[ahydra]

A series of interesting hands from a couple weekends ago. It was a tough field but I feel partner and I held our own fairly well (team-mates on the other hand... not so much, as evidenced by an overall datum of worse than -150 IMPs).

---

Opps playing precision, 2C was 10-14 with 6 clubs or 5C4M, 2D was a relay showing 7+ HCPs, 2S didn't show anything about strength. Was the lead-directing 2H too much vulnerable or should West have not competed to 3H?

Thanks,

ahydra

[sfi]

West was right to compete to 3H, but did it one round too late. This made it easy for N-S to work out they had a misfit and double for penalties.

2H is risky, particularly at this vulnerability, but is probably a reasonable gamble.

[FelicityR]

2♥ with 5332 just looks gruesome (for want of a better word) at this vulnerability. Partner has enough to raise to 3♥ (thinking his ♣K is a good card) but as sfi rightly said should have done so after immediately after 2♠.

[cherdano]

sfi, on 2019-August-27, 18:09, said:

West was right to compete to 3H, but did it one round too late. This made it easy for N-S to work out they had a misfit and double for penalties.

I agree West should bid 3H first round, but I don't think it would have made a difference. North already learned everything he needed to know about South's hand with 2♠, he would have doubled a direct 3♥ as well. It's not as if 3♣ followed by double invites partner to pull to 4♣.

Quote

2H is risky, particularly at this vulnerability, but is probably a reasonable gamble.

I think you have to draw the line somewhere - a 5332 10-count just isn't enough to bid red against white vulnerable against a well-defined auction by the opponents who have both already shown values.

[pescetom]

I think you were wrong to bid 2♥ at that vulnerability. Partner was also wrong not to raise immediately, but as Cherdano says that probably made no difference to the ugly outcome.

[ahydra]

pescetom, on 2019-August-28, 07:14, said:

I think you were wrong to bid 2♥ at that vulnerability. Partner was also wrong not to raise immediately, but as Cherdano says that probably made no difference to the ugly outcome.

Actually the seating was the other way around - partner bid the 2H.

I agree with those who say 2H is a little thin at this vul, despite the excellent suit. As for raising to 3H - yes, doing so immediately perhaps puts more pressure on opponents, but I need to make it clear to partner I'm only competing (she has a tendency to get excited when I raise her). Indeed - is my 3H really worth the effort? Notably, the spades are bound to be 4-3-3-3 around the table so we'll lose at least two spade tricks, possibly three. Plus the bad heart split was hardly a surprise given that South showed 9+ black cards. Double-partscore swings are profitable in short IMPs matches, yes, but it seems most likely that 3H will go 1 down, and might easily get doubled.

ahydra

[Tramticket]

ahydra, on 2019-September-01, 01:51, said:

I agree with those who say 2H is a little thin at this vul, despite the excellent suit.

2H is VERY thin for a vulnerable, two-level over-call in the sandwich seat at IMPs (not much better at MPs). This is particularly easy to punish when the opening bid is a narrow precision range.

[rmnka447]

Tramticket, on 2019-September-01, 02:35, said:

2H is VERY thin for a vulnerable, two-level over-call in the sandwich seat at IMPs (not much better at MPs). This is particularly easy to punish when the opening bid is a narrow precision range.

I agree completely, especially with an 8 loser hand. But for me the fault lies with West for the 3 ♥ raise with a 9 loser hand. West knows ♥ could be only an 8 card fit. West also holds what looks like two defensive tricks and potentially useful ♠ cards. It's time to give up the ghost and defend.

[gszes]

west has an easy 3c bid available if they want to show serious values. A simple 3h (immediate) raise gets this hand across nicely. Passing is out of the question since I would much rather trust partner than the opps. The fact that partner chose to bid 2h on this collection may indeed lead to disaster but they will learn from the experience. I would hate to miss game when partner has AKx Axxxxxx x xx.
I am not sure why so many players ignore the idea that entering the bidding at unfavorable opposite two unlimited (bidding) opps is fraught with danger.

[kuhchung]

late to the thread, but if you wouldn't overcall for example a 1S opening with this, I wouldn't do it over 2C either. perhaps that is a dumb view, but I have been punished just like this too