[adhoc3]

Pard open 1C, you have:

♠4
♥J85
♦AKQ92
♣QT65

What would you bid here?

Scoring: IMP

1C---1D
1H---2H//

Falling 1.

---

[mr1303]

3S, splinter looks reasonable. Partner should bid 3NT, which I'll play (and go off like a man)

[Echognome]

Don't see what's wrong with 2♥ as a contract other than it didn't make.

[mikeh]

2♥ is an underbid and also happens to rule out possible contracts in ♣.. picture Ax Kxxx Jx AJxxx.... ok, a specific hand, but North could have an even better hand with shape.

I have no objection to raising 1♥ with 3 card support, but that is not this hand.. maybe xx KQx Axxxx xxx would be prototypical.

It seems to me that we want to be able to get to any one of 3 denominations: ♣, ♥ or notrump....

We'd also perhaps like to describe invitational values... but I don't think we can do all of this. We can maximize our flexibility in terms of denomination by making a 4th suit forcing bid.... but that will inevitably force to game even if you play that 4th suit does not in itself immediately establish a gf (BWS is such a method).

I think the South hand, with 2 modest fits and a 12 count with a good suit, is worth a game force... certainly at imps and probably at mps... if only because it maximizes the chances of finding the best strain.

Unfortunately, that will lead to 3N

Too bad. So sad. But, if you want to avoid bidding contracts that fail, pass every time it's your turn... otherwise, shrug and get onto the next board.

[whereagles]

This bidding is too wierd to me. So many good calls available with the South hand.. why 2♥?

[hrothgar]

I see two reasonable choices with this hand.
Neither leads to that great a contract

Option 1: Take the high road

Bid 2♦ (strong jump shift), intending to show delayed club support.
I consider 2♦ a slight over bid (shift a heart to a Diamond and I'd consider 2♦ clear)

Option 2: Take the low road

If you don't believe that the hand is strong enough for an immediate GF than you really don't have any choice other than 1♦. You intend to rebid

2♥ over 1♥
2N over 1♠
3N over 1N
3♠ over 2♣

I don't think that 2♥ is that terrible a contract. it just doesn't make. In a similar vein, I don't think 3N would be a terrible contract (though its also down)

[SoTired]

are we looking at the same hand? Isn't our hand 12hcp + singleton? Don't we have a good fit for opener's clubs and 4-3 fit in hearts? Isn't 2H showing <10? I bid 3C over 1H. Game invitational, hoping opener can bid 3N. If opener passes, OK. If partner bids 3D, I will try 3H showing our spade shortness and trying for a moysian 4H contract.

I think it best to ask these questions without showing both hands. Too many people seem to be answering with the final result in mind.

[kenberg]

It appears that you are not playing in the Walsh style (1D only if there is no four card major or if the hand is strong enough to reverse into a major) since if you were, opener would rebid 1NT over 1D. Since you are not playing Walsh, I would be reluctant to raise a second suit on a modest three card holding, even with the stiff. (Playing Walsh, 1C-1D-1H shows a shapely hand and responder can raise to 2H on three cards since opener will know that with modest values and four cards responder would have bypassed diamonds.) So in my view, 2H is an underbid on points and a misbid on shape. I believe the choices are 3C (invitational) and 2S(fourth suit forcing). With my 12 count and good five card suit, I opt for 2S. If partner is addicted to opening on trash this bid will encourage him to get past that personality disorder. Possibly partner will continue showing his shape by rasing 2S to 3S, but probably he will bid 2NT. At any rate, we will end in 3N from one side or the other, going down. Tough luck. Once partner opens, and he certainly has an opening hand, we will be playing in game.

Ken

[kenrexford]

This Q, and Kenberg's reply, brings up something that I do not know the answer to and am curious about.

If playing Walsh, what are the parameters of the 2♥ raise?

[Limey_p]

SoTired, on Jul 27 2006, 12:31 PM, said:

are we looking at the same hand? Isn't our hand 12hcp + singleton?

are we looking at the same hand? This is a game force opposite a standard opening bid. So start with 4th suit forcing [you should have an agreement with your partner for this sequence - is 1♠ or 2♠ 4sf?]

then pard can declare 3NT. and likely go down. So perhaps you didn't lose anything playing in 2♥ after all.

