[mikeh]

pclayton, on Sep 18 2007, 02:21 PM, said:

mikeh, on Sep 18 2007, 11:17 AM, said:

jtfanclub, on Sep 18 2007, 01:56 PM, said:

pclayton, on Sep 18 2007, 01:12 PM, said:

Or because the suit isn't good enough and the outside defense is too good:

T9xxxxx, xx, AKQx, x

You'd bid 3♠ with that? Vulnerable?

How about you, MikeH? Balance in with 3♠ on that hand?

Well, I wouldn't expect partner to have Phil's hand. Too much duplication of values in the diamond suit (opposite my own AKQx), for my liking. Altho having 14 cards does make bidding more attractive

If the hand were 109xxxx AKQx xx x, I'd vote for a reopening double, not 3♠. If it were 109xxxxx AKQ xx x, it is close... and I'd probably go with 3♠.

Right; since we were discussing the lack of a weak 2, I meant 10-9 6th. Obviously an AKQx can't be in diamonds on this layout, but I made up the hand just to show what an example looks like.

I would imagine if we did have a 6=2=4=1, Mike would reopen with 3S, not x, but I can't speak for him.

Yes, with 6=2=4=1 I'd almost certainly reopen with 3♠. Indeed, in my first post, I said that if partner had a 2-suiter, I'd expect it to be pointed suits, not majors.

[jtfanclub]

mikeh, on Sep 18 2007, 02:43 PM, said:

Yes, with 6=2=4=1 I'd almost certainly reopen with 3♠. Indeed, in my first post, I said that if partner had a 2-suiter, I'd expect it to be pointed suits, not majors.

OK, that's fair....if your partner could have a spade suit which is too bad for 2♠ but good enough to balance with 3♠, then you'd have to pass a 3♠ call.

I didn't think that was possible, but if players a lot better than me think that it is, then my partner probably thinks so too.

[SoTired]

1. pass, 2. pass

(4H is insane. I won't discuss that)

This is a textbook hand for a common novice mistake: Bidding 3N because you have stoppers. Remember that a stopper is only 1 trick. It takes 9 tricks to make 3N. You have 4 probably 5 tricks from your own hand. How is partner going to provide 4 more tricks when you have no fit with partner's suit and partner is a passed hand.

3N hangs partner for making a competitive, protective bid with club shortness.

[jocdelevat]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     -     -     Pass
 Pass  3♣    Pass  Pass
 3♠    Pass  4♦    Pass
 Pass  Pass  

[mikeh]

I have to say that I think the reopening bid is a close call between 3♠, double and pass. I like to think that double is best.... partner won't normally pass without a club stack, but I sure don't like the fact that I have zero defence in 2 suits and a void in trump... having a stiff trump that I can lead after winning a heart would make me far happier (helps take partner of the trumpstack endplay that often lurks on these hands when partner passes the double). BTW, I would not pass a reopening double, and maybe I should...maybe in a couple of years we can post the problem after a reopening double

But I truly hate the 4♦ call

[jtfanclub]

mikeh, on Sep 18 2007, 07:04 PM, said:

But I truly hate the 4♦ call

The more I play bridge, the more confused I get.

To me, it was obvious that any hand where it wasn't safe to bid 2♠ can't possibly suddenly become safe to bid 3♠ when partner hasn't shown anything, and so therefore partner's 3♠ couldn't simply show just a bunch of spades. It must show spades and something else, which with my partners would always be hearts.

And to me, it was equally obvious that a hand with just a bunch of diamonds that couldn't safely call 3♦ can't possibly become safe to bid 4♦ when partner hasn't shown much. Therefore, 4♦ couldn't simply show just a bunch of diamonds. It must show diamonds and something else, which, logically, must be hearts- 5+ diamonds and 4 hearts. Which isn't what he actually had, but it's darn close: a reasonable call if you think that partner would pass instead of bidding 2 spades with a pointy two-suiter.

It just, I dunno, FEELS like poorbridge. "I can't bid 2 spades so I'll balance at the 3 level", "I can't bid 3 diamonds so I'll override partner at the 4 level". Ick. Bidding one suiters seemed so much easier when I was younger.