[WellSpyder]

---

Love all, MPs. What do you bid now? Are you concerned that if you bid 4♥, you are almost inviting oppo to bid 4♠? If you are, does it affect your bid now, do you decide now what you will do if 4♠ comes round to you, or do you simply bid what you think you have to bid and wait to see what happens?

[aguahombre]

I suppose I could try to get partner back into the expected auction by bidding only 3♥, hoping for 3s to come back around and trying 4♣.

But, they do have ten or eleven Spades, and it is more likely 4♠ will come back around than just 3, and I am in worse position..not having shown that I wanted to be in game. Think I will just do the pedestrian 4♥ over 2♠ and let everyone else do the guessing and operating.

[ggwhiz]

This hand is fraught with danger, ie if we have a club fit as well as hearts and there is a lot of shape going on.

I might bid 3♠ on the way to 4♥, far from clear that partner will interpret this as I hope or that it would occur to me at the table but a straight up 4♥ bid and respect partners decision shouldn't be a disaster where the field should mostly face the same 4♠ bid if it's coming.

I just watched Nickel go -1050 against 5♥ doubled where they had a 9-card spade fit and 10-card club fit and Nickel had a 19 count on vugraph so the danger is real. Both ways. Nickel won 12 imps on the board (6♥ doubled for 1660).

[aguahombre]

ggwhiz, on 2017-March-15, 12:00, said:

This hand is fraught with danger, ie if we have a club fit as well as hearts and there is a lot of shape going on.

I might bid 3♠ on the way to 4♥, far from clear that partner will interpret this as I hope or that it would occur to me at the table but a straight up 4♥ bid and respect partners decision shouldn't be a disaster where the field should mostly face the same 4♠ bid if it's coming.

I just watched Nickel go -1050 against 5♥ doubled where they had a 9-card spade fit and 10-card club fit and Nickel had a 19 count on vugraph so the danger is real. Both ways. Nickel won 12 imps on the board (6♥ doubled for 1660).

I think the problem with 3♠is that it sounds like a power 4♥ bid which brings 4♠ doubled into the mix -- not a two suiter. it would be nice if 4♣ were a 'responsive' leaping Michaels after Partner's takeout double and a raise; but we definitely haven't discussed that one.

[silvr bull]

I would not let the opps play 4S, so I plan to push to the 5 level if the opps bid 4S. With the OP hand, I really want to tell P about the C lead, so I will bid 3H now and expect to bid 4C or 5C over their S bid. Change the hand texture to x KJxxx xx QJxxx (so I do not want a C lead against 5S), and I will bid 5H immediately to let the opps guess with minimum information.

[gszes]

Looking at this hand objectively we seem to be worth a 4c bid BUT given the way bridge is scored failing to bid 4h seems almost criminal. I have no intention of letting the opps play 4s and I will bid 5c even if 4s x happens. I might have a problem if opps bid 5s

[rmnka447]

A little LOTT helps here. The opponents have 10 or 11 trumps and we should have a 9 card fit. So, by LOTT reckoning, there should be 19 or 20 tricks out there.

With this shapely hand, I'm bidding a lot starting with 3 ♥ and following up with a bid in ♣. If I'm wrong in aggressively bidding this hand, so be it. The OP asked about this hand in a MP context, so if we go for a number it's only one board. I'm going to try to make the opponents make the last tough decision on the hand.

If partner doubles 4 ♠ before I can bid, I'll sit. I do have 1 1/2 QTs.

If the opponents get forced to 5 ♠, then we've achieved pushing them 1 level higher where we might have a chance to beat them.

[Jinksy]

Given a) the modern style for a takeout X to show the other majors and not really much else, and b) that we're a passed hand, I think there's an argument that 4♣ here should be a fit jump for hearts.

I would not expect partner to take it that way without prior agreement, though.

