[jdeegan]

Partner has taken ownership of this hand, for better or for worse. He has at least 4 spades, you have four spades or else partner has some serious fall back position. Just bid 4♠. All other calls ZERO. IMHO.

[jdeegan]

paulg, on 2013-August-08, 05:01, said:

I thought this was a pretty easy four spades bid too, but I was actually given partner's hand first, then the result of the board so it was difficult to be too objective about it. As mikeh says, many reasons to post a hand and my own sanity was the real reason this time.

Partner held AKx xx AKQxxx Qx. I'm told that Deep Finesse makes nine tricks in spades, ten in diamonds and they can make eight in hearts.

Your side faced a real bridge problem. No reason to fret about it. Your pard had to do something lest you be stolen from. A penalty double going all pass might be just the ticket. Lots of good possibilities. In addition, you might have 4 decent spades and a game going hand (sort of unlikely on the previous bidding). Your bid of 4♠ was automatic.

I tend to be a pessimist, so I would have bid 4 ♦ with the six bagger. He has what looks might be 10 tricks. 4♦ is ten tricks. Let the other schmucks guess. Or, maybe not.

Double is prowling for penalties. A territory you should learn to love. Pard has fewer spades than advertised, but who knows at this point? Your pard has pretty much whatever momma ever wanted in a bridge hand. I like his defensive tricks, but not just yet. AKQ sixth in ♦ may not translate on defense. Maybe it makes me (by just a little bit) into the unfashionable 4♦ bidder.

You have to bid 4♠ as the auction went.

[PhilKing]

jdeegan, on 2013-August-10, 02:04, said:

I tend to be a pessimist, so I would have bid 4 ♦ with the six bagger.

For most of us, 4♦ over 2♥ would show diamonds and spades.

Besides, by-passing 3NT (our most likely game) is rather obscure.

[rmnka447]

4 ♠ wtp. Partner clearly has a big hand. Partner cannot have a ♥ stack. If the 4 ♥ bidder also has a "good" hand, making game may be a problem. But it's also possible the 4 ♥ bidder is just trying to steal the contract. You can't tell which it is.

There is a big premium at IMPs for making vulnerable games. If game makes your way, you'll have to beat 4 ♥ DBLd 4 tricks to offset the value of a vulnerable game. That doesn't seem very likely based on your cards. So it's better to bid on and try for the 10 trick game.

Who knows, maybe the opponents will take the push to 5 ♥, at which point, you can pass any further Dbl by partner.

[sathyab]

PhilKing, on 2013-August-08, 05:48, said:

3♦?????

Choice is between 3♥(my choice) and Double.

I can understand 3♥ asking for a stopper. If they bid 4♥ you can now double describing your hand pretty accurately. Why double though ? Even if they bid only 3♥ instead of 4♥, it's awkward bidding 4♦ with that hand or doubling again.

[Zelandakh]

mikeh, on 2013-August-07, 10:49, said:

I'd estimate the likely number of trumps at about 18, with more chance of 17 than 19.

I agreed with everything you wrote except this. Given that you add one for a double fit, 19 is surely more likely than 17, no?

@Justin: I seem to remember your posting that you play 2 types of Michaels over a Weak 2, which would mean that 3♥ was not available. I am interested to hear how you then handle these hand types.

[PhilKing]

sathyab, on 2013-August-20, 13:08, said:

Why double though ?

I didn't.

[mgoetze]

PhilKing, on 2013-August-08, 05:48, said:

3♦?????

Choice is between 3♥(my choice) and Double.

Dear Phil,

could you please, for the benefit of intermediate bridge players such as myself, elucidate the reasons why 3♦ should not merit serious consideration?

[lycier]

4♠ is an easy decision I think.

[PhilKing]

Below are all of the 3 minor overcalls over a 2♥ opening in part 1 of my database.

6.Q83.K97.AKJ854
JT6.K84..AKJ9865
Q97.AQ.4.KQJ8653
Q.63.AJ5.AKJ9753
KQJ5.43.8.AKJ854
K63.A9.A5.QT9863
J982.4.K6.AQJ932
62..7654.AQJ8654
T952.A.J6.KQJ986
AKJ2.A5.8.KT8762
K74.J8.T5.AKJT54
K6.Q65.AJ.A97432
A62.Q85.Q.AK8643
Q.J63.K86.AQJ875

74.5.AKQJ962.J93
K65.2.KQ86542.KQ
8.KJ.AQJT52.QJ73
864.A87.AQ9876.4
K.T75.KQJ964.AJ9
8.A.AKQ932.T9853
Q53.4.AKQT76.JT8
KQT.AT3.KQT873.3
QT6.KJT.AQT642.7

The hand under discussion is stronger than any of those, and way stronger than most. Basically there is no example of any top player overcalling 3m on a hand this strong - you are going to miss too many obvious 3NT contracts. Caveat, I have only looked at first in hand openings so far, and understand that there is scope for a stronger range over 3rd in hand openings, but the sample size is small. One spectacular example though - over a 3rd seat 2♥, 3♣ was chosen on A75.A7.A2.KQJ964 which led to 5♣ down one rather than 3NT up one. The players were almost never both facing a 2♥ opening, so direct comparisons are rare, but Welland did not overcall on the K74.J8.T5.AKJT54 hand where his counterpart did (it made no difference, as it happens). The weakest overcall was below:

[Event ""]
[Site ""]
[Date ""]
[Board "20"]
[West "DAI"]
[North "FANTONI"]
[East "YANG"]
[South "NUNES"]
[Dealer "W"]
[Vulnerable "All"]
[Deal "W:83.KQJ764.QT9.32
62..7654.AQJ8654
K754.932.KJ8.K97
AQJT9.AT85.A32.T"]
[Scoring ""]
[Declarer "N"]
[Contract "5CX"]
[Result "12"]
[Auction "W"]2H 3C Pass 3NT Pass 5C X AP
[Play "E"]
H2 HA H4 D4
C7 CT C2 C4
H3 H5 H6 C5
C9 D2 C3 CA
S7 SQ S3 S2
H9 H8 HK C6
S4 SJ S8 S6
S5 S9 H7 C8
[Room "Closed"]
[Score "NS +1000"]
[BCFlags "1f"]

Boom!