Leaderboard

Hello, My partner and I are currently playing better minors using inverted replies. My inquiry is that I am debating trying a 12-14 weak NT. Having a direct jump to 3♣/3♦ could cause some bidding issues. If my partner is sitting on a hand like this... ♠: AJxx ♥: KJxx ♦: AQ ♣: xxx And I want to make an inverted raise to 3♣, the only thing my partner knows is that I most likely have 5 ♣, and 6-9 HCP. The bidding will go, 1♣-3♣ My partner certainly does have a nice 15 HCP opposite 5 ♣ in this situation. 3NT may not hurt anything even with 21 HCP, however, what if we are looking at a part-score in MP? Do many of you think this could become a problem at times using a weak NT with inverted raises? If so, does this sound like a plausible solution? We play 10+ HCP 2/1 bids, 2NT is currently a balanced 17-19 HCP jump raise, which honestly, we do not have much use for. I was thinking that if we choose to adapt a weak NT, we can keep our inverted raises by turning 2NT into the lower limit of 6-7 HCP for clubs, and 3C be 8-9 HCP showing more support to a 15-17 NT. Is this worth a try? I don't see it as being a huge issue, being an uncommon bid, but I would like to hear what you all have to say. Many thanks, Don

I'd just assume it was a singleton. Covering from Jx could be very costly.

With both black Aces (needed for the grand) it's mandatory.

ACBL Regional Open Pairs, mixed field but sound opposition at your table, if that matters You are dealer, all vul [hv=pc=n&n=saq2h3dqj6542cqj4&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1dp1hp2dp2sp3sp4cp4dp4np]133|200[/hv] 1. Do you agree with your auction so far? If not, what would you have done differently? 1a. I'm particularly interested in alternative calls after partner bid 4♣. What other calls are possible here? 2. What does partner have? Approximate shape and values 3. What is 4NT? (You are in an occasional partnership and thus without detailed slam bidding agreements beyond "normal RKCB") 4. What call do you make?

Support doubles typically apply through 2♥ for Law of Total Tricks reasons - you don't want to get stuck playing a 4-3 fit at the 3 level when strength is equally distributed and there's no shortness in the 3-card trump hand. After partner's 2/1 bid, a double here is Balance of Power (See Mel Colchamiro's Book) and requires only 3 trump if intervenor's (opponent) bid is at the 2 level and 2 trump if at the 3-level (Mel's rule of 23). Red vs White you have to decide if your side's putative game is worth more than the double.

Thoughts on using something like this? With a 15-17 NT and 12-14 NT... 1♣: 3+♣ (12-19 HCP) -2♣: 4+♣ (10-16 HCP) -2♦: 10-11 NT (8-9 w/ 12-14 NT?) invite denying ♣ (possible 4 card ♥/♠) OR (17+ HCP) NT -2♥: 5+♥ (17+ HCP) -2♠: 5+♠ (17+ HCP) -2N: 5+♣ (6/7 HCP) -3♣: 5+♣ (8/9 HCP) Sadly, this doesn't work out the same for a 1D opening. 1♦: 3+♦ (12-19 HCP) -2♦: 4+♦ (10-16 HCP) -2♥: 5+♥ (17+ HCP) -2♠: 5+♠ (17+ HCP) -2N: 5+♦ (6/7 HCP) -3♣: (17+ HCP) NT (4cM possible) -3♦: 5+♦ (8/9 HCP) I lose the NT invite, but keep a SJS for balanced strong hands, however, a 2/1 ♣ bid is still there. It may not happen often, but the 1♣-2♦ may also remove 4th seats ability to accurately overbid diamonds, hearts, or spades.

SJS... 1♦-2♠ 3♦-4♣* 5♥*-5♠* Not sure after this...King ? is pointless, and partner assumes we may not have much support to spades...easy 7♦ or a gut instinct 7♠, no regrets...

I do have a few things to bring up more. One of the points of my suggestion to move my 6-7 inverted jump raises to 2NT is to allow for the 15-17 NT to stop in a NT contract at MP. Sure, we might go down 1 sitting with a bad 21 HCP fit, however, we most likely have an 8 card club suit to help the cause. My concern is that by jumping to 3C with 6-9 HCP and 5 clubs, we put a lot of stress on the 15-17 NT 1C opening. How can a nice 16-17 tell the difference between a 6 HCP minimum and a 9 HCP max? The contract may be wrong sided, but I still like this better at MP. The only problem I see with your suggestion about replacing minor jump raises is that it somewhat defeats the purpose of an inverted jump. 1C-2D leaves room for opponents to bid majors at the 2 level. I also have other methods for showing a 13-15 or 18-19 balanced hand than jumping to 2NT. If I cannot bid a 2/1 in same suit, I can do a 2D, 2H, or 2S raise.

