GrahamJson

It seems likely that few will open your hand at other tables, in which case it seems likely that the bidding will proceed 1S - 4S, or maybe just 3S. After all, players will often stretch their raises over a TOX. If most of the field are in 3S then getting -300 in 5C or 5D is a bottom, even if 4S is on. And if 5e field is in 4S, bid on strength rather than preemptively, I would expect to lose -500 if I were to bid on. On that basis I would cross my fingers and pass, knowing that prospects ar3nt great. Another factor is that it is bad for partnership confidence if you take out partner’s doubles because you were light for your previous bid. Partner will understand if you were trying to put pressure on, but it went wrong. He will be less pleased if you go for 300 or more and you could have picked up +100 by passing.

Is it too late to ask for an undo?

On the contrary, 2NT should show scattered, soft values rather than a hand with good controls. With the latter you can afford to sit and wait, taking control once opener has shown his hand. With modest scattered values that will be difficult. You have little or nothing to cue bid and other bids could often be made on completely worthless hands. Also, if you do end up in NT you want the lead coming up to your queens and jacks rather than up to aces. To put things another way; if you can use 2NT to show a fairly narrowly defined type of hand doesn’t it make sense to do so, rather than never using the bid at all? To use the original hands as examples, but give it six hearts so that a 2NT rebid is not an option. Now after an immediate 2NT response opener bids 3H after which responder makes minimum bids and you end up in 4H. If you respond 2D and opener rebids 2H what now? I suppose it goes 2NT - 3H - 4D (cue) - 4H - Pass. However how does opener know whether p has just the KD or whether he may have a few extra values? Does responder go on knowing he has some extras? It all becomes a bit of a guessing game. On BBO such hands are usually bid by the strong hand keeping on bidding and the weak hand making meaningless minimum bids. Sometimes they end up in the right spot, sometimes they don’t.

Hmm, seem to be a lone voice here, but I’m not convinced with the idea that you shouldn’t ever respond 2NT to 2C. Suppose for example you respond 2D with the given hand. Now p rebids 2H. Now what? If you rebid 2NT and p, with a two suiter bids 3D (holding a different hand from the one given), what next? 3H? If so, how does he know you have any values as you could have xxxx xx xxx xxxx? If instead you respond 2NT the bidding would continue 3H -3S -4D -4H. Ok, you are at the four level, but p will know you are 4234 with 7-9. To me that seems a pretty reasonable place to be. I can accept that you should respond 2D because your methods require 8 or more for a positive, or two controls, or whatever. But not just because 2NT takes up room. Maybe it does, but then so do lots of other bids. However if they describe your hand well you use them. Incidentally, the system I play with one of my regular partners is that 2D shows 4+ with a 2H response showing 3 or less. You can therefore happily respond 2D and rebid 2NT over a 2H rebid, knowing you have already shown some, albeit limited, values.

Is it? With honours in three suits there is no grea5 advantage in having the stronger hand play. A 2NT response looks fine to me, if it is part of your methods. It has the advantage of showing the general nature and strength of your hand with a single bid, which is no bad thing. The trouble with these 2D “waiting” Bids is that it can be difficult to catch up later and show you have useful values.

Assuming you have no specific agreement to the contrary a 2NT rebid by responder is a second negative, so can’t be used here as you have good values opposite a 2C opener. As the bidding went, why not rebid 3NT over the 3S raise? It seems to describe the hand well. However, going back a round, what’s the point of playing Puppet if you don’t rebid 2NT on hands such as West’s?

This is a very tricky hand and I don’t think it makes a lot of sense to base your methods on trying to cope with it. For example, you might like the idea of a double in this position as showing values, in which case p will bid 3C and you presumably play there. But what if you make one of your small clubs a small diamond? I.e. KQx Jxx AQxx xxx. Now you end up in a 43 fit when a 44 fit was available. Having said that my preference would be to use 2NT in this position as Lebensohl, with a double being for business. It may not completely solve the problems with these particular hands, but you can now bid 3C showing values, which might help.

Thanks for this. I misunderstood your original post, hence my comments. I’ll now check with my two regular partners that we are all playing the same version of Muppet.

Playing Muppet Stayman, in which (2C - 2D -) 2NT - 3C - 3H denies a four or five card major, a rebid of 3S by the 3C bidder shows a five card suit in a 54 majors hand. That is the whole point of playing Muppet. With normal Puppet Stayman opener has to rebid 3NT to show no 4 or 5 card major, making it impossible for responder to look for a 53 spade fit below 3NT. This is why some play an immediate response of 3S to show 54 in the majors. If you play Muppet Stayman it frees up the 3S bid (I.e. 2NT - 3S) for other purposes. One option that I use is for 3S to be a puppet to 3NT after which responder can bid a minor, setting the suit and asking for key cards (minorwood), or show both minors by bidding a major suit shortage.

Back of the net! Mind you, I think most Easts would have introduced hearts on such a hand. Maybe that’s what he was thinking about.

I stand corrected regarding LOTT and NT. I’ve just perused my copy of “To bid or not to bid” and indeed it does recommend giving a total trick count of 7 plus the number of trumps, which in this case comes to 15. However it also recommends subtracting a trick for a holding of QJxx, giving a total of 14. This suggests that if 1NT makes then 2S is off and vice versa. So whether to bid on depends on vulnerability, which I can’t see mentioned anywhere. Perhaps I’m being affected too much by a recent hand in which p contested the part score by balancing, only for oppo to bid and make game. Fortunately our team mates made slam, so we still gained.

