What would you expect here from random expert partner? Would you bid on or pass?
Pull or pass?
#1
Posted 2015-June-19, 11:32
What would you expect here from random expert partner? Would you bid on or pass?
#2
Posted 2015-June-19, 11:52
With a random in a STAR TMZ OK match I would expect a semi-balanced 18-19 where they don't trust me to make the right decision, and I will bid 4♠.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#3
Posted 2015-June-19, 13:28
Phil, on 2015-June-19, 11:52, said:
With a random in a STAR TMZ OK match I would expect a semi-balanced 18-19 where they don't trust me to make the right decision, and I will bid 4♠.
Agree. 1m-1M-3NT is a common handhogging bid among BBO randoms.
-gwnn
#6
Posted 2015-June-19, 14:56
#7
Posted 2015-June-20, 02:04
11IMPs down the drain when the other table played 4♠ making.
#8
Posted 2015-June-20, 06:46
#9
Posted 2015-June-20, 09:54
I can certainly see bidding 4S. I can certainly see passing. I would be happy to hear whether people think that this is or is not a 3NT re-bid. I tend to think that it is. When it goes down, I move on to the next hand/
#10
Posted 2015-June-20, 11:36
That said I'm generally allergic to 3nt with a singleton let alone 2 of them and would pull in a casual partnership. A critique of the pass is out of bounds though.
What is baby oil made of?
#11
Posted 2015-June-20, 11:41
Since I can't know if partner has anything at all in ♠s, I'd sit just like you did.
Partner took a gamble and lost --- end of discussion.
I wonder what partner would have said if you'd bid 4 ♠ and gone down while 3 NT was a make?
#12
Posted 2015-June-20, 14:09
#13
Posted 2015-June-20, 21:35
3NT means: "I think we have 9 tricks in NT if you have spades stopped."
You have spades stopped. It seems that your partner thought wrong.
Rik
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds the new discoveries, is not “Eureka!” (I found it!), but “That’s funny…” – Isaac Asimov
The only reason God did not put "Thou shalt mind thine own business" in the Ten Commandments was that He thought that it was too obvious to need stating. - Kenberg
#14
Posted 2015-June-20, 21:54
rmnka447, on 2015-June-20, 11:41, said:
Since I can't know if partner has anything at all in ♠s, I'd sit just like you did.
Partner took a gamble and lost --- end of discussion.
I wonder what partner would have said if you'd bid 4 ♠ and gone down while 3 NT was a make?
Nice post!
#15
Posted 2015-June-21, 01:49
#16
Posted 2015-June-21, 02:24
What would you bid holding QJ1098xxxx Qxxx - - ? (assuming you responding a spade) There has to be some hands on which you'd pull.
3NT doesn't say "I want to play in 3NT". It says "I have a good hand with a long diamond suit, high cards in hearts and clubs and usually a singleton spade" and you are asked to express an opinion.
As I said before seeing the full hand, it's very easy to construct hands where 4S is better than 3NT. You can also construct hands where 3NT makes and 4S doesn't although actually it's much harder (x Jx AKQJxxx KQx is better in 3NT, but even that isn't cold on a spade lead).
#17
Posted 2015-June-21, 03:00
FrancesHinden, on 2015-June-21, 02:24, said:
What would you bid holding QJ1098xxxx Qxxx - - ? (assuming you responding a spade) There has to be some hands on which you'd pull.
3NT doesn't say "I want to play in 3NT". It says "I have a good hand with a long diamond suit, high cards in hearts and clubs and usually a singleton spade" and you are asked to express an opinion.
As I said before seeing the full hand, it's very easy to construct hands where 4S is better than 3NT. You can also construct hands where 3NT makes and 4S doesn't although actually it's much harder (x Jx AKQJxxx KQx is better in 3NT, but even that isn't cold on a spade lead).
GIB agrees with you. Robots bid this hand in a very simple way: 1♦ - 4♠
If I tried to force it to make a decision over 3NT, it still pulled to 4♠.