Congratulations, you're the first person to figure out what my partner was doing. I'm still not sure how the auction would have gone had I realized this (and bid 2NT), but at least I would have a chance to get it right.

You’re focusing too much on the hand itself and not enough on the principle that I was trying to illustrate; the principle being that I don’t believe that fit jumps are appropriate when all four hands are bidding. By all means, shuffle the cards around in any combination which you choose. Just don’t lose sight of the principle. This thread has already attracted a fair amount of views which tells me that others are interested in what is being discussed. A lot of players know about the Snapdragon Double. How may of these players actually use it? I have absolutely no idea. I am willing to put my head on the chopping block here and say that not enough partnerships using Snapdragon have detailed agreements on its wider possible applications. More to follow here as I have another idea on how Snapdragon can be made more useful. Watch this space!

The hand posted above was exploring further the question asked in post 16 (repeated here for convenience): Including 6-cards in the fourth suit was therefore done intentionally. A 5-card misfit in the fourth suit is discussed at the end of this post. The hand posted above was also exploring further the suggestion made by chasetb in post 17 to allow 3 cards in partners suit (repeated here for convenience): Therefore, including 3-cards in partner’s suit was also done intentionally. After reading more about fit jumps over here and over here I’m not convinced that they are applicable when all four players are bidding. You can quite easily end up in a disaster like this: [hv=pc=n&s=saqj64h72dj85c832&w=sk852hkj98dcaqjt6&n=s9h54dakt632ck754&e=st73haqt63dq974c9&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1c1d1h2s(Fit%20Jump)p3d(No%20Spade%20fit)d(Penalty)p(Damn%21%20Should%20have%20used%20Snapdragon)pp]399|300[/hv] When the bidding goes: 1♣-1♦-1♥-2♠ (fit jump), you are forced to 3♦. With the HCP favouring the opponents they now trot out the red card and you end up red-faced! The Snapdragon Double keeps the bidding lower. It also keeps you out of trouble. The first article stipulates the criteria for Fit Showing Jumps as the following: 1. A good 5+ card suit, typically with 2-3 working honours 2. 4+ cards in partner’s suit, preferably 5 when partner bids a minor suit 3. 10-11 HCP, perhaps shaded with primary honour controls 4. An unbalanced distribution, preferably with a singleton or void (no flatter than a 5-4-2-2 shape) The first hand posted is out of kilter with Fit Showing Jumps, both regarding HCP and the number of cards promised in partner’s suit. It is also out of kilter regarding a (normal) FSJ sequence.

After 1m-1M-2m responder needs a GF bid to enable slam exploration at low levels. To do this, the bid of the 3rd suit is forcing but does not guarantee as many as 4 cards. Imagine: ♠KJ10 ♥AKJxxx ♦Axx, ♣x. Responder's 2nd bids are invitational (3♦, 3♥), forcing(4♦) or to play(4♥ or 5♦). 2♠or 3♣ should be "3rd suit forcing" - these might be natural 4+ card suits but do not have to be. Therefore you would bid 2N with no ♥ tolerance and fewer than 4♠s. Partner will rebid 3♦ or 3♥ as game forces. (3♣ by partner should show 4=5=1=3 or 4=5=0=4 and be GF). Assuming partner rebids 3♥ as in the example hand above, your next bid will be 3N. Partner will know you have 0-1 ♥s and soft values. Partner might still continue with outside controls yet unbid. Notice that your ♠ values are duplicated and not pulling full weight. Partner can now bid 4♦ to show 3-card support and slam interest. With 3-card support and only game interest partner would bid 4♦ instead of 3♠ (yes this foregoes 3N).

Partner asked for ♦K which we don't have. However, we do have 2nd round control in ♦ and an extra trump, which I think is as good as having ♦K, so I'll bid 7♥.

Well, thank you for the replies everyone. 1. 3♠ was described as everything from "a nice call" to "a really bad bid". I think the truth is somewhere in between. At the table, I rejected 2NT because I didn't want partner to bid 3NT with 4513. Partner already knew I didn't have 4 spades, so I thought 3♠ was very descriptive in case the 4-3 fit was the best spot. I agree, however, that what I really wanted was to slow down the auction, and 2NT is the way to do that. As for 4♦, Phil mostly has it right when he said it shows that I didn't understand 4♣. I was basically trying to say "I have nothing extra to cue" while keeping the bidding below 4♥ in case that was the best spot opposite some 4612 hand. 2. There was no consensus on partner's shape; some think 45 in the majors, others think 56. At the time I thought the most likely shape was 46. As it turns out none of these was correct. What about partner's strength? 2♠ was clearly game forcing, but does it show extra values beyond that? Certainly 4♣ shows extras, but I didn't know that at the time I bid 3♠. 3. Most people think 4NT was RKC for spades. If so, what was the point of 4♣? I thought 4NT was to play, giving up after I failed to show encouragement after the 4♣ slam try. 4. Thus, I passed 4NT. Partner made 5, for an avg-plus.

