[MrAce]

hotShot, on 2011-September-05, 06:43, said:

Can't be worse?
How do you expect the trumps to break, if preemptor has a max. of 2 cards in that suit.
How many rounds of ♣ do you intend to ruff with the north hand (because that the only suit short enough for a ruff) knowing that RHO is short in ♣ and has 4+ trumps too.
Sine 3♣X= is 670, you should not go down 3 dbled, so you need to make 7 tricks.
South gets the A♦ and maybe ♠Q and ♥J are useful, but since finesses are most likely off, north needs to have about 5 tricks in his hands.

If north's semibalanced hand can produce 5 tricks although finesses won't work and although RHO can overruff or promote his trumps,
than 3♣ won't make and going down is too expensive.

Yes everyone who reads "to bid or not to bid" or "LOTT" comes with this response. We are all aware that if you get doubled there are hands that will cost you more than -670. This aint one of them though imo. And even if it is, you are not doubled yet And yes i insist in the long run with this hand, playing a 4-3 fit will bring better score than playing 3♣ doubled. Yes RHO has short ♣ too, does he have 4 trumps ? Let him have it, then they score 1♣+2 overruffs+ an extra natural trump winner + 2 more tricks. What does that make ? -500 still looks better to me than -670. If they are taking more than this in defense when our suit is on charge, they will probably make 3♣+1 doubled when you let their 7-8 card solid suit to be on charge.

In this hand to bid or pass is not even a close decision to me. And we did not even mention the big hands yet pd may have, whichever suit he has we have great fit with no wasted values in his shortness.

I understand the fear of losing trump control, but the matter is it won't matter since the guy with long trumps will be RHO. Disaster scenario is if 3♣ opener has 3-4 of of our trump and we lose the trump control, which again won't matter because then we will play undoubled. It matters if we were defeating them of course but there is no perfect decision on this. I still believe in bidding to be superior in the long run.

[JLOGIC]

gnasher, on 2011-September-05, 03:02, said:

Even a second-seat preempt doesn't promise nine winners. The problem with 3♦, or 3-anything, is that it will play horribly unless we happen to hit partner's 5-card suit. It does depend on the opponents, but against most people I'd pass and hope it goes down. Maybe partner will score a singleton trump honour.

Of course it doesn't promise 9 winners, but he has a partner too. It's not like we have a ton of defense. There is also the chance that partner is about to double and bid something. If that is the case, our hand is perfectly fine, and we don't have to hit his suit immediately. This doesn't seem that unlikely of a scenario either, and passing seems like a likely disaster then too (it might be good if 4M is down, but it doesn't rate to be). I am not thrilled by bidding 3D but I just don't see our chances of beating this as super high. Like you said, it depends on the opps, england and everywhere else pretty much seems to have much more aggressive preemptors than where I'm from, but unless they are known to be crazy it just seems like a huge gamble that imo will not work out often enough.

[jmcw]

Agree with 3♦. If partner rebids a Major I will reluctantly raise to game.

[Rossoneri]

What actually happened at the table: I bid 3♥ and this was raised to game by partner.

The ♣A was led and dummy was:

---

West continued with the K, and I ruffed in dummy. J♦ led to the Q, A and 9. Now a second diamond to East's K, West following. East thought for a moment, and she eventually returned a ♥. Trumps broke 4-3, so I drew trumps and played off the established ♦, East could ruff in anytime she wished, but her hand only had ♠s left so I made my contract losing a trick each in ♦ and ♣ and a ♦ ruffed by East's fourth trump. Whew!

[JLOGIC]

Obv I would pass the X

[MrAce]

Rossoneri, on 2011-September-06, 02:10, said:

The ♣A was led and dummy was:

---

West continued with the K, and I ruffed in dummy. J♦ led to the Q, A and 9. Now a second diamond to East's K, West following. East thought for a moment, and she eventually returned a ♥. Trumps broke 4-3, so I drew trumps and played off the established ♦, East could ruff in anytime she wished, but her hand only had ♠s left so I made my contract losing a trick each in ♦ and ♣ and a ♦ ruffed by East's fourth trump. Whew!

hotShot, on 2011-September-05, 06:43, said:

Can't be worse?
How do you expect the trumps to break, if preemptor has a max. of 2 cards in that suit.
How many rounds of ♣ do you intend to ruff with the north hand (because that the only suit short enough for a ruff) knowing that RHO is short in ♣ and has 4+ trumps too.
Sine 3♣X= is 670, you should not go down 3 dbled, so you need to make 7 tricks.
South gets the A♦ and maybe ♠Q and ♥J are useful, but since finesses are most likely off, north needs to have about 5 tricks in his hands.

If north's semibalanced hand can produce 5 tricks although finesses won't work and although RHO can overruff or promote his trumps,
than 3♣ won't make and going down is too expensive.

[gnasher]

JLOGIC, on 2011-September-06, 03:37, said:

Obv I would pass the X

And win the first diamond.

[phil_20686]

This is a bizarre hand, isnt 4S off if that is the layout. how fortunate that in the 3-3 fit you could take a ruff in the north hand without losing control. LOL.