[han]

I'd bid 2C followed by 3S on Jxxxx x x AKQxxx.

I disagree with the hog, double was not fine at all. North has 0 tricks.

[P_Marlowe]

#3 No - X was penalty.
#1 depends, in the end North has 2 (1 1/2) tricks against 4H, his partner showed a
reasonable hand, chances are, that they go down, and the X should also prevent p
from bidding on.
XX is unlikely, and X= cost just 170 or 220.
#2 a stronger hand, 64 is ok

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Fluffy]

 dwar0123, on 2012-May-07, 04:51, said:

 Fluffy, on 2012-May-07, 01:14, said:

I think KQxx KQxxxx wih nobody vul might be enough. But 6-4 is not the most likelly shape, because it would require both suits to be strong. 7-4 and 7-5 are more like it. with 6-5 you would normally do michel's, but maybe with suit disparity such as the ne oyu have here you might want to encourge clubs.

Going by this, it seems the problem wasn't the hand strength it was just the quality of the spade suit?

Not only, the ODR is different and as important as suit quality, Jxxx AKQxxx has 1-3 defensive tricks and 6-7 winners, KQxx KQ10xxx has 0-2 defensive tricks 7-8 winners. (maybe exagerating the numbers a bit, but you get the point)

[neilkaz]

South's bidding on this hand could serve as a classic example of how not to bid a competitive bridge hand. It also is a great example of what can happen when one player takes a view and then decides to mastermind the auction.

South's decision to bid 3♠ after pd has passed twice and when the opps are in a game try auction is a pipe dream hoping that pd fits ♠ and that if so 4♠x or perhaps 5♣x will prove best. This is a very bad decision noting that junky 4 card suit.

The following thoughts should be going through South's mind when considering the daft 3♠ bid.

1) Perhaps the opps aren't bidding game.

2) Perhaps declarer will miss guess the trumps or ♦ if south properly uses the green card and doesn't help the opps play the hand.

3) What happens when pd doesn't have 4♠ and perhaps 3♠x could even be ugly..will I just pull and play 4♣x?
4) What will I do if pd thinks that I have more than I do for my 3♠ call and doubles 4♥? When you take dubious actions and don't have the hand you advertise you may have to deal with a pd who's X'd them.

South's decision to pull 4♥x is also awful. For all he knows 4♥x can't make or 5♣x goes for 800 or 1100.

I don't at all care for north'd double of 4♥ as it waves even more a red flag in front of even a weak declarer to finesse him for red queens. He cannot expect a two trick set here and if he passes, perhaps a weak declarer goes down if left to his own devices. It is a disaster if the X turns +50 into -590.

Players who often bid like south are often wondering why their pd has found excuses to not play next week or even why they're not included in the next team game.

All south should be doing after this auction and disaster is appologizing A LOT. "Very sorry partner, I knew that I advertised a better hand and I simply panicked when you X'd them." Even though North's double is dubious, in no way should South criticize after his foolish bidding.

[the hog]

 han, on 2012-May-07, 05:04, said:

I'd bid 2C followed by 3S on Jxxxx x x AKQxxx.

I disagree with the hog, double was not fine at all. North has 0 tricks.

I can tell you now that if my pd held the South card's and bid like that the opponents were going down.. Anyway, who says I have 0 tricks?

[nige1]

dwar0123 asks "2/1 gf imps. So I guess we have 3 questions.
1. Did north have his double given partners bidding?
2. What exactly does south show with the 3♠ bid?
3. Should south run to 5♣ here?"

I agree with Fluffy about the meaning of 3♠ so IMO..
1. No. Double doomed NS to a bad score.
2. 4+ ♠ 6+ ♣ with playing rather defensive strength. e.g. ♠ AQxx ♥ - ♦ xx ♣ QJxxxxx would suffice.
3. No. Rather than jump out of the frying pan into the fire, South should trust his partner. (so blame 50-50).

---

 the hog, on 2012-May-07, 18:13, said:

I can tell you now that if my pd held the South card's and bid like that the opponents were going down.. Anyway, who says I have 0 tricks?

Han... but, as the cards lie, North's hand seems to be worth a trick. e.g. Declarer might ruff the third ♣, cash ♥A, cross to ♠A, finesse ♥J, Cash ♥K, continue with ♠KQ and a fourth trump, to end-play North and avoid a ♦ guess.

[rmnka447]

1. No, partner may be bidding a distributional player. Besides, both opponents have shown red suit fits with the strong hand behind you. Doubling may just be giving too much information about how to play the hand to declarer. Another thing to consider is what your side can make. It certainly doesn't look like you and your partner have anything more than a partscore. So if you beat 4 ♥, there's unlikely to be much of a swing.

2. A hand with longer ♠s than ♣s. The more distributional the hand the less HCP needed to make the bid. Kxxxx x x KQJxxx would be enough.

3. No, there's no reason to believe that 5 ♣ will yield a better result than 4 ♥. This hand is a good advertisement for the Fred Will approach. Fred was a very fine, wise old player from Detroit. When asked about his secret to success, he said "I never do anything that I can be criticized for in the post mortem." Simple, but sage advice. You don't want to be explaining to partner why you pulled the double when partner shows up with ♥ QJ109 and 4 ♥ never makes.

[mgoetze]

 rmnka447, on 2012-May-08, 04:49, said:

2. A hand with longer ♠s than ♣s. The more distributional the hand the less HCP needed to make the bid. Kxxxx x x KQJxxx would be enough.

Surely not what you meant, or are you serious AND giving hands in reverse suit order?

[the hog]

"2. A hand with longer ♠s than ♣s. The more distributional the hand the less HCP needed to make the bid. Kxxxx x x KQJxxx would be enough."

I assume you don't play Michaels?

[rmnka447]

My bad -- meant longer ♣s than ♠.

[the hog]

I still assume you don't play Michaels as this is a classic Michael's hand.

[phil_20686]

 the hog, on 2012-May-08, 21:58, said:

I still assume you don't play Michaels as this is a classic Michael's hand.

A lot of people play split range, so there are 5-6 hands that would fit in there.

I dont like split range, For me 5-6 hands would need a big suit disparitly to bid this way: JTxxx - xx AKJxxx would probably be enough.