[Phil]

J9xx KJx AQTx xx

matchpoints, opps are vulnerable

pass - (pass) - 1♥ - (3♣);
?
If you think it matters, you and your partner play Flannery (4-5 spades, 5-6 hearts, hearts always > spades)

[rduran1216]

dbl, probably 4H next

[the hog]

Opposit a third seat nv opening I am going to cut pd some slack. 3H for me. If we did not play Flannery I would have doubled first.

[dake50]

Is double here a 'good defense' support double? I try that.
Why would this double be 'maxpass without fit'?
Pure 'cards' hand just lets us defend unless partner reopens.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Phil, on 2012-July-01, 21:10, said:

J9xx    KJx    AQTx    xx

matchpoints, opps are vulnerable

pass - (pass) - 1♥ - (3♣);
?
If you think it matters, you and your partner play Flannery (4-5 spades, 5-6 hearts, hearts always > spades)

I think the hand is at least worth game in ♥, and since there is room below game to make a more descriptive raise by a passed hand, I'll make a fit-showing-jump of 4D!

[benlessard]

Im a maximum passed hand, my hand cannot be a lot better than what I already have so its either 3D or 4D/4H. I just dont understand bidding only 3H.

X might lead you into a 43 S fit rather than playing in hearts. Those who dont have a weak 2 in D should probably keep 3D natural NF and for them X might be a way to show extras.

[the hog]

benlessard, on 2012-July-02, 08:22, said:

Im a maximum passed hand, my hand cannot be a lot better than what I already have so its either 3D or 4D/4H. I just dont understand bidding only 3H.

X might lead you into a 43 S fit rather than playing in hearts. Those who dont have a weak 2 in D should probably keep 3D natural NF and for them X might be a way to show extras.

Do you realise that pd is 3rd hand nv?
Do you realise you have only a limit raise in H in an uncontested auction? I don't understand letting the opponents own you by forcing you into unmakeable contracts. Do you realise that 3H is not a weak bid?

Also please don't argue that one of the opps is a passed and and the other has made a WJO. 3C here opposite a passed pd can be a pretty good hand in my part of the world, especially vul.

Please post the full hand Phil. I am curious.

[Fluffy]

I'm a pussy who bids just 3♥, too many fineses and they don't seem to be well placed in general.

[Zelandakh]

the hog, on 2012-July-03, 00:25, said:

Do you realise ...
Do you realise ...
Do you realise ...

Also please don't argue ...

Do you realise that some players open light in first seat and soundly in third? Perhaps Ben is from this school.
Do you realise there are different ways of bidding?
Do you realise that just because someone has disagreed with you it does not mean they have misunderstood the problem.

Also please don't argue that this style was not stated in the original problem; nor was the style for 3♣.

Anyway, my own take on this, perhaps not surprisingly from the above, is that the best bid here probably depends to some extent on partner's third seat opening tendencies. Playing solid first, light third 3♥ is probably enough; playing light first, solid third forcing to game is also just fine. This is surely first and foremost a judgement issue and since Phil knows his partner better than we do (and he knows he does and in any case has good judgement) I suspect this probably relates to a ruling.

[gnasher]

Assuming a 3♦ fit-bid is unavailable, I'd bid 4♣, though as Zelandakh says it depends on what you expect for the opening bid. Personally I don't see much need for light 3rd-seat 1M openings at this vulnerability. A 10-count with a decent five-card major would be opening a weak-two anyway.

Regarding the argument that we'd have bid 3♥ uncontested so we should bid 3♥ now: in an uncontested auction we would have had 2♥, 2NT, 3♥, Drury and possibly some jump shifts available to show different strengths of raise. Now we have only pass, 3♥, and bidding game. Some of the two-level raises will want to bid 3♥ competitively; if we also include all of the three-level raises it gives 3♥ an impossibly wide range. To reduce this range, it makes sense to take some of the hands from the top of the range and move them up to the 4♥ level.

This is comparable to overcalling in notrumps over a weak two. In an uncontested auction we'd have shown the 15-19-counts at the one level and the 20-24 counts at the two-level. Once they open a weak two, we can't do that. We don't play a 2NT overcall as 15-24; instead, we play 2NT as 15-18 or so, and overbid on some of the stronger hands.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2012-July-03, 04:27

[bluecalm]

I go with 3H. It would be more difficult at imps, at mp's even if we have 25pc the game hasn't been made yet with xx of clubs and diamonds honors being almost certainly off side.
On the other hand it's entirely possible we are going down 2 in 3H if partner has Qxx AQxxx xxx xx or any other weakish auto 1H opening in this colors.

[mfa1010]

4♥. We have to push a little with good limit values in this sequence even opposite a possible 3rd hand opening. 4♣ is too much. The hand is not slammy and I have xx in their suit. I know that 4♣ in such sequences normally doesn't promise support, but as we could have single/void it shouldn't be bid on a balanced non-opener with 3card support. I don't need to 'establish a force' either, since I can just double 5♣ if they bid on.

[Phil]

I doubled. Partner held AKx Axxxx x Kxxx. RHO held x xxx Jxx AQJTxx who later admitted, what was I thinking?

I thought the penalty was a realistic possibility. As I mentioned, we play Flannery. My flight plan was 3♥ if he bid 3♦ and raise 3♥ to 4♥. I would expect he'd pass with a 3523. Only a. 3532 represents a problem pattern.

[the hog]

Zelandakh, on 2012-July-03, 03:26, said:

Do you realise that some players open light in first seat and soundly in third? Perhaps Ben is from this school.
Do you realise there are different ways of bidding?
Do you realise that just because someone has disagreed with you it does not mean they have misunderstood the problem.

