid is aggressive. The first double is correct, 3D is poor. I would also bid 5D over a vul 2C overcall and a 3D bid by partner, as I would expect a better hand.

[cherdano]

mgoetze, on 2011-January-10, 17:24, said:

Aha, so you were the one to bid 5♦.

Perhaps not everyone would show preference with Jxxx x Ax KQJTxx, but some might.

If partner would bid 3♦ with that you might as well bid 7N to get rid of him. Why exactly does he want to play in a 4-2 fit when he has a KQJTxx suit?
It's ok to suggest bad bids now and then, but BBF is more forgiving if you don't do it in a sarcastic tone.

[mtvesuvius]

2♣ is a bit much, but I can live with it, a few more club spots would be nice of course.
The responsive double is a bit light, but with 3 card support and nice interior cards, I don't mind it.
3♦ is clear... To suggest passing here is ridiculous. Partner showed the red suits, and we have a clear preference, the only interesting question is what 2N should be... Perhaps the 3-6 in the minors?
5♦ is absurd. I give this bid 95% of the blame, just because it is so ridiculously bad lol
Double is bad, however not ridiculous... South can see a heart lead, diamond over, heart ruff, and perhaps another trick in the wash. Personally I wouldn't double, but partner did bid 5♦ R/W... Surely he must have something, right? Right?!?!

[whereagles]

I'm not joining the bandwagon of a flurry of accusations on bids that could very well have worked out fine in other contextes. Besides overcaller having no business doubling 5♠, the bidding seems fine to me. Pushy, but fine.

You were booked for a bad score anyway because opps took the last guess and guessed right.

[Fluffy]

2♣ is absurd

double is agressive

3♦.... well after an absurd bid you are stuck with no bid so you pick your best, I would rather bid 3♣.

why is so many people criticying 5♦? I expect partner to have 6-4 in the minors wich means 19 card double fit with cross shortness in the majors, looks like we are making 5♦ most oof the time partner has his bid.

Last double is a forcing pass disagreement. Blame lack of talking.

[gwnn]

2♣ is too much for me but I don't think it is obviously bad (but I really like light overcalls!).
Double is OK
3♦ is smart, I like it. Partner's a passed hand here, he ought to have diamonds and hearts.
5♦ is completely atrocious
x is braindead (sorry, couldn't find a better word)

[the hog]

5♦ is absurd. No, your comment is absurd.

xx
x
Axxx
AQJxxx

void
Jxxxxx
KQTxx
Txx

Where do you want to be? 5D is an excellent contract and the C overcaller would bid the same way.

[Free]

2♣ is agressive, but acceptable I guess.

Dbl is pretty obvious, we don't have anything to lose and have the perfect shape.

I don't understand why people like 3♦. For me this would show a 4 card suit, without a clear call we can just pass (since partner still has 2NT available as a new takeout). Why on earth would I bid a 3 card suit at 3-level without an honour in it??

5♦ is pretty crazy as well, especially if 3♦ isn't a pure bid. If overcaller showed a 6-4 then it may be reasonable to bid 5♦, but 4♦ or 3NT (suggesting a sacrifice) are definitely alternatives.

The final Dbl is ridiculous, but I guess it's inspired by the fact that partner bid 5♦ V vs NV. Perhaps hoping for ♥A, ♦A, ♥ ruff...

[kenberg]

I do not see the purpose of the 2♣ bid. If partner does not have clubs then I do not want to play in clubs. If partner does have clubs then we have at least a nine card fit, the opponent's have a fit, partner is a passed hand, they will outbid us, I do not wish to suggest that we can make 5♣ or that we should sacrifice (at this vul) in 5♣. It seems to me that 2♣ will just cause trouble. Of course maybe maybe partner has a magic hand where he can make a responsive double after spades are raised and then we have a magic fit and 5♦ makes. Could be, but I am passing 1♠.

I spend time with 2♣ because that is the start of everything that follows. If somehow in a moment of enthusiasm I had bid 2♣ and the auction continued to 5♠ I would hesitate a really long time before passing to make sure that partner is barred from the auction and so also cannot double (yes, I am joking here).