[mikl_plkcc]

---

A significant portion of the field ended up in a ♥ slam, and we won 8.1 IMPs by stopping them finding it.

There was only 1 table who ended up in slam where the ♠ suit was mentioned, however that table used a strong ♣ and the ♠ was only mentioned in the 2nd round of the bidding.

---

[hrothgar]

You did something incredibly stupid and you got lucky

Try not to learn any lesson from this

[Cyberyeti]

If you are going to get into this auction, do it first time, either with a 5 card weak 2 or Ekren 2♥ (4-4 or 5-4 either way round majors)

[steve2005]

You need to check West for a pulse. Clearly should bid on after a partner supports hearts.
A try of 5♦ should get to 6

[akwoo]

hrothgar, on 2025-March-30, 15:23, said:

You did something incredibly stupid and you got lucky

Try not to learn any lesson from this

I agree that opening 2♠ is a better way to gamble.

I don't necessarily agree this is incredibly stupid. I agree bidding 3♠ is more likely to lose 9 IMPs (-1100 vs -620) than gain 8 or 9 IMPs. However, OP is playing in a game they are clearly outclassed in.

OP has to clarify their goals for us. Would they rather be +10 IMPs for the night once in a while and -100 IMPs the rest of the time, or would they rather be relatively consistently somewhere between -20 and -40?

If they would rather be +10 once in a while, then they should be playing like they're at least 30 IMPs down at the start, and this isn't a bad spot to swing in.

[akwoo]

For the pair playing against the strong clubbers - they should learn to come in earlier. If you're going to bid 2♠, it's safer and more damaging to do it the first round.

But - me and Precision partner against clones, it goes (P)-1♣-(2♦*)-2♥-(4♠)-P**-(P)-5♦-(P)-6♦ I think.

(*) hearts or blacks
(**) forcing

[hrothgar]

akwoo, on 2025-March-30, 21:50, said:

But - me and Precision partner against clones, it goes (P)-1♣-(2♦*)-2♥-(4♠)-P**-(P)-5♦-(P)-6♦ I think.

Big difference between overcalling a strong club and jumping in after a 2NT opener and a shape showing bid by responder

[helene_t]

South should probably either have bid 5♠ or passed. 4♠ doesn't take away any bidding space and can only help opps.

I think 3♠ is too risky although I wouldn't call it "incredibly stupid". One of my partners does this kind of things all the time, sometimes it gains and sometimes it looses.

The problem with 3♠ is that you have heart length so they are likely not to have a fit, which means they will often chose to defend 3♠X.

[mikl_plkcc]

akwoo, on 2025-March-30, 21:34, said:

I agree that opening 2♠ is a better way to gamble.

I don't necessarily agree this is incredibly stupid. I agree bidding 3♠ is more likely to lose 9 IMPs (-1100 vs -620) than gain 8 or 9 IMPs. However, OP is playing in a game they are clearly outclassed in.

OP has to clarify their goals for us. Would they rather be +10 IMPs for the night once in a while and -100 IMPs the rest of the time, or would they rather be relatively consistently somewhere between -20 and -40?

If they would rather be +10 once in a while, then they should be playing like they're at least 30 IMPs down at the start, and this isn't a bad spot to swing in.

I only had a 5-card suit so I couldn't open (unless we played 5-4 preempts), and when partner passed, it would then be safe because we knew that we didn't have the strength. West bid transfer and didn't bid Stayman, so he didn't have 4 ♠ (unless he started 5-5 majors with a transfer). Also, at 3♠, they couldn't double us freely in IMPs because there is a great risk of doubling us into game in case the partner had length in ♠.

If the 2NT opener turned out to have 4 or 5 ♠ and could find out a way to penalty double us, bad luck. We had been advised that a double by the NT opener would be better played as takeout instead of penalty, so it would require the responder to either make a penalty double (unlikely), or the opener to make a takeout double where the responder could penalty pass (also unlikely, because the responder didn't have 4 trumps).