[WellSpyder]

Thanks for your thoughts, everyone. I have a follow-up question or two. If you bid 4♥ with this hand, thinking that you don't mind going on with 5♣ if oppo do bid 4♠, do you change your mind if partner hesitates over 4♠?

Or, more precisely, after the auction

---

a) are there logical alternatives to bidding 5♣?
b) could a break in tempo from partner over 4♠ demonstrably suggest one alternative over another?

[cherdano]

It looks crazy. But I am quite tempted to just bid 4C, and 5C over 4S.

How often is partner going to bid to the 6 level on this hand if we show hearts and clubs? I would say virtually never. (He would have to have a void opposite my singleton. Not likely after RHO bid 2S only.)

So let's compare three plans:
1. 4H, then 5C over 4S.
2. 4H, then 5H.
3. 4C, then 5C.

I like 2 a bit better than 1. 5C helps partner with the lead, and occasionally we find a better fit. But it also helps opponents on the lead and defense, and more importantly it helps them decide whether to bid 5S - knowing about our double fit, and that club values behind my suit would be defensive. I think 5H will sometimes push them to 5S when that is wrong, and sometimes it will steal the pot and win us a double game swing. As I said above, it will virtually never cause partner to make a wrong decision- he will have no decision to make.

But now let's look at 3. It loses to 2 when they would have sold out to 4H with their likely 10-card fit. Or when they sell out to 4C despite their 10-card fit because it's not game, but we can make 5H. But it gains when partner gets off to the right lead against 5S, or 4S doubled. Plus, partners decision to double 4S is more likely to be reliable when I have shown the suit where I have defensive values.

Am I crazy?

[MrAce]

cherdano, on 2017-March-20, 06:38, said:

Am I crazy?

Yup.
Simply disabling yourself to play 4♥ alone is crazy.
Everyone is so obsessed that they will bid 4♠. They did not yet.
Pd may easily hold 3433 or even 4333 shape with 16+ hcp that could not start 1 NT. Or they may not have enough shape to bid 4♠. Or they may believe they have good chance of defeating 4♥. Vulnerability is not screaming for a save either.
I really do not like one player to decide that they will bid 4♠ by simply looking at only his own 13 cards, and then decide to show the lead and then decide to save without showing one of his suits which probably has 9 card fit while the suit he decided may in fact be only a 7 card fit. Basically taking care of everything except than showing pd what he actually has.

[WellSpyder]

MrAce, on 2017-March-20, 08:56, said:

Simply disabling yourself to play 4♥ alone is crazy.
Everyone is so obsessed that they will bid 4♠. They did not yet.
Pd may easily hold 3433 or even 4333 shape with 16+ hcp that could not start 1 NT. Or they may not have enough shape to bid 4♠. Or they may believe they have good chance of defeating 4♥. Vulnerability is not screaming for a save either.
I really do not like one player to decide that they will bid 4♠ by simply looking at only his own 13 cards, and then decide to show the lead and then decide to save without showing one of his suits which probably has 9 card fit while the suit he decided may in fact be only a 7 card fit. Basically taking care of everything except than showing pd what he actually has.

Some excellent points, MrAce! On this occasion, though LHO has indeed bid 4♠ over your 4♥. What are you going to do when this comes round to you?

[aguahombre]

WellSpyder, on 2017-March-20, 09:26, said:

Some excellent points, MrAce! On this occasion, though LHO has indeed bid 4♠ over your 4♥. What are you going to do when this comes round to you?

Hope Partner didn't screw things up by breaking tempo and creating another 'but I wuz always gonna'.. ruling. For this reason, we really have to either have an extended Leaping Mike agreement or just bid 4H and live with it.

[MrAce]

WellSpyder, on 2017-March-20, 09:26, said:

Some excellent points, MrAce! On this occasion, though LHO has indeed bid 4♠ over your 4♥. What are you going to do when this comes round to you?

I would now bid 5♣. Coming from pass that should not make pd too excited.