AP

[HeartA]

mr1303, on Jul 27 2006, 10:46 AM, said:

3S, splinter looks reasonable. Partner should bid 3NT, which I'll play (and go off like a man)

ditto.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

over 1C, bid 1D. after 1H, ... well bid 3C.
The main problem with 2H is, that it is an
underbid by at least an Ace.

If you play 4th suit forcing as inv.+, that
would be fine, but I assume, you play 4th
suit as game force.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[neilkaz]

I played this hand recently..when was it played ? I want to go back and look at it and cannot find it.

TY .. neilkaz ..

[neilkaz]

These posts are easier to answer if we are given, in the initial post, a bit of info about system. Were you playing SAYC or 2/1 and were you using Walsh responses ?

Anyhow..I'll bid whatever is 4SF here or 2H if playing Walsh (not my style, but I don't say no to PD's who prefer it) since it is GF.

If bidding up the line, the 2H bid is a gross underbid.

If not playing 4SF (4SF is a MUST, IMO) then I just jump to 3C invitational and if PD cannot bid 3NT or carry on, we likely aren't missing anything.

.. neilkaz ..

[adhoc3]

I added poll on this post. Full hand is only for satisfying curiosity. The mission here is to find the best reasoning, not the best contract

[Free]

We have game going values, so we need to show them. Bidding 2♥ or 3m doesn't do the job, so 2♠ is pretty clear imo. Later you can show your 3 card ♥ support if you want (and if you still can). 2♥ is AWFUL! If you would've opened it would be a good rebid (better than 2♣) but your partner opened so it's a completely different situation...

[sfbp]

Looks like a nice example for XYZ to me. It doesn't help much, but it probably keeps you out of 2H

1C - 1D - (nat, why would you play anything forcing you to bid otherwise)
1H - 2C - (invitation, nothing about clubs, forces 2D)
2D - 2NT - (where I live, balanced invite
Now AND ONLY NOW, have you given the opener the right information and decision. I am sure he will bid 3N, but at least he can downvalue his majors.

Stephen

[adhoc3]

sfbp, on Jul 28 2006, 10:08 AM, said:

Looks like a nice example for XYZ to me. It doesn't help much, but it probably keeps you out of 2H

1C - 1D - (nat, why would you play anything forcing you to bid otherwise)
1H - 2C - (invitation, nothing about clubs, forces 2D)
2D - 2NT - (where I live, balanced invite
Now AND ONLY NOW, have you given the opener the right information and decision. I am sure he will bid 3N, but at least he can downvalue his majors.

Stephen

Ahhhh, yes. I 'felt' it, but did not recalled when I said 'not certain'. Thanks.

[benlessard]

2s 4th suit GF seems like the best most flexible bid.



If you play walsh

1c--1d--1h--3h would have been GF so after 2s -- 2nt --- 3h should show 3 card support or an advanced cue-bid with solid diamonds.


3clubs is an underbid

but 2h is a gross underbid

[1eyedjack]

sfbp, on Jul 28 2006, 04:08 PM, said:

Looks like a nice example for XYZ to me. It doesn't help much, but it probably keeps you out of 2H

1C - 1D - (nat, why would you play anything forcing you to bid otherwise)
1H - 2C - (invitation, nothing about clubs, forces 2D)
2D - 2NT - (where I live, balanced invite
Now AND ONLY NOW, have you given the opener the right information and decision. I am sure he will bid 3N, but at least he can downvalue his majors.

Stephen

I don't like the idea of bidding 2NT with a singleton in the only unbid suit when partner has yet to indicate any stoppers in it.

I was wondering how it might go in a weak 1N system. North opens 1N and then South has to decide whether his hand is with GF or invite. It is close but I think South would normally go for GF on this hand, and pattern out with 1-3-5-4, on which North would then bid 3N.

I am interested by the 1C-1D-1H-3C bidders. Clearly they do not place this in the GF category.

Incidentally, are there no votes for a 1NT rebid by N?