[jillybean]

---

[DavidKok]

3♣ for now. If we have a spade fit, partner will inform us. We likely don't belong in hearts, and if we belong in diamonds partner will make a lot more noise on the next few rounds. This way we can also find a potential club fit.
One possibly awkward rebid by partner would be 3♥, fourth suit, asking for a stopper. We have one but are far too strong to bid 3NT or even 4NT (quantitative) over that. We could consider bidding 2NT now so that we can pull partner's possible 3NT to 4♣, but I don't like it. Just stick with the system. If partner does bid 3♥ I will bid 3♠ and hope that partner noticed that I bypassed 2♠ last round. This should be a 5♠4♣ hand with a lack of heart values, but I'll bid on if partner signs off in any game.

[mw64ahw]

If you want to move to advanced bidding, then I play
2♥ as natural or min. (non-Ambra style) and 2♠ as ♣ with extras.

[mike777]

3 Clubs extras as others mentioned.

Exploring grand slam at this point.

[mikeh]

I started to post that I agreed with David….bid 3C and hope that partner’s next bid won’t endplay us.

I still think that’s the mainstream action, but I like 2N. The more I think about it, the more I like it.

Partner can bid 3C with both minors and short majors. He can rebid 3D, where I’d fall in love with that diamond queen. He can bid 3S, setting trump. He might even bid 3H, but I’d not expect that since I’ve denied heart suit. Over 3N, with no real fit, I’d just try 4N.

We could miss a 4=4 club fit when he has something like 1=3=5=4 with say x QJx AKJxx Qxxx but I’m not sure 3C would solve that issue anyway…..that hand doesn’t look like a hand that pushes past 3N after 1S 2D 3C…though since south will keep bidding, north might later back into the suit.

I’m actually hoping for 3D from him, lol. Now I can raise to 4D or I could, in my methods, haul out keycard via 4H….since I don’t really want to give LHO a free lead directing double, I think I’d bid 4D (forcing, and see if partner can show a heart control now or later

[DavidKok]

Keep in mind partner can still bid 3♦ over 3♣ - that's not where 2NT gains.

The death response to 2NT isn't 3♥, it's 3NT. Since 2NT is supposed to be very descriptive in terms of both shape and strength responder may choose to conceal a four card club suit or even a sixth diamond if they judge that opposite a balanced hand we belong in NT. I think that we will often learn less, not more, despite using a cheaper bid.
What's more, I have not discussed what 1♠-2♦; 2NT-3NT; 4♣ shows. I think 5=3=1=4 with lots of extras is sensible, but I make a habit of not introducing undiscussed bids. Worse - we might not be on the same page regarding the continuations. I know what I would like them to be on this start, but I'm not confident partner thinks the same way.
Lastly our hand is (in my opinion) too strong to pass off as 18-19 balanced. I'm not saying this is what we are doing by bidding 2NT, but without discussion this is the hand type partner will likely evaluate against.

All things considered I see more benefits to 3♣. It's only a single step more expensive and does not distort our shape. Crucially, it strongly requests that partner continue to pattern out.

[thepossum]

My honest and long considered bid before reading the thread was 3 clubs despite my inclination to get too excited - not 2NT because I feel it underestimates my hand

[mikeh]

 DavidKok, on 2024-November-07, 14:00, said:

Keep in mind partner can still bid 3♦ over 3♣ - that's not where 2NT gains.

The death response to 2NT isn't 3♥, it's 3NT. Since 2NT is supposed to be very descriptive in terms of both shape and strength responder may choose to conceal a four card club suit or even a sixth diamond if they judge that opposite a balanced hand we belong in NT. I think that we will often learn less, not more, despite using a cheaper bid.
What's more, I have not discussed what 1♠-2♦; 2NT-3NT; 4♣ shows. I think 5=3=1=4 with lots of extras is sensible, but I make a habit of not introducing undiscussed bids. Worse - we might not be on the same page regarding the continuations. I know what I would like them to be on this start, but I'm not confident partner thinks the same way.
Lastly our hand is (in my opinion) too strong to pass off as 18-19 balanced. I'm not saying this is what we are doing by bidding 2NT, but without discussion this is the hand type partner will likely evaluate against.

All things considered I see more benefits to 3♣. It's only a single step more expensive and does not distort our shape. Crucially, it strongly requests that partner continue to pattern out.

