[bluecalm]

IMPs. None vulnerable. World class opposition which doesn't make wild preempts.
You are W.

♠K54 ♥AQ3 ♦8 ♣AT9873. S deals and opens 3♥.

I have moderately strong opinion about it but I am in the minority among my bridge playing friends. Your call !

(if vulnerability matters please comment on it)
(if style of opponents matters please comment too)

[Hanoi5]

I pass. Partner should re-open and then I guess I'd bid 3NT over his double.

[whereagles]

rather obvious pass to me, on the usual argument that "pard is bound to be short in hearts, so he'll act if the hand is ours".

[Siegmund]

The choice here is pass-and-pass-again-when-partner-doubles vs pass-and-bid-3NT, I think, and I lean toward the former. If partner coughs up a 3S bid instead of course I'll raise.

[dake50]

Preempts work because opponents overbid, underbid, or misbid.
I won't volunteer an overbid 3NT. Perhaps a misbid if 4S is right or even 4C/5C.
And this is asserted by a notorious overbidder myself.

[Fluffy]

3NT is right to avoid partner reopening with 4♦, however partner should be aware of how awful a 4♦ reopening is and avoid it himself. So lets pass.

[pooltuna]

bluecalm, on Jan 4 2010, 05:00 AM, said:

IMPs. None vulnerable. World class opposition which doesn't make wild preempts.
You are W.

♠K54 ♥AQ3 ♦8 ♣AT9873. S deals and opens 3♥.

I have moderately strong opinion about it but I am in the minority among my bridge playing friends. Your call !

(if vulnerability matters please comment on it)
(if style of opponents matters please comment too)

Are there any other realistic choices besides 4♣ (yuk) and pass. I would give serious consideration to passing a balancing X by partner. BTW does anyone considering 3NT remember the recent posts of a similar nature where the auction went 3♠ 3NT. In one post the NTer held 22 and in the other 16. Are we dropping to 13 now?

[bluecalm]

Well... I feel 3nt is right but I can't find any people who agree with that so I need to reconsider.
I think this hand is better for 3nt than most 15-17balanced ones because we have 2 sure heart tricks and good suit to take tricks in. We also don't pay 1100 if they double (because of 4C runout).
I generated some hands and tried to imagine how the auction would go after pass and 3nt and 3nt still seemed like a big winner.
We are making about 60-65% of the time double dummy (assuming all pass, depends on exact setting for the preemptor) but of course it's not in itself strong argument because on many of those hands we would play 3nt anyway and on some we will end up too high after partner raising us.

[bluecalm]

Some random hands generated by DMpro where 3NT is a winner :

---

---

---

Something like that also may happen :

---

:-)

I am browsing through generated hands and it really seems like 3NT is big winner. I usually readily accept that my opinion is wrong when all the better players around says it's ridiculous but here I just can't convince myself...

[Codo]

I understand you feelings about 3 NT. I guess that this hand will play quite often quite good in 3 NT opposite many typical hands for partner.

Unluckily the downsides are too big:

1. If you play 3 NT from 13-22, no partner can make any sane descisssion later. He will frequently miss good slams and bid bad ones.

2. If Partner has no club fit, your chances are quite remote to stay in a making contract.

[jdonn]

I don't go this low!

[ArtK78]

Clear pass.

The problem with the 3NT overcall is not so much that 3NT may be the right spot for your side, but that partner will assume that you have a (much) stronger hand. Therefore, you will not play in 3NT when 3NT is the right spot.

Whether 3NT is the right call over a reopening double is another issue entirely. It doesn't take very much for 6♣ (and even 7♣) to be a very good contract. For example:

Axxx x Axxx Kxxx

Admittedly, a perfect fit. But is it unreasonable? Add the ♠Q and you have a grand on 2-1 clubs. Add both black queens and the grand is on ice.

[gwnn]

too low for me but it's not a ridiculous overbid. it's a normal overbid.

[kfay]

In general... If partner can't reopen, we can't make anything!!!

Sure you can construct some hands where it's right, but the times we get creamed, I strongly suspect, strongly outnumber those.

[peachy]

Pass. Partner is likely short in hearts so if it is our hand, he will balance in with a Dbl. Any action in this seat needs better values.

[OleBerg]

Switch diamonds and spades, and I'm with you.

[Fluffy]

Just to clarify, I do wanna paly 3NT, but I am doing this after partner reopens, so he doens't play me for a stronger hand.

[bluecalm]

Quote

Just to clarify, I do wanna paly 3NT, but I am doing this after partner reopens, so he doens't play me for a stronger hand.

Yeah I understand. I think partner shouldn't be willing to reopen light though. Especially without perfect shape or only 3 spades. We often miss a game if we don't bid now that one is for sure. We also sometimes (often ?) go overboard if partner goes to slam. On the other hand this :
KJx
AQx
KJx
QJx

Would be considered by many standard 3nt but is it really any better for slam purposes ?
I understand there are no takers. I will be more careful with those 3nt's. Especially with partner who doesn't expect such hand.
The hand is from European Champions Cup. Polish players passed Fantoni's opening and lost 7 imps. At the other table Polish player didn't open with high preempt and it was easy for Italians to bid 3nt. Full hand:

Scoring: IMP

---

I don't think E should reopen. What do you think ?

[655321]

I also pass the original hand and (while I would kind of like to bid) it is not really a close decision to me.

The reopening decision seems more interesting. I think I would double, but maybe I am influenced by seeing the whole hand, I don't think passing is wrong.

If the second heart was a club, everyone would double I am sure. If one of the diamonds was a club (or a spade) I would definitely double too.

[gnasher]

bluecalm, on Jan 4 2010, 11:53 PM, said:

I understand there are no takers.

I'm not yet not a taker. I think you've made some good arguments, but I want to do my own simulation.

I wouldn't be very concerned about partner carrying us too high. As you say, if partner insists on slam we'll probably be OK. In fact, I think bidding now is more likely to get us to a good slam than cause us to reach a bad slam.

Mainly I'd just be worried that LHO would lead his longest suit, get in with a club, and then cash a lot of winners.

Quote

I don't think E should reopen. What do you think ?

I think he should, but probably with 4♦, unless that's conventional. In a perverse way this is a good hand for NLM - your methods prohibit a natural descriptive bid, so you double instead and that happens to work.

Quote

At the other table Polish player didn't open with high preempt and it was easy for Italians to bid 3nt.

I hope the Polish South has learnt something from this experience.