[DavidKok]

You pick up a wild hand at IMP scoring, and before you have time to assess just how high you are going to push the bidding you notice partner has opened in first seat, in your long suit no less. Exciting.

---

The 1♣ needs some explanation. You've agreed to play 10-13 'Kamikaze' NT at this vulnerability, along with an 'unbalanced' 1♦ opening. Therefore 1♣ must be one of the following:

• A 14-16 balanced hand, may contain 5 diamonds (even 3=3=5=2 is possible!). No 5cM.
  
• A 17-19 balanced hand. Does not contain a 5-card diamond or major suit.
  
• Unbalanced or semibalanced with real clubs (shows at least 5 unless 4441, and all 4441's with the singleton not in clubs are opened 1♣).

As responses you could opt for 2♣ inverted minor (showing 10+, but who's counting), but your methods only allow you to locate a 4-4 spade fit over that if it so happens that neither side can bid notrump (you can then bid to a 4♠, partner will likely be convinced it is a Moysian but will probably pass). Alternatively you can bid 1♠, showing 4(+) spades and 8(+) points, over which you have XYZ available (so three ways to show clubs over 1NT).

General bridge theory dictates that you should introduce your major suit if you only wish to explore game, and that long minor suits really start to shine only at the slam level. But maybe these clubs strong enough that you would prefer 5♣ in the potential 7-2 fit even over 4♠ with a 4-4 spade fit. At any rate, plan the bidding. If you have a partnership agreement that helps on this hand please also share it.

[mw64ahw]

Should be safe in 4♣ and 5♣ is likely if North has a couple of Aces. So 4♠ looks doable if opener has 4.

The description of your 1♣ doesn't quite fit with my approach so in the absence of a balanced 15-17 which I'd open 1NT with 4-way transfers...

Playing Transfer Walsh, but with a Strong NT with 1♠ the only strong response:
1♣-1♥ complete with 3♠, 2♠ with 4♠ and a Weak NT/3♠ with 4♠ & 18-19hcp

After a non-♠ response it would typically be a 2♣ reply, but distributionally this hand is worth 3/4♣ although I skip taking it to 4 without an Ace.

[pescetom]

With this hand at IMPs I would probably just bid 4◇ which for us is Kickback fixing trumps in clubs: if he shows 0/3 Keycards then I punt 6♧, otherwise 5♧ (trusting him to go on if he really does have 4 Keycards).

At MP (or at least with a black Jack) I would be more inclined to show the spades and lever XYZ if he doesn't raise.

[Winstonm]

The fact that east could not act over 1C is important IMO and reduces the chance that we need to act in semi-preemptive mode. Too top-heavy for me to bid spades (do I really want to invite a 3-card raise?) so I bid 2C.

[pescetom]

Winstonm, on 2021-July-31, 10:53, said:

The fact that east could not act over 1C is important IMO and reduces the chance that we need to act in semi-preemptive mode. Too top-heavy for me to bid spades (do I really want to invite a 3-card raise?) so I bid 2C.

With our agreements, he needs 4 cards to raise spades directly, so one less concern there. But it's interesting that we read East's silence in different ways: one reason I like 4◇ is that West may have an impressive collection of hearts.

[mikeh]

While I expect that we belong in clubs, I’ll try 1S. The vulnerability may keep west out….and if he is bidding over 1S, he’ll often be bidding over an inverted club raise so 2C won’t usually have any useful preemptive effect. Plus I don’t want partner inferring that we have defensive values which he will be more inclined to do after a strength promising inverted raise (no way am I bidding 3C…if I raised it would be 2C or something a lot higher) than over a 1S response.

I think we may end up with a difficult choice if partner shows a strong hand via, say, 2N.

1C 1S 2N…..now what? He rates to hold Ax or better in clubs, or xxx, etc, so we rate to run clubs, but lots of 17+ hands give us good slams.

So methods may factor later (I use transfers over 2N rebids by opener, so 3S would show interest in a high level club contract, but partner won’t cooperate with, say, KJx AQxx Axxx Ax, because he won’t play us for clubs like this).

Methods also come into play if he rebids 1N, and this hand becomes a nightmare if he raises to 2S on a 3 card holding. But it’s not as if any direct club raise avoids all issues.

[DavidKok]

If it makes a difference, my followups on several auctions are:

1♣*-1♠; 2♠ can be bid on a 3-card suit, but if so it promises an unbalanced or semibalanced hand and hence at least 5 clubs. Over this we have 2NT asking for shape (partner will bid their shortness on the 3-level with 3-card support, 3♣ with 3-card support and no shortness, i.e. 3=2=2=6, and 3♠ or higher with 4-card support) and other bids without a jump are short suit trials or advance cue bids (to be clarified during the subsequent auction) for 4♠. Jumping over 2♠ will show a real side suit and shows SI.

