[Cyberyeti]

I'm not sure which part of the forum this should go in, but also comes from the Tolle this weekend. My issue is less with the particular hand but with some of the more general implications of the situation here.

---

The unopposed auction went 1N(11.5-14)-2♦(♥, slow)-2♥-2N(v slow)-4♥

The pair were playing that 3m was GF, not sure about 3♥, so the rather horrible 2N had to be bid as the only sensible invite.

I think the 4♥ bid is an abuse of the UI, but as the auction will likely go 3♥-4♥ anyway there is no damage.

My issue is:

If this 2N is bid slowly it isn't your stereotyped 2533 11 count, if it's bid fast, it's more likely to be close to this. This can leave partner much better placed to judge whether to play in ♥/NT.

Having run across the banning of some carding methods in EBUland for exactly this sort of issue (that if you hold the wrong cards, you tend to make the reluctant play slowly), should it be looked at in the bidding also ?

[helene_t]

I don't think the BIT creates any relevant UI. Responder could have a minimum for his 2NT (considering pass), he could have a maximum, maybe he had a 4-card spades and wasn't sure if 2♠ would be a GF or if he somehow denied a 4-card spades by failing to bid Stayman. Or maybe he has some soft-valued 6322 and thought a notrump contract should still be in the picture. Or maybe he missorted his hand and now discovered he didn't have five hearts and was wondering how to reduce the risk of a silly contract.

Opener doesn't care about this, though. He just describes his hand and leaves the judgment issues to partner. With his top en of the range, ruffing value, and support, 4♥ is obvious.

[Cyberyeti]

helene_t, on Dec 2 2009, 08:59 AM, said:

I don't think the BIT creates any relevant UI. Responder could have a minimum for his 2NT (considering pass), he could have a maximum, maybe he had a 4-card spades and wasn't sure if 2♠ would be a GF or if he somehow denied a 4-card spades by failing to bid Stayman. Or maybe he has some soft-valued 6322 and thought a notrump contract should still be in the picture. Or maybe he missorted his hand and now discovered he didn't have five hearts and was wondering how to reduce the risk of a silly contract.

Opener doesn't care about this, though. He just describes his hand and leaves the judgment issues to partner. With his top en of the range, ruffing value, and support, 4♥ is obvious.

I think we need to get real here, this is a pretty poor 13 count, see how well it plays in 4♥ opposite xx, KQ10xx, KQx, Qxx for example and that's far from the worst hand he can hold (try J10, 10xxxx, KQx, KQx where 2N is the last making spot or xx, Q10xxx, KQx, KQx where 2N/3♥ are the tops, or Jx, KQxxx, 10xx, KQx where barring spade lead and diamond switch or a passive club you'll make 3N but have no play in 4♥).

I think the degree of thought firmly places the hand in the unbalanced category by the fact that he had to think before bidding 2♦ and again after the completely unexpected 2♥ . The hesitation places the contract in hearts when there are plenty of other hands where it's not right to play there.

[helene_t]

I don't see how a slow 2♦ shows an unbalanced hand. What kind of hands would not just automatically bid 2♦, holding a 5-card hearts? I can think of two: maybe he has a balanced hand and was thinking of stayman instead, since he would play in notrumps unless opener has 4 hearts. Or he has 4 spades and was thinking of the correct way to bid the hand.

The slow 2NT could mean that responder is maximum for the 2NT, or that he is minimum. Maybe there is a case that the ethical thing to do here for opener is to bid game when in doubt, since responder is more likely to have a minimum than a maximum (you can discount maximum unbalanced hands as they will bid game over 3♥ anyway, so it is a question of any minimum vs a balanced maximum).

[campboy]

Hmm.

The thought before 2NT suggests that he is thinking of doing something else, which could be 3♥, pass, 3NT or 3m I suppose. But what does the pause before 2♦ suggest? Well, one obvious possibility is that partner was considering suppressing his heart suit, and that certainly suggests that it is less likely to be right to play in hearts. Of course, he could just have been thinking about what to do at his second turn...

Anyway, I think 4♥ obvious. I would accept with that hand even playing 12-14, which they are not. Having chosen to accept, if partner thinks a 5-3 heart fit is worth playing in, why should I ignore him? I would not consider concealing the fit unless I was 4333.

[bluejak]

Huh. I do not mind the pause before 2♦, planning the hand, which tells partner little. But the pause before 2NT is terrible: was his partner's 2♥ bid a surprise? Why did he not decide what to do on the second round before bidding 2♦?

Sure, there is UI here, but only because North created it totally unnecessarily.

[wank]

good players plan the bidding and play because they are good players and forsee the problems which might arise. bad players don't think so far ahead. it may be poor play, but i wouldn't call it terrible, especially if it was referring to any ethical/legal aspects.