[fmjssy]

---

[mw64ahw]

If opener has an average of say 8hcp and you have 16hcp then that leaves partner with an average of 8hcp giving you a combined holding of 24hcp. Your 16 is a good 16 given partner is likely to have ♦ that may offset the Q♦. Your 4 card 'tenaces' provide additional value so 3NT is the vote

[Cyberyeti]

mw64ahw, on 2023-January-10, 08:48, said:

If opener has an average of say 8hcp and you have 16hcp then that leaves partner with an average of 8hcp giving you a combined holding of 24hcp. Your 16 is a good 16 given partner is likely to have ♦ that may offset the Q♦. Your 4 card 'tenaces' provide additional value so 3NT is the vote

The nagging doubt about 3N is that the game most likely to make on thin values is 4♠ which 3N takes out of the picture, imagine partner with J10xxx, x, xxxx, A10x, 4♠ is a lot better than 3N. That said at this vul, you are not getting rich out of 3♥, so you have to do something, are you feeling lucky ? X is probably right if partner has 4 spades, 3N is better if he hasn't.

[LBengtsson]

It all depends what partner has opposite on the day whether 'Pass' 'X' or 3NT is the right call here, and whilst I feel that if you were in 2nd seat here 3NT would be right, in 4th seat your hand is slightly weaker as you can assume that the ♥ finesse is wrong, and the pre-emptor is not likely to lead a ♥ from a broken suit against a NT contract.

It also suggests, given that you have a 4 card ♥ suit, that the pre-emptors partner is short in ♥s so will be long in the other suits, and I just do not think you have enough, even with your own partner who is likely to have a 8-9 count, to make 3NT without some luck, so if my partner held this 16 HCP hand and actually 'Passed' I would not have any reason to criticize imo.

I agree with the OP that it is a "tricky hand". As I said, anything could be right on the day. There might be endplay and elimination possibilities to make 3NT given that you will have a good idea of the distribution, so even though 3NT does not look quite right, on the balance of possibilities, I tend to agree it is the least worse of possible bids.

And, you do not win matches by being a coward. So 3NT it is here also.

[mikeh]

Is no-one interested in the form of scoring?

At imps, the prospect of +100 or +150 against 3H isn’t attractive when we rate to have a play for +400 much of the time.

At mps, the prospect of a plus is quite attractive when 3N will fail much of the time.

If you think that 3N is more likely than not to result in a minus score, then passing is clearly correct at matchpoints.


At imps, say you think that 3H will usually go down 100 when 3N fails by a trick and 150 when 3N makes (obviously there are many possible outcomes, but these two seem like reasonable constructions)


Passing wins 4 when it’s right and loses 6 when it’s wrong.

This ignores the chances of going for a number when LHO, short in hearts, passed with almost all of the missing hcp, but it also ignores some (less likely) upsides.

So, if you think this way, you’ll bid 3N at imps if you think it has close to a 50% chance of coming home, but at mps only when you think it is (slightly) more likely than not to make

Fwiw, I’d bid 3N at imps. At mps, depends on my mood.

[gszes]

sigh i hate it when i am contrary to the world but i will go ahead and try to justify my cowardice (pass) anyway.

Say p has Kxxx void Kxxxx Axxx. We have pretty decent play for 3n. However, most players I know will x 3h with that hand so p does NOT have that good of a hand. That means the upside of bidding seems much much smaller than we like to think. Giving p a random 8 count, and comparing it with our hand, shows 3n to have a pretty small % chance of making.
I realize this will score poorly on some hands but getting those positive scores no matter at imps or mp keeps me from getting slaughtered. Its not just that but it seems so RARE when the cards are going my way so pass caters to the pessimist in me. STAY WELL

[LBengtsson]

mikeh, on 2023-January-10, 14:26, said:

Is no-one interested in the form of scoring?

Yes, I was, but I forgot to mention it in my post. Duh! Thanks for clarifying that aspect, Mike. I was focussed on the strength/weakness of the hand and position at the table.

[dsLawsd]

Depends on partnership agreements a bit. If I double and partner looks at his heart shortness he/she has the option of passing (esp at mp) or bidding their longest suit. If he/she bids 3 ♠ you now bid 3NT. choice of games.
Partner should pass with good defensive values. Preempts work. Vulnerable might be a much tougher problem.

Partner might well have Kx(x) x QJxxx Axxx(x) or similar.

[mikeh]

dsLawsd, on 2023-January-12, 16:54, said:

Depends on partnership agreements a bit. If I double and partner looks at his heart shortness he/she has the option of passing (esp at mp) or bidding their longest suit. If he/she bids 3 ♠ you now bid 3NT. choice of games.
Partner should pass with good defensive values. Preempts work. Vulnerable might be a much tougher problem.

Partner might well have Kx(x) x QJxxx Axxx(x) or similar.

Firstly, double is takeout. There is NO hand with which partner should pass (given our heart holding, he can’t have a penalty pass). This isn’t a situation in which one looks at one’s heart length and uses that to infer that partner had a penalty double. Zia and Rosenberg tried that for a short time but had some spectacular disasters….not to mention that such an approach can be gamed by the opps (and they are entitled to know about it…the double becomes alertable. While they can’t usually game this when it’s a balancing double, unless they already know your agreement, it’s trivial to pass with long hearts after a direct double)

Secondly, if you double and then bid 3N, that does NOT offer a ‘choice of games’. At least not in normal methods. I’d take it as a very strong hand with hearts well stopped, and some spade tolerance (since doubler had to be prepared for a 4S advance).

Yes, it would be nice if partner knew to pass with say Kxx x Kxxxxxx Qx. But he’s not. He’s bidding some number of diamonds…quite possibly 5D.