bulovapsb

I look at this hand and seriously consider passing at my first call. Let the opponents come in... I don't mind defending ♠ (unless partner is void, in which case we have at least a minor-suit fit) and I can take a competitive push to 2♥ if they stop in 2-minor. My fear is that, should I choose to respond 1♠, even after I take a simple preference back to ♥ over opener's rebid, partner will put me on more values than I actually hold (sort of what happened in the original, given, auction).

With most 10-11s, I'd rebid 2N myself with a balanced hand and ♥xx. So let's agree that I was being asked for 7+-to-9 (X+ is a good X with spots and/or no evident wastage). The biggest problem with the 2N advance, is that if I'm the same 5-ct with 4-2-4-3 shape, then we're playing 2N. If I'm 4-2-3-4, then I've probably passed 2♣. But I do "get it". Hence my above-mentioned reconsideration of the purpose of the advancing call.

I would be happy to entertain this argument, if the hand you presented for me to bypass 1♠ holding xxxxx did not consist of only 6 other cards. Give me a 6th ♠ and I'm prepared to bid 2♠/a 1N rebid, or pass a 2♥ rebid. Or pass any 2-minor call in which I hold another card (or two...hard to tell when I'm given only 11). I am reconsidering, based on other discussion, what was being probed by the advance after my 2♥ preference. But I remain unconvinced that 2N is the correct call in any case with 3-5-1-4 shape. So I'm willing to concede ...2♠-3♥ pass. I've been advised that even 2N-pass isn't egregious, but 2N-3♥ is superior (since I have 3 card support). I still tend to try and bid games at IMPs on the basis of the risk-reward. Getting to the RIGHT strain, however, is important.

I'm the partner. To reply directly to the above: With my sub-minimal values, a 1♠ response MIGHT find 4-4, but on the more-likely occurrence of a 1N rebid by partner, my "forced" correction to 2♥ would imply more values than I actually had. With essentially a one-call hand (that call being a weak-♥-raise, going through 1N to slow down the auction) I don't want to over bid before having limited my hand. A lot has been said that boils down to "send me to the rubber room" but with my balanced 5HCP including an A, any advance by partner after my 2♥ must show extras, and I have about the top of my weak-raise, 1N-2♥ range, so another call BY ME has to be appropriate. 3♥ is still just a simple, weak preference, and can be done with a LOT less than an A (I'm likely to compete with the same sequence with J-4th and K-3rd...nature of my game is to slow down by starting with a forcing 1N and taking the preference...then competing to 3♥ if the opponents come in). If the continuation over 2♥ had been 2♠, NO WAY would I consider a raise! I know, as responder, that partner has extras, AND I know that we have a fit in ♥. If he really has extra values AND a 4-cd ♠ suit, he could have reversed at his first rebid (which is NOT necessarily game-forcing, as people seem to think a JS to 3♣ would be...). So, now I can decide if my hand WITH 3-cd ♥ support is worth a game (which I think it is) or just a wimpy return to 3♥ (and if I'm not bidding 3♥/2N then I'm not bidding 3-only-♥/2♠ either). AND 2N is an option for me (which partner should correct to 3♥ on his KQJ-6-baggger with a stiff ♦, and he's THEN conveyed his ENTIRE hand). BUT: MY partner's 2N advance implies a balanced hand with extras. And now I think, maybe 9 tricks is easier than 10. Partner never conveyed his ♦ weakness/shortness. And even if I have Jxxx there, without SOLID ♥ what's the point? If he's not passing 2♥, then I have to find the right game with my A+J. 2N just lead me to the wrong guess. So call the rubber room on me...I STILL think that when Opener advances showing a balanced hand opposite no more than a weak preference, responder should be bidding game at IMPs. And with a 4x3, that game seems more likely to be in NT. As may be clear from the above, I also agree with what Mr. Herrmann said.