[CSGibson]

---

3♥ may have been a wimpy bid, but that's what you did. Now what?

NAOP, Matchpoints

This post has been edited by CSGibson: 2013-October-28, 03:32

[mr1303]

Partner is in control of things, so I leave it up to him. I pass.

[Fluffy]

I see no reason to disagree with myself on previous round, so I pass.

[billw55]

No way, I made my choice, gotta stick to it now.

edit: if forum logic holds, then 5♥ must work on the actual deal. If that is the case, what it proves to me is that 4♥ was right before, helping partner to bid 5.

[ArtK78]

Pass. Anything else is out of the question.

[akhare]

Pass -- if this suit wasn't good for 4♥, surely we aren't considering 5♥ with it now.

[GreenMan]

Agree with the others, not because I'm a good player, but because I've had plenty of bad boards from changing my mind halfway through instead of picking a strategy and sticking with it. On that principle I see no alternative to Pass.

[jogs]

Pass. Guessing that partner has bid badly. He probably
should have bid 4 or 5 hearts instead.

[neilkaz]

Easy pass here. Leave it up to PD.

[the hog]

A unanimous pass. Partner knows the hand better than I do.

[dake50]

Pass.! Partner tried to buffalo opponents out of 6S,7S with his 3Nt spammer.
IT WORKED.

[CSGibson]

ok, I was kicking myself after this hand because I thought I should have bid 4N here - emphasizing the extra heart length, since partner almost certainly has a high heart honor (the ace in this case) for 3N - partner is an exceptionally good and thoughtful player, you can trust her to have a logical reason for what she does.

[aguahombre]

CSGibson, on 2013-October-28, 23:18, said:

ok, I was kicking myself after this hand because I thought I should have bid 4N here - emphasizing the extra heart length, since partner almost certainly has a high heart honor (the ace in this case) for 3N - partner is an exceptionally good and thoughtful player, you can trust her to have a logical reason for what she does.

And, in turn, I assume she can trust you to have thoughtfully had a logical reason for bidding 3H ---and to (now and in the future) not bid again when she hasn't invited you to do so. Your thought about bidding 4NT because of the extra heart (thus extra trick) is a good thought, IMO. Will it (sucessful or not) affect her trust in future situations?

[rhm]

CSGibson, on 2013-October-28, 23:18, said:

ok, I was kicking myself after this hand because I thought I should have bid 4N here - emphasizing the extra heart length, since partner almost certainly has a high heart honor (the ace in this case) for 3N - partner is an exceptionally good and thoughtful player, you can trust her to have a logical reason for what she does.

In spite of unanimous Pass I consider 4NT a good bid. An expert knows when to violate Bridge rules. Assuming a reasonable partner you know at least about a ten card fit.

It is very easy to construct hands where 4♠ and 4NT are laydown.
For example:

---

.

Note, I have given East a doubtful hand for 4♠, which is not particularly freaky.

Rainer Herrmann

[billw55]

CSGibson, on 2013-October-28, 23:18, said:

ok, I was kicking myself after this hand because I thought I should have bid 4N here - emphasizing the extra heart length, since partner almost certainly has a high heart honor (the ace in this case) for 3N - partner is an exceptionally good and thoughtful player, you can trust her to have a logical reason for what she does.

OK, so my question is: if you want to emphasize the extra heart length, wouldn't 4♥ have been effective? What does 3♥ then 4NT tell partner that a direct 4♥ would not have? And in fewer bids too.

Also, dake offers what seems to me a logical reason for 3NT. Not the only one of course, but partner knows which it is.

[ArtK78]

billw55, on 2013-October-29, 06:14, said:

OK, so my question is: if you want to emphasize the extra heart length, wouldn't 4♥ have been effective? What does 3♥ then 4NT tell partner that a direct 4♥ would not have? And in fewer bids too.

Also, dake offers what seems to me a logical reason for 3NT. Not the only one of course, but partner knows which it is.

I assume you mean 4♥ as an opening bid, as if you bid 4♥ now, the TD will be called.

I agree with the original 3♥ bid, and I already posted that I would pass over 4♠, which seems clear.

Yes, one can construct hands where everyone has their bids and both 4♠ and 4NT make. But I am more concerned with partner bidding 3NT as a baby psyche to inhibit further bidding by the opps. In my experience, this is far more likely than rhm's construction.

In any event, I opened 3♥ and, rightly or wrongly, I am stuck with it.

[billw55]

ArtK78, on 2013-October-29, 06:33, said:

I assume you mean 4♥ as an opening bid, as if you bid 4♥ now, the TD will be called.

I agree with the original 3♥ bid, and I already posted that I would pass over 4♠, which seems clear.

Yes, one can construct hands where everyone has their bids and both 4♠ and 4NT make. But I am more concerned with partner bidding 3NT as a baby psyche to inhibit further bidding by the opps. In my experience, this is far more likely than rhm's construction.

In any event, I opened 3♥ and, rightly or wrongly, I am stuck with it.

I assume you mean overcall instead of opening. RHO opened 1♠. Rainers diagram had the hands in the wrong seats, as compared to the OP, but still in the correct order.

Agree about the possibility of 3NT as psyche, this is what dake pointed out, and what I meant by "partner knows which it is".

[rhm]

ArtK78, on 2013-October-29, 06:33, said:

I assume you mean 4♥ as an opening bid, as if you bid 4♥ now, the TD will be called.

I agree with the original 3♥ bid, and I already posted that I would pass over 4♠, which seems clear.

Yes, one can construct hands where everyone has their bids and both 4♠ and 4NT make. But I am more concerned with partner bidding 3NT as a baby psyche to inhibit further bidding by the opps. In my experience, this is far more likely than rhm's construction.

In any event, I opened 3♥ and, rightly or wrongly, I am stuck with it.

We are red and while I agree with the initial 3♥ bid, I disagree strongly that a baby psyche is likely nor that a baby psyche would be a sensible operation here.
The fact that LHO passed over 3♥ (without hearts) argues against this.
Rarely do such operations accomplish their desired purpose. Opponents are usually not dumb enough to be talked out of the values they see in front of their nose.
Nevertheless your mileage may vary and you know your partners better than I do.
Even if that scenario existed, which I consider remote, chances are 4♠ will make and 5♥ will not be a disaster.

Rainer Herrmann

[CSGibson]

aguahombre, on 2013-October-28, 23:37, said:

And, in turn, I assume she can trust you to have thoughtfully had a logical reason for bidding 3H ---and to (now and in the future) not bid again when she hasn't invited you to do so. Your thought about bidding 4NT because of the extra heart (thus extra trick) is a good thought, IMO. Will it (successful or not) affect her trust in future situations?

Our meta-rule in partnership trust situations is that exceptional bids are reserved for exceptional hands - hands where partner will have trouble making a final decision if we pass the buck. I might only have 6 hearts for a weak jump overcall (though at these colors that is infrequent), so an eighth heart may be enough for me to make an exceptional bid.

[rogerclee]

4N seems like a good bid to me, we have an extra trick. If partner thought he was making 3N, I think we're making 4N.