[zenbiddist]

What are you thinking and bidding over partner's balancing bid? IMPs. Thanks

---

[rmnka447]

This is a classic IMP fight for the part score situation.

You've got a good 13 HCP. Give opener 11 and responder 5 -- then -- partner might have a max of about 11 and often will have less. So game looks remote.

I'm bidding 3 ♣ because 2 NT in this situation is usually for the minors.

[Wouterf]

3♣ seems standard, don't punish p for making a balancing bid. He is bidding on your hcp as well.
Not all games are ment to be bid.

[Tramticket]

Yes, i agree with 3♣.

I would probably have bid 3♣ on the last round at match points.

[mycroft]

If I'm playing a Precision pair, especially one under 35, I'll try for game. Opener has a flat 10 and partner raised on Qxx and a stiff.

Otherwise, partner is bidding my cards already and if I punish her for doing that, she won't do it next time. "I'd rather be -1100 than -110" - L.Cohen.

I agree with tramtickets above; except that if 2NT was "two places to play" for me too, I'd do that instead of 3♣. Unfortunately, in my partnership, it's minors.

[aawk]

With no agreements looks like take out for both minors most likely 5-4 because your partner already passed on 1♠.

A regular partnership should have made agreements about these situations (for 2nt both minors or 2 places to play).

[msjennifer]

3Club.My spade King is of doubtful value.Partner has passed once and it is obvious that he is trying to balance and it looks very unlikely that he has a heart suit as he just could have doubled.His 10/11 points are minor oriented.3C may or may not make but is unlikely to be doubled.

[GrahamJson]

3C looks obvious but I'm wondering about the merit of 3H. If 2NT is two places to play then they are most likely the red suits, so 3H will immediately find your fit. Also, if opponents compete with 3S you can follow up with 4C. If you had bid 3C you might find it more difficult to compete further.

As to hanging partner for protecting, I don't see that as a huge worry. Even opposite xx x KQxxx xxxxx 4C is only one off, and makes on a spade lead, and partner should surely have something a bit better than that.

[miamijd]

2nt here is two-suited, so you bid as follows:

1. If you prefer C to D, you bid 3C, and then if partner corrects to 3D (showing the reds), you pass or correct to 3H, depending on your hand.

2. If you prefer D to C, it's a bit more complicated:

A. If you prefer D to C and either prefer H to C or are indifferent between C and H, you bid 3D.
B. If you prefer D to C, but have a definite preference for C over H, you should bid 3C.

This one is an obvious 3C bid. You should give up on game, because partner had neither enough to act over 1S nor a hand suitable for a X this round.

Cheers,
mike

[RD350LC]

Wouterf, on 2017-April-13, 02:22, said:

3♣ seems standard, don't punish p for making a balancing bid. He is bidding on your hcp as well.
Not all games are ment to be bid.

I agree completely with this response. I would expect that the hcp would be split 20/20 or nearly so, so I do not want to hang partner for balancing. I would bid 3C-and no more.
If they bid 3S, then it is a case of heads you win, tails you tie.

[gszes]

4c

IMPS is a game or risk vs reward. I think 3c looks totally normal and should work a decent amount of the time. The problem I have with 3c is that it is not clear the opps do not have a heart game they are just itching to bid. 3c makes it entirely too easy for either N OR S to chime back in with 3h.

There is a very real concern p has short hearts here and while we might have some decent defense against spades we might have little against hearts. If p is concerned with your overbidding clubs just explain you were willing to up the level by one to eliminate the risk of the opps finding a big heart game.

If perchance p has 2 places to play (!D !H) at the very least we will get to play 4h from our side while probably being too high.

[nige1]

zenbiddist, on 2017-April-13, 01:40, said:

What are you thinking and bidding over partner's balancing bid? IMPs. Thanks

---

I rank

• 3♣ = NAT. Partner has a weak 2-suiter of some kind but be wary of punishing his enterprise.
• 5♣ = NAT. Brave but reasonable.
• 3♠ = CUE. But how do you expect partner to co-operate?

[gordontd]

nige1, on 2017-April-16, 17:12, said:

I rank

• 3♣ = NAT. Partner has a weak 2-suiter of some kind but be wary of punishing his enterprise.
• 5♣ = NAT. Brave but reasonable.
• 3♠ = CUE. But how do you expect partner to co-operate?

5C won't seem reasonable if partner turns out to have the reds, which is quite likely. If you do want to get to game, 4C would at least allow you to get to 4H if you have a heart fit.

[WellSpyder]

I'm surprised at how many people always seem content with the idea that oppo opened and responded, so we won't have game available. In my experience it is quite possible that you still belong in slam, let alone game, when oppo make the first two bids in the auction.

[mycroft]

If we have even a sniff at slam, partner would have doubled (and bid). She's bidding some of my points already.

The chance partner has even a useful 13 is low. And I have King-and-one in their suit - that seems to be the worst possible holding, no?

As I said, if I'm playing one of the new Precision pairs, we likely have game, and I'll try. Otherwise, I'll take my plus where it lies (which is likely to be 3♠-1).

[WellSpyder]

mycroft, on 2017-April-18, 09:19, said:

The chance partner has even a useful 13 is low. And I have King-and-one in their suit - that seems to be the worst possible holding, no?

I agree. I wasn't trying to argue that we should be looking for slam on this hand! But I was taking issue with the general argument (which I think does make an appearance in this thread) that once oppo open and respond, partner's maximum point count is 24 less whatever we hold, and therefore we should just be looking to compete the part score.