I couldn’t disagree more with your closing point. While 3C promises some extras, it absolutely doesn’t even hint at a 19 count so you’re not passing 3N if he bids it anymore than I’m passing 3N if 2N gets raised. Meanwhile, 2N suggests showing shape at least as much, if not more so, than does 3C. Over 3C, responder isn’t driving past 3N with a heart card unless you’ve got play for grand, given that he doesn’t expect this power. More importantly, after 2N he ‘knows’ that I have diamond tolerance and a heart stopper, so he can safely emphasize good diamonds without worrying that I might be unable to bid 3N over 3D.

Finally, I find it interesting that anyone thinks that 2N limits my hand. That’s nonsense, in terms of hcp. Maybe nobody noticed that 2D forced to game? One of the most powerful features of 2/1 is the ability to make low level exploratory bids with big hands….responder won’t think I have this hand when I bid 3N but he should know it’s possible….and thus he’ll bid by describing his hand. AKJxxx in diamonds bids 3D almost regardless of the rest of his hand, absent 3+ spades or long clubs worth bidding…precisely because he won’t assume that I hold a 5332 minimum….I probably hold that but it costs nothing for him to describe his hand over 2N.

In my experience, slam bidding is probably the area in which expert partnerships outperform non experts most consistently….because we don’t rush to game unless the hand is very simple.

Btw, give me 5314 with the diamond queen turned into a spot, and I’d bid 3C. But I really think 3C undervalues that queen.

[thepossum]

2NT limits my hands Mike - maybe not enough to matter but I still prefer 3 clubs

[jillybean]

#18

---

Sorry, I have been away from keyboard all day.

Regardless of your continuation, partner will bid diamonds again.
Do you have agreements over 2N, systems on? How do you show diamonds.

[mike777]

4D
I want partner to be captain
Btw 4H will be kickback

[thepossum]

Since we are game forcing I am bidding 3H

I am still working out what partner has for a game force and two diamond bids, and I am not risking being passed in 3NT yet

[jillybean]

---

Does anyone set ♦ as trump first round?

[mike777]

We Intermediate players really need to be capable of bidding to 7NT
On these type of hands where opponents are silent.

[thepossum]

So on the earlier bidding and my 3h I am either expecting another diamond bid or 3NT or something forcing and then onwards
Blackwood could get the Grand. Quants will not

[mikeh]

thepossum, on 2024-November-07, 19:01, said:

2NT limits my hands Mike - maybe not enough to matter but I still prefer 3 clubs

I’m sure that for you 2N limits your hand. For good players…no, it doesn’t. That’s because your side is already forced to game so you have no need to ‘show strength’ when what your want to get is some more info about partner’s hand…so make a cheap bid to maximize his ability to make a descriptive bid.

[thepossum]

mikeh, on 2024-November-08, 18:38, said:

I’m sure that for you 2N limits your hand. For good players…no, it doesn’t. That’s because your side is already forced to game so you have no need to ‘show strength’ when what your want to get is some more info about partner’s hand…so make a cheap bid to maximize his ability to make a descriptive bid.

I have just deleted a rather long defence to this attack. Not for any reason other than to prevent the thread being diverted. I still have the text if anyone wants to pursue it
I regard your comment Mike as another unnecessary personal attack and misinformation - not that personal but it undermines me somewhat
My system that I play - irrespective of knowledge or skill or experitise - precisely limits 2NT and 3NT bids - you should know that the systems people play are nothing to do with expertise
Some of the most experienced players are still able to play very basic systems. Not that I regard myself as one but systems do not define expertise
Like I say, life is too short (all of ours) for another tedious fight with Mike. I deleted my old post solely for that reason but have it stored somewhere if anyone wants to keep rubbish going. I am sure you can probably read it under deleted posts and I can send you a copy if you insist

[thepossum]

jillybean, on 2024-November-08, 11:14, said:

Does anyone set ♦ as trump first round?

I think North has to just keep bidding diamonds until etc - hopefully 7NT. That is in my system
How can you set diamonds on first round

EDIT I know this means nothing but I have tested the hand with GiB which jups to 6 diamonds and QPlus which remarkbly finds 7NT - that kind of impressed me because I was struggling knowing how to get one side or other to take control

[jillybean]

thepossum, on 2024-November-08, 20:41, said:

How can you set diamonds on first round

That is what I hope to find out.

[mike777]

I don't recommend it but I suppose
1S= 5D. Sets diamonds on round one....
😁 😁