1♣*-1♠; 1NT (14-16, max 3 spades) now we have XYZ. In particular, 2NT forces 3♣ which we pass (followups if we decide to bid on not discussed), direct 3♣ is weak and asks partner to pass with anything except a beautiful maximum, 2♣ forces 2♦ and 3♣ on the second round is invitational with long clubs and exactly 4 spades, and 2♦ asks for support in either major after which 3♣ is GF with long clubs, not necessarily SI.

1♣*-1♠; 2NT shows 17-19 balanced (and is game forcing) and may contain 4 spades. Opener can bid 3♣ as Checkback, 3♠ showing 6(+), 3NT to play and all other bids are natural and descriptive. A definite weak spot in my system.

1♣*-4♦ would be a diamond splinter for clubs (3♦ is weak and natural).

Over 1♣*-2♣* partner will bid 2NT (GF) with 17-19, 3♣ with an unbalanced minimum, splinter with appropriate unbalanced intermediate hands and bid values with all other hands. If partner has an unbalanced hand with a 4-card major they may bypass a fragment in lower ranked suits to clarify the shape on the next round, but with balanced hands they will bid up the line.

[pescetom]

DavidKok, on 2021-July-31, 12:29, said:

1♣*-1♠; 1NT (14-16, max 3 spades) now we have XYZ. In particular, 2NT forces 3♣ which we pass (followups if we decide to bid on not discussed), direct 3♣ is weak and asks partner to pass with anything except a beautiful maximum

We play that direct 3♣ is natural game forcing and followups after 3♣ show various 5-5 game forcing, which already adds a lot of bang for little buck. Weak clubs can go through the 2NT puppet to 3♣ then pass.

[DavidKok]

I don't see an advantage of direct 3♣ GF compared to 2♦ artifical GF followed by 3♣ natural.

[LBengtsson]

some logic is needed. there is virtually no reason to play in a ♠ fit as you have two stiffs that need to be covered by aces, so discards on the ♣ suit are meaningless. you have a ♣ fit of at least 10 cards. its IMP scoring so even if the other side bid a ♠ slam you should be in a ♣ slam at worst. lose a few Imps but what you do not want is partner supporting ♠ and the ops intervening heavily because he will probably never know about the ♣ fit.

I think that partner's opening hand in many other systems, especially 2/1 would be opened either 1♣/1♦/1NT so if the ops intervene the auction could (???) be similar except if stayman used immediately.

so any bid that shows/sets ♣ as trump and shows a stiff, so 4♦ or 4♥ (if this is splinter agreeing ♣) would be my bid here. at least partner knows immediately that I am worth 5♣ and I have shape to cover his losers perhaps. if the ops bid 4♥ and partner makes a forcing pass, I bid 5♣ content I have not overstated my hand.

I prefer splinter of 4♥ slightly as it makes ops bid difficult if he holds big ♥ suit.

[DavidKok]

You may have missed the 1♣ description, we do not have a guaranteed 10 card fit in clubs. Also the 5-level is far from safe.

[pescetom]

DavidKok, on 2021-August-01, 02:56, said:

I don't see an advantage of direct 3♣ GF compared to 2♦ artifical GF followed by 3♣ natural.

I don't see any real advantage in a direct 3♧ that is not GF: you can always invite in clubs after going through the 2♧ invitational Puppet, or sign off in clubs with a weak hand after the 2nt Puppet.

One advantage of direct 3♧ as GF is uniformity, so that after XYZ all jumps are GF.
Another advantage is to distinguish a particular hand type that wants to establish it's suit as trumps, quite different from the situation 2◇ where responder is asking opener for more information and even his successive 3♧ does not settle the question.

[DavidKok]

pescetom, on 2021-August-01, 06:13, said:

I don't see any real advantage in a direct 3♧ that is not GF: you can always invite in clubs after going through the 2♧ invitational Puppet, or sign off in clubs with a weak hand after the 2nt Puppet.

One advantage of direct 3♧ as GF is uniformity, so that after XYZ all jumps are GF.
Another advantage is to distinguish a particular hand type that wants to establish it's suit as trumps, quite different from the situation 2◇ where responder is asking opener for more information and even his successive 3♧ does not settle the question.

I think we play XYZ quite differently. Immediate jumps are NF for me, so your treatment would decrease uniformity in my system. Also I think there is merit to having different ranges of weak-ish club hands, also with different emphasis on 3NT versus 5♣.