[paulg]

---

Favourable vulnerability at IMPs. You are playing 2/1 with a short club. The 1♦ opener guarantees at least four diamonds but will only have precisely four when 4441 with a black suit singleton, otherwise will have at least five and be unbalanced (that is, partner will not hold a balanced hand with four or five diamonds). Over 3♥, a double from partner would be takeout with a good hand.

Your call? (I was unhappy with my choice at the table and think another call is better, so just checking!)

If you bid 3♠, then please decide on your action if partner continues with 3NT.

Updated imps scoring.

This post has been edited by paulg: 2012-April-17, 05:38

[gwnn]

Maybe I just feel like pretending to be an expert, but where is my 4♥ COG bid?

[gnasher]

I'd bid 4♦. That's probably giving up the chance of playing in 4♠, but being in the wrong partscore and going down is nearly as expensive as missing game. RHO hasn't raised hearts, so partner probably has a few of those, and given our suit lengths he's more likely to be 1-3 in the majors than 2-3 or 3-3.

After 3♠-3NT, I'd bid 4♦. Partner didn't bid 3NT on the previous round, so he's not likely to be enthusiastic about his choice.

[Hanoi5]

I'm a little worried to be playing MP's and finding out 3NT was the last makable game. But I voted 3♠/4♦, 'cause maybe that's always right.

[ggwhiz]

3♠ then 4♦ for me too.

I have not entry to hoped for spade tricks in notrump and a partner that is very good at bidding 4♠ with a stiff honour (when it's right) on an auction like this.

If 5♦ is right pard needs to bid it but 3nt feels really wrong.

[mikeh]

I'm bidding 3♠ then pulling 3N to 4♦.

I take Andy's point about the wrong partscore, but partner won't correct 4♦(instead of 3♠) to 4♠ with Hx in spades and often not with 3 card support, since we haven't shown 5 by our bidding to date,

And if he has spades and drops me there, I may be able to elope with a bunch of trump tricks and scramble 140.

I think 4♦ is just giving up on game too easily, while also being too pessimistic about spades.

[Phil]

Have to go with the COG-Q, which as of this morning is apparently part of BWS, BBO-ADV and obv BBFS.

Getting passed in 3♠ opposite a 'misfit' is a very big concern.

[kenrexford]

Aside: Intermediate jump overcalls take away these types of problems. 1♦-P-2♠, and then the world is yours.

[Phil]

kenrexford, on 2012-April-17, 12:35, said:

Aside: Intermediate jump responses take away these types of problems. 1♦-P-2♠, and then the world is yours.

fyp

[kenrexford]

Phil, on 2012-April-17, 14:32, said:

fyp

True, but I would also say that intermediate jump overcalls would take away the problem, because if my RHO jump overcalls in spades, I have no problem with KQxxxx in spades.

[lalldonn]

Easy 3♠ IMO?

[MrAce]

I am in the same wagon with those who bids 3♠.

Over pd's 3 NT i will bid 4♦

[mikeh]

Phil, on 2012-April-17, 10:45, said:

Have to go with the COG-Q, which as of this morning is apparently part of BWS, BBO-ADV and obv BBFS.

Getting passed in 3♠ opposite a 'misfit' is a very big concern.

While playing either 4♠ or 5♦ opposite a 2443 weak notrump with some values in hearts is of no concern at all?

[rogerclee]

I don't like 3S, partner is really likely to have spade shortness given our system, so I would just bid 4D.

[Phil]

mikeh, on 2012-April-17, 18:03, said:

While playing either 4♠ or 5♦ opposite a 2443 weak notrump with some values in hearts is of no concern at all?

How much in hearts will this weak NT have when we have a r/w 3♥ overcall on our left? I could be wrong, but I think we have too much playing strength to let this out below game.

By the way, I don't claim to know Paul's system. He might be opening 1♣ with all weak NTs, although he might have said something.

[rogerclee]

Phil, on 2012-April-17, 21:09, said:

By the way, I don't claim to know Paul's system. He might be opening 1♣ with all weak NTs, although he might have said something.

I took his explanation to mean that they open 1C with all weak NTs without a 5cM, except they still open 1D with a 6322 minimum with 6 diamonds.

[paulg]

Phil, on 2012-April-17, 21:09, said:

By the way, I don't claim to know Paul's system. He might be opening 1♣ with all weak NTs, although he might have said something.

paulg, on 2012-April-17, 03:26, said:

(that is, partner will not hold a balanced hand with four or five diamonds)

Insufficient? He won't be balanced with three diamonds either.

[paulg]

mikeh, on 2012-April-17, 09:25, said:

I'm bidding 3♠ then pulling 3N to 4♦.

I take Andy's point about the wrong partscore, but partner won't correct 4♦(instead of 3♠) to 4♠ with Hx in spades and often not with 3 card support, since we haven't shown 5 by our bidding to date,

And if he has spades and drops me there, I may be able to elope with a bunch of trump tricks and scramble 140.

I think 4♦ is just giving up on game too easily, while also being too pessimistic about spades.

Mike's answer represents my views after the event. In fact I think it is pretty clear especially as we always open 1♦ with 2=4=5=2 hands. At the table I bid 4♦ and at least this has received support from respected posters.

Partner held A Kxxx Axxx Axxx and the par contract was 3♠, realistically impossible to reach after the three hearts overcall.

[jdeegan]

paulg, on 2012-April-18, 02:43, said:

Mike's answer represents my views after the event. In fact I think it is pretty clear especially as we always open 1♦ with 2=4=5=2 hands. At the table I bid 4♦ and at least this has received support from respected posters.

Partner held A Kxxx Axxx Axxx and the par contract was 3♠, realistically impossible to reach after the three hearts overcall.

Aw come on. You have an easy pass over 3♠ at (worst case) 50 a trick. If it gets doubled, still pass, really good one card support.

[Fluffy]

paulg, on 2012-April-18, 02:43, said:

Partner held A Kxxx Axxx Axxx and the par contract was 3♠, realistically impossible to reach after the three hearts overcall.

Unless something odd happens I think the par contract at this point is 3♥ doubled.