Also please don't argue that this style was not stated in the original problem; nor was the style for 3♣.

Anyway, my own take on this, perhaps not surprisingly from the above, is that the best bid here probably depends to some extent on partner's third seat opening tendencies. Playing solid first, light third 3♥ is probably enough; playing light first, solid third forcing to game is also just fine. This is surely first and foremost a judgement issue and since Phil knows his partner better than we do (and he knows he does and in any case has good judgement) I suspect this probably relates to a ruling.

Had Phil and his partner been playing an aberrational style as possibly indicated by you, then I am certain that Phil is intelligent enough and has been postig long enough to indicates this as a possibility. Hence I think we can assume that nothing out of the ordinary is to be expected.

[bluecalm]

I think double is ok. That was my firs thought but I am afraid it's often 5 spades and even if partner partner don't bid 3S with 3-5-3-2 minimum outright as I think he might he will think we are 5-2-3-3/5-2-4-2 or something after we correct 3D to 3H.

[MrAce]

Phil, on 2012-July-03, 08:02, said:

I doubled. Partner held AKx Axxxx x Kxxx. RHO held x xxx Jxx AQJTxx who later admitted, what was I thinking?

I thought the penalty was a realistic possibility. As I mentioned, we play Flannery. My flight plan was 3♥ if he bid 3♦ and raise 3♥ to 4♥. I would expect he'd pass with a 3523. Only a. 3532 represents a problem pattern.

To me 3♥ or 4♥ or 4♣ 3♦ all are fine, i wouldn't argue with anyone for those.

Dbl i dont like but i can live with it. What i don't understand is to DBL and then bidding only 3♥ over 3♦. First you delayed your major fit, now by bidding only 3♥ you are hiding it. You basically showed 4-5 card ♠ and doubleton ♥ with less than 4♦ 9-11 hcp imo.

AJxxx
Jx
KJx
xxx

AQxx
Jx
Kxx
xxxx

Everyone (except than few ) is so concerned about pd being 3rd seat opener and light, but no one seems to concern that pd may have a giant also and it is very important that we show our fit and strength immediately and accurately. We all know when we open light in 3rd seat and they preempt we will have hard time. Some people like Hog may go conservative and miss a game or slam, some go as if pd opened in 1st seat and end up bidding too much.

This topic made me think that perhaps we should all consider making wide range and more frequent preempts over 3rd seat major openings.

I would personally bid 3♦ to say i have ♥ fit and ♦ values and better hand than 3♥. I believe it is better to use the space below the 3 level of opener's suit for hands that are too good for 3♥ and concerned about bidding too much vs a 3rd seat opener, by a passed hand. 4♦ would be 4-5 in red suits.

[the hog]

MrAce, on 2012-July-04, 23:03, said:

This topic made me think that perhaps we should all consider making wide range and more frequent preempts over 3rd seat major openings.

That thought occurred to me also.

[MrAce]

the hog, on 2012-July-05, 00:29, said:

That thought occurred to me also.

Even simple 2/1 overcall can be enough sometimes, which may bring them to 3 level most of the time with only 7 card fit + and only half of the hcps in the deck.

It is like madness nowadays. I thought we open light in 3rd seat to show a lead or to show a hand that can compete after a fit. But lately i saw my pick up pds, who are experts and bbo wc players, opening in 3rd seat 1♠ with hands like

KJxx
Qxx
Ax
Txxx

This is crazy to me. And she got upset when i jumped to 3♦ (fit jump) She said she hates those fit jumps etc etc, and that i should use drury that keeps us low enough. I said if the goal is to stay low we can also stay low if we just dont open 1♠ with those hands. I am not against opening a 4 card major but KJxx ?? Funny as it is, if opps played 3 nt, instead of leading my original long suit diamond from KJxxx i would lead ♠ which allows them to make 3nt.

I dunno, i have a feeling that it is being abused by a lot of players lately. If opps are going to open almost every hand in 3rd seat and try to mess our bidding, we should use this against them imo. If we pass they have the legal controlled psyce tool drury. I am not scared to bid though, due to their style they actually are the ones in bad position, once someone overcalls or preempts.

-They can not double us efficiently
-They can not compete efficiently since they dunno how many trumps they have.
-They set themselves up for a lot of decision making position and there will be times they wont bid game or slam when it is right to do so trying to be cautious, or there will be times they will overbid and end up playing ridicilious games, some of them being doubled.

[gszes]

I normally see myself deferring to the hog when his comments hit before mine but here
I am not so sure. Yes indeed p might be opening a light hand 3rd chair but that does not
mean an X cannot be tried first (at these colors we should be salivating at the chance for
a huge penalty).

It is not just the possibility of a penalty that interests me but that x is also better at gathering
extra information that might make it possible to upgrade our hand from the invitational
hand we have to game forcing after p responds if they do not convert to penalties.

I prefer to save my 3h bids for more offensive types of hands with not much defense so
penalties do not look like a good shot for ex

QJx Qxxxx KJx xx

When I x the only bid that causes me any real heartache (when p does not convert)
is 3s. While we might have a double fit (surely p would strain to bid 4s with 4 spades
and near max) we might also be stuck in a 43 spade fit vs 53 hearts when p is minimum.
OUCH but proabably not a horrendous ouch.

If p rebids 3d or 3h the double fit or extra heart length make my hand better and bidding
4h makes more sense.

[ArtK78]

I would bid 3♥ on these cards. It is matchpoints, I want to try to go plus.

Bidding game on a balanced hand as a passed hand opposite a 3rd seat opener is not my style.