I notice that I missed a key fact; that we’re playing pairs, not teams. Given this I agree that 2S is reasonable. However I don’t think I would bid it if RHO had had a long think. Incidentally, the LOTT only applies when comparing two suit contracts, not a suit vrs NT.

A balancing 1NT is possibly the most ill defined bid in the book. Whilst players may play that it shows 13-15, say, or some other range, they are often forced to use it on stronger hands, or unbalanced hands, simply because no other option appeals. There is therefore a good possibility that 1NT is not oppo’s best spot. Maybe they should be in three, with both oppo having taken a conservative view. Or maybe they have an eight card, or even longer, heart fit. Reopening might just allow then to find the right spot. One thing I do know is that partner is not holding a treasure trove as he surely would have bid again if all he needed was a queen opposite. If I’m worth 2S now then I should have bid it immediately. Having decided it was not worth a raise before nothing has happened to make it worth it now. A hand does not suddenly get stronger just because you previously passed.

I guess that I am alone but I think that 5D may be the percentage choice. As oppo lack diamond honours it is more difficult for them to double than 4S. If you do have a spade fit then 5D may come in too, and if you don’t have a fit 5D is certainly better. Lastly, if oppo go to 5H you want a diamond, not a spade, lead. Of course you can argue than you can bid 4S then bail out to 5D if doubled. Perhaps that is the best tactic, but it sounds a bit desperate to me, and you are more likely to be doubled in 5D than if you were to bid it confidently immediately.

I will happily raise partner’s major with three cards, rather than rebid a weak minor (or 1NT in some cases). I am in good company doing this; Mike Lawrence devotes a whole chapter on the merits of three card raises in his book “ Tips on bidding”. However this is not the time to do so. Your minor is not weak and, with only 11 points, it is extremely unlikely that the bidding will die in 2C. When partner does bid on you can support spades knowing that partner will have a good picture of your hand. Of course it is still difficult to get to slam, but at least you should avoid 4S.

Unless playing with a regular partner with a well drilled system I would not recommend bypassing a diamond suit. From what I have seen this results in missing major suit fits more than finding them.Why? Because if you respond 1S, say, and subsequently rebid in diamonds how does partner know which is longer. It’s fine if you have a detailed understanding with partner on this point (e.g. transfers after a 1NT rebid) but without this you are likely to miss 5-3 major suit fits. Or, even worse, end up in a silly 4-2 fit. I have seen it happen many times on BBO. Bidding Walsh style may have theoretical advantages, as may transfer responses. But they both require a lot of discussion and no little memorising. I’m not convinced that they are worth the effort.

The conclusion of B&A was that an unsupported ace was the lead least likely to defeat a small slam but was also the lead most likely to prevent an overtrick. Hence, other things being equal, it was generally a poor lead at imps but a good lead at MPs. I should add that these conclusions did not apply to every hand but were dependent upon the exact suit holdings.

“With ordinary B/W you just ask “how many aces” Answer “Two” Bingo. No Aces out and just one loser in H= 6” But you only have one ace, so there is one ace out, plus a possible trump loser. Of course you can take the risk of bidding six, but at least with RKKB you know it is a risk.

3D should£ be routine. It’s called false preference. It doesn’t mean that you prefer diamonds to any other suit, just that 3d is the best contract available.

It seems to me that in this sequence you have made the 4D bid almost forcing to slam, based on the subsequent bidding. After all, many would play that the 4H bid is merely showing a place to play, as a return to a major suit at game level is often played as natural. So, if 4H is a cue bid and 4NT is RKKB, where do you play if slam is not on?

Just bid 4H. Slam is a long way off unless partner has underbid. Incidentally I wouldn’t require 9 points for a jump response. AQxxx and out would be enough. I’d certainly take stronger action on most 11 counts (taking into consideration water values of course ).

The only system that I can think of where the north hand is a 1D opening is the Blue Club. But it doesn’t show clubs and it would in any case be a 1C opening. As others have said, north is nowhere near a 2C opening. Similarly I don’t like the double which traditionally shows either a bust or some trumps. Either way it warns the 2C opener not to bid on unless he can make the contract on his own. With values, particularly an ace, you pass, forcing, and allow opener to show his suit. You will do well to reach slam after the 4S overcall, which looks clear to me, but after 1H - 4S -P - P - X you should reach 5D or 5H.

The description of SAYC on the ACBL website says the following: Rebids with a medium hand (16–18 points): Jump raise of responder’s suit or jump rebid of opener’s suit; Reverse in a new suit, i.e., bid a new suit at the two level which is higher ranking than the opening suit; Non-reverse bid in a new suit (this has the wide range of 13–18 points). With a maximum hand (19–21 or 22 points) opener must make a very strong rebid: Jump in notrump; Double jump raise of responder’s suit or double jump rebid of opener’s suit; Jump shift in a new suit. Based on this I guess the jump to 3NT should show 19-21, but I imagine few would play it that way, using it for 18-19.

I don’t think that there is any doubt that if you doubled following a long think from partner and the TD was called he would award an adjusted score. You might also face an additional penalty. Incidentally I don’t agree that having previously passed makes reopening correct. I’ve never felt that somehow passing makes your hand stronger. To reopen in this position you need a bit of distribution to make up for the lack of strength. Make the QC the queen of another suit and have 4441 or 5431 distribution and a double would be ok, but not on this mess.

Hmmm, perhaps I’m being a bit simplistic, but if a 4432 Hand isn’t worth bidding at the one level I don’t see how it is worth bidding at the three level. Look at it another way. If you pass and it turns out you could have made game I dont think team mates will give you a hard time. If you double and go for 1100 on a part score hand things might be a bit different.