1. I would have bid 2N over 2♠. I have a terrible hand, singleton in my partner's suit, dont see any need to encourage partner to bid on. Of course over 3♣, I would show my 3 card support then. 2.4522, game forcing 3.RKCB 4. I would answer 1KC

Does 1♦- 1♠ 2♦- 3♣ 4♣ - 5♠ feel like it misrepresents the value or key question left on this hand? If partner returns to 6♣, you can offer 6♦. Partner should not take 3♣ as natural in this auction initially (see 3rd suit forcing p55-56). Also BWS 2001 states: After a one-level suit response and opener’s simple same-suit rebid: (a) a third-suit bid that is a reverse or a three-level bid is forcing to game;

Partner should be better than Ax, AQx, AQJxx, Kxx, with which he would ask about our shortage since the ♣Q would not be sufficient for grand if we were 1525. Could partner have AKQJ, AQx, Axx, Kxx or something similar, where he can count exactly 12 tricks and just needs something extra from us for 13, so we should bid grand? Or could partner have AK, AQx, AQJxx, Kxx? I don't see why not. I pass. Edit: On second thought, hands of the same nature as that 4333 (no ruffs needed for 12) might bid 6NT since it could survive a bad trump break. I think that is even more reason to pass. This is a tangent, but I think it's important to have a general try for grand available. General extras are very easy for opener to assess and express. If responder can just bid 5NT with my 4333 example hand, you can pass in relative comfort on the actual auction. As another aside, can you show both shortages (hence 6-5 either way) if partner asks over 3♥? I'm assuming that partner could have found that out, keycarded (using 4♠ instead of 4♦, say, though 4NT is also fine) and partner would no longer be asking about kings (we're 6-5!) - he could just ask about the club queen and we would respect his decision. His decision to not follow that route could be because 2♥-2NT-3♥-3♠-4♣(=one shortage)-4♠ is RKCB for ♥ and is too high to ask for both ♣Q and ♦K, so I'm not sure if any negative inferences exist.

Tangent then (sorry, not trying to hijack): are you more likely to make a 2 level overcall with this kind of hand if you don't preempt with these kinds of hands or is it more of a delayed 3 level jump or more of a second pass? I was more just trying to make the point that the hand is disgusting and I'd rather bid 3♦ or pass now than bid 2♦. I think I'd hope RHO has the spade K and just attack spades outright to set up an endgame where he has to ruff and lead away from his heart J. Would rather play LHO for the club A, which means we need to attack spades.

I haven't thought about the line yet, but wouldn't that give the overcaller J109x, -, K9xxxx, xxx? I can understand not wanting to open that 3♦ in 1st seat based on style but still ew ew ew

What about exiting a diamond now, and planning on reversing dummy with another heart ruff in hand if they continue them (or taking whatever finesse is offered by RHO)? If they play a heart, exit in clubs and plan on taking the spade hook at the end.

trick one play a small spade we really need to have 3 spade tricks to have a decent chance of making 3n and we cannot afford to have our J covered by a singleton Q at trick one. Win the A or 7 Since we are assured of 3 spades our best bet is to try and maximize our chances of winning 3 clubs. IMO the best LOP is to play the club A and exit with a small club. This LOP will assure us of 3 clubs anytime the suit breaks 33 as well as when it breaks 42 and there is a doubleton honor or KQ tight. A dia switch from rho probably isnt a huge disaster due to the dia 9 in dummy. Any time lho wins the 2nd club trick (either due to them having KQx KQ Kx or Qx we are well on our way to 9 tricks because there is little damage they can do. If rho wins the 2nd club we will probably need some luck if they make a dia switch.

I'd try this as well, though I wonder if things aren't quite as bad as they look due to the presence of the diamond 9 in dummy. Also if you finesse clubs and West wins, he can't play a diamond without setting up your Q. Suppose the SQ loses and a diamond comes through, then you're losing only two diamonds and can still hope for clubs 3-3. ahydra

I'm not an expert - but at the table I'd play the spade Jack, and if it wins finesse clubs. If it loses doesn't look good.