[Dirk Kuijt]

Scoring: MP

We had a soft result on this. How should the bidding go in a 2/1 framework?

---

I'll admit to our bidding a bit later.

[kenrexford]

My preferred auction would be:

2NT (19+ to 21-)
3♣ (muppet)
3♥ (no 5-card major)
3♠ (five spades)
4♣ (super-accept, two of the top three clubs)
4♠ (that sounds awful)
P (ok)

A second possible auction:

1♦-1♠
2NT-3♦(transfers)
3♠(agreed)-4♦(cooperative)
4♥(last train)-4♠(nope)

[mike777]

Dirk Kuijt, on Aug 31 2010, 01:57 PM, said:

Dealer: South Vul: N/S Scoring: MP

♠ 107653 ♥ K1075 ♦ AJ42 ♣   ♠ AKQ ♥ 82 ♦ KQ97 ♣ KQ97

We had a soft result on this.  How should the bidding go in a 2/1 framework?

I'll admit to our bidding a bit later.

maybe?



2d(18-19 bal)=2h(tfr)
2s(forced)=3h
3s(3s)=4d cue
5d=5nt(pick a slam)
6d


----


or..


2d-2h
2s=3h
3s=4s
p

[ArtK78]

I don't see any problem getting to 4♠. I would not want to be in slam in spades or diamonds, but both have some play.

A normal auction would be:

1♦ - 1♠
2NT* - 3♥
3♠ - 4♠

* am I worried about my small doubleton heart? A little. But what choice is there on a balanced 19 count?

Responder should not be trying for a spade slam with a suit of 10xxxx opposite 3 card support and combined assets of 26-27 HCP, some of which rate to be wasted.

[Dirk Kuijt]

Thanks

FWIW, our auction was

1♦-1♠
4♠-6♦

Since I don't think either one of us bid this very well, I'll not admit to whether I was North or South.

We compounded the bidding with the play. The ♥A was led, after which the hand is makeable, but declarer mistimed the play, giving us the score we deserved.

[P_Marlowe]

1D - 1S
2NT - 3C (1)
3S - 4D (2)
4H (3) - 4NT (4)
5S (4) - 6S


(1) NMF
(2) Cue, showing a top honor, spade is agreed as trump
(3) Last Train, ..., I dont think opener should by pass 4S,
so if you dont play it, than 4S it is
(4) RKCB for spades, in view of the double fit and because
opener showed some life

With kind regards
Marlowe

[ONEferBRID]

1C ( 3+ )
-  1S
2NT ( Balanced 18,19 )
-  3C! ( Wolff Relay--always asks for 4h )
3D! ( no 4h )
-  3H ( 5s/4h, GF )
3S ( 3s )
-  4S

[bluecalm]

Quote

FWIW, our auction was

1♦-1♠
4♠-6♦

You are throwing imps/mp's away if you bid 4♠ with 3 of them imo no matter rest of the hand.
It's not like you are happy to play 4-3 fit becaue of ♥xx as your ruffs will be with honors.
Why not just bid systemic 2NT, you have 18-19 balanced afterall. Fits perfectly.

[Codo]

I think the hand is really tricky.

As north I would like to be in 6 diamond if partner holds not too many wasted values in club. But I would not have the tools to find this out after

1 ♦ 1 ♠
2 NT

So, I would bid 3 ♣ or 3 ♥, depending on my methods and play 4 ♠ after finding out about the fit.

[gnasher]

Sorry - ignore this.

[hanp]

It seems to me that any "standard" auction starts with 1D - 1S - 2NT (or perhaps 1C - 1S - 2NT, which I will ignore since opener chose 1D in practice).

After 2NT it depends on system. I like to play transfers, with 3C showing either diamonds or a single suited slam try (with 5+ spades).

On the actual hand, the bidding might start with

1D - 1S
2NT - 3D (hearts, and thus at least 5 spades)
3S (2-3 spades, not 4 hearts, not 2-3 in the majors)- 4D (natural).

Holding KQxx in clubs opposite what is at most a singleton, I think that opener should sign off in 4S.

With a slam try and 4-4 in spades and diamonds, responder could bid

1D - 1S
2NT - 3C
3D - 3NT,

with 4C/4D/4NT instead of 3NT depending on strength and shape. Anything but 3S would promise diamonds.

[hanp]

By the way, I think that the auction

1D - 1S
2NT - 3C
3D - 3H

does not promise this 5440 shape. I would bid this way on a 7-count with 5-3-4-1 shape for example, showing the club shortness and keeping 3NT, 4S and 5D in the picture.

[rhm]

kenrexford, on Aug 31 2010, 02:02 PM, said:

My preferred auction would be:

2NT (19+ to 21-)
3♣ (muppet)
3♥ (no 5-card major)
3♠ (five spades)
4♣ (super-accept, two of the top three clubs)
4♠ (that sounds awful)
P (ok)

Do you really call the South hand 19+, with which you then would super-accept???
But then North shows of course remarkably restraint.

I wonder what you would call 19- hand (guess ♥82 could have been ♥32)

Rainer Herrmann

[hanp]

gnasher, on Sep 1 2010, 04:50 AM, said:

Sorry - ignore this.

Too late, I already responded to your post before you edited!!!

[pooltuna]

assuming passing opps
1♦ 1♠
2NT 3♥
3♠ 4♠
all pass

will be interesting to see what creative action will happen over 3♠

[rhm]

1♣ -- 1♠
3♠ -- 4♦
4♠

Simple and effective. I do not like to suggest notrump, when I have no intention to play notrump.

Rainer Herrmann

[hanp]

How about suggesting a balanced 18-19 count when you have a balanced 18-19 count?

[rhm]

hanp, on Sep 1 2010, 09:17 AM, said:

How about suggesting a balanced 18-19 count when you have a balanced 18-19 count?

It depends whether you consider an 18-19 count, where 9 points are in partner's major and a small doubleton in the unbid major, where partner is known to be shorter representative for a balanced 18-19 count. Bidding should be geared to finding the best contract. This sometimes means bending the rules.
Besides, I presume even you would not suggest a balanced 18-19 count with 2NT, when you had a balanced 18-19 count, if it included 4 cards in ♠.

What do you do with the actual hand if the bidding continues

1♦--1♠
2NT--3NT

I rarely double raise a major on 3 cards, but I also refuse, particularly at MP, to play fancy conventional meanings for 3NT. If partner has Jxxx or worse in ♠ and good ♥ he is invited to suggest 3NT. At least 3NT will be played from the right side

While I usually open 1♦ with 4-4 in the minors, I make an exception with strong hands for obvious reasons.
1♠ over 1♣ is very often a 5 card suit anyway.

Rainer Herrmann

[Fluffy]

I like to start with 3♦ after 2NT, don't see a big point exploring major fits when our best fit will likelly be diamonds anyway.

If partner happens to bid 3♥ over 3♦ now we have a great 4♥ avaible to show our hand better than anything else.

in practice it will go

1♦-1♠
2NT-3♦
3♠-4♣

now does south like 4♣ cue or not? if its the ace that's great, but if it isn't...

4♦-5♣
5♦-pass

5♣ shows a void, and south hates to hear it.

[gnasher]

If (reasonably enough) you don't like the idea of 1♦-1♠;2NT, why not bid 1♣-1♠;2♦? That will ensure that you reach spades when you belong in spades, and notrumps by responder when you belong in notrumps by responder.

The main downside is that you're showing one more club that you have, but that seems a much less dangerous deception than showing one more spade than you have.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2010-September-01, 10:36