[helene_t]

mikl_plkcc, on 2025-March-31, 03:51, said:

I only had a 5-card suit so I couldn't open (unless we played 5-4 preempts)

But if you can overcall at the 3-level after your LHO has anounced a strong balanced hand, surely you can also open at the 2-level. In fact, opening at the 4-level may well be safer than overcalling at the 3-level. And also disrupts more.

The 3-level overcall doesn't disrupt at all and should on this board have made it easier for opps to find the slam since East now got to show the fit immediately, which would probably not have happened if you had passed. So I think that on this board it was Wests pessimism and not your overcall that gave you a good score.

The overcall can help partner find a sac (they might bid 6♠ over opps 6♥) or find the spade lead. A 2♠ opening is much safer and also more likely to be effective.

[Cyberyeti]

Interesting hand, if W dealt, we would get to 7♦ trivially as we have an opening bid where 5-5 in the reds is one of the options, after that all that's required is blackwood (in diamonds or 6 ace).

You are not going to enjoy something like this:

---

[P_Marlowe]

mikl_plkcc, on 2025-March-31, 03:51, said:

I only had a 5-card suit so I couldn't open (unless we played 5-4 preempts), and when partner passed, it would then be safe because we knew that we didn't have the strength. West bid transfer and didn't bid Stayman, so he didn't have 4 ♠ (unless he started 5-5 majors with a transfer). Also, at 3♠, they couldn't double us freely in IMPs because there is a great risk of doubling us into game in case the partner had length in ♠.
<snip>

If they double the likelyhood, that it makes is basically zero, where do you think, you can park your hearts.
Given the vul., the best you can hope for is a small plus, 500 vs. 600. And this assumes, their game always makes,
and you find a fit.

This is an action you can do playing MP, Playing IMPs, it is ...

[mikl_plkcc]

helene_t, on 2025-March-31, 04:03, said:

But if you can overcall at the 3-level after your LHO has anounced a strong balanced hand, surely you can also open at the 2-level. In fact, opening at the 4-level may well be safer than overcalling at the 3-level. And also disrupts more.

The 3-level overcall doesn't disrupt at all and should on this board have made it easier for opps to find the slam since East now got to show the fit immediately, which would probably not have happened if you had passed. So I think that on this board it was Wests pessimism and not your overcall that gave you a good score.

The overcall can help partner find a sac (they might bid 6♠ over opps 6♥) or find the spade lead. A 2♠ opening is much safer and also more likely to be effective.

At the first and second seat, I can't preempt freely unless I hold the exact length and trump holding, because if my partner wants to investigate slam, he has to know exactly what I have from his hand and my only bid.

For example, auctions such as 2♠ - pass - 6♠ - all pass is only possible when the 2♠ opening is well defined in both length and quality. Therefore, I never preempt with a void (unless overcalling the void) or with a side suit (5-card suit or good 4-card major) when my partner hasn't passed yet. The way I usually bid slam is just by simple math (for NT slams, e.g. if I hold 13 HCP when my partner opens 2NT, it is a direct raise to 6NT), or by constructing possible hands by partner and counting tricks (for suit slams, e.g. if partner opens 2♠, I hold ♠AJTx ♥AKQ87 ♦KQ97 ♣, it is a direct raise to 6♠ because the opener must have the trump KQ to qualify for a 1st-seat opening - even though it is possible to find 7♠ if there is a method to query the ♦A as there is a risk that the 4th seat can find their ♣ fit and interfere with our constructive methods), rather than any constructive methods.

[hrothgar]

mikl_plkcc, on 2025-April-01, 10:30, said:

At the first and second seat, I can't preempt freely unless I hold the exact length and trump holding, because if my partner wants to investigate slam, he has to know exactly what I have from his hand and my only bid.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to play a style that uses disciplined preempts in first and second.
Sometimes you'll win
Sometimes you'll lose

If you feel that you must take action with this hand, then change your style in first / second seat, because intervening at the three level in an auction like this one where RHO is showing a balanced hand with 20+ HCP and the opponents haven't found a fit is suicidal.

FWIW, I published this as a bidding poll.
https://bridgewinner...m-2-ylho2afjkw/

I suspect that folks will mistake this for an April Fools Gag, unlike my actual April Fools post which folks seem to have taken far too seriously