[WellSpyder]

aguahombre, on 2017-March-20, 10:50, said:

Hope Partner didn't screw things up by breaking tempo and creating another 'but I wuz always gonna'.. ruling. For this reason, we really have to either have an extended Leaping Mike agreement or just bid 4H and live with it.

Yes, of course partner broke tempo - cheers, pard!

At the table I felt reasonably comfortable bidding 5♣ because I had only bid 4♥ after deciding that I would know what to do over 4♠. Otherwise I would have tried to find an alternative to 4♥ - though I hadn't decided what it might be.... I wasn't trying to anticipate a BIT, of course, just trying to avoid being left with the last guess in the auction. Of course this will be regarded as a self-serving statement, so I was interested to see if others would tackle the problem in a similar way. Leaping Michaels certainly sounds like a possible approach to this sort of problem, though - thanks for the suggestion, Agua.

[mr1303]

I bid 4H expecting to bid 5C if 4S came back to me, so I follow through.

About the hesitation, what does it suggest? If partner was thinking of doubling? Or bidding 5H himself? Not clear. In any event, I think the only bid disallowed here is double, so I bid 5C.

[aguahombre]

WellSpyder, on 2017-March-22, 03:45, said:

Yes, of course partner broke tempo - cheers, pard!

At the table I felt reasonably comfortable bidding 5♣ because I had only bid 4♥ after deciding that I would know what to do over 4♠. Otherwise I would have tried to find an alternative to 4♥ - though I hadn't decided what it might be.... I wasn't trying to anticipate a BIT, of course, just trying to avoid being left with the last guess in the auction. Of course this will be regarded as a self-serving statement, so I was interested to see if others would tackle the problem in a similar way. Leaping Michaels certainly sounds like a possible approach to this sort of problem, though - thanks for the suggestion, Agua.

Well, this extension of LeapMike had not occurred to me before this thread but now we are adding it. I really like finding ways to give either the opponents or partner the last guess -- and really hate wuz gonna's or unilateral stuff.

If 4♠ did come back around, and the hesitation happened, I would concede that Pass was a LA and that Partner's break suggested not passing even though my original intent was to come back in with 5♣.

[Vampyr]

mr1303, on 2017-March-22, 05:51, said:

I bid 4H expecting to bid 5C if 4S came back to me, so I follow through.

About the hesitation, what does it suggest? If partner was thinking of doubling? Or bidding 5H himself? Not clear. In any event, I think the only bid disallowed here is double, so I bid 5C.

It seems to me that anything except pass is disallowed.

[Winstonm]

I bid 4H. I'll worry about what to do next only if someone else bids again.

[rhm]

rmnka447, on 2017-March-16, 15:36, said:

A little LOTT helps here. The opponents have 10 or 11 trumps and we should have a 9 card fit. So, by LOTT reckoning, there should be 19 or 20 tricks out there.

With this shapely hand, I'm bidding a lot starting with 3 ♥ and following up with a bid in ♣. If I'm wrong in aggressively bidding this hand, so be it. The OP asked about this hand in a MP context, so if we go for a number it's only one board. I'm going to try to make the opponents make the last tough decision on the hand.

If partner doubles 4 ♠ before I can bid, I'll sit. I do have 1 1/2 QTs.

If the opponents get forced to 5 ♠, then we've achieved pushing them 1 level higher where we might have a chance to beat them.

This strategy looks right to me.
I do not want to emphasize hearts too much, but of course we have to mention hearts.
There is close to zero chance that the bidding will stop in 3♥ and if it does we may be high enough.
I am also reluctant to defend without having mentioned my best suit.
So if over 3♥ and 3♠ I can follow up with 4♣ I will leave the remainder to partner, having given a fair description of what I got.
If not I will be forced to bid 5♣ over 4♠, but then they either they have bid 4♠ voluntarily or partner has raised hearts, in which case my club bid must also have lead implications.
(I would not bother introducing a bad suit then)

Rainer Herrmann