Several bid options

[mike777]

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=sa9xh9xxdaxxcaqjt]133|100|Scoring: IMP

1h=p=?[/hv]

 

Your bid options are:

2c=100% game force

2nt=Jacoby/Bergen strong H raise

3nt=4333 14-16 hcp only 3 card trump support.

 

Your choice and why?

[Chamaco]

I am not fond of the use of 3NT for 4333 raises, because of frequency issues, but for once my hands fits in this system agreement, I'll use the bid :-)

[luke warm]

if that's the systemic definition of 3NT, then that's what i bid

[hrothgar]

3NT? Whats the problem?

 

You have the right strength - (K+R rates this as a 15.6 count)

You have the right shape

 

If you aren't going to respond 3NT with this hand, then you really might want to consider changing your system

[Guest Jlall]

well the problem is you really dont want to play 3N and you wrongside the hand. That being said, it's a good description of my hand so I'll bid it.

[dirtbag]

3nt? thats awful, i sure hope u arent playing 2/1 and propose a 3nt response!

[Blofeld]

On the one hand, 3NT is an accurate description of the hand.

 

On the other hand, it eats up a lot of bidding space, possibly wrongsides the contract, and indicates a stronger preference for no trumps than we have -- look at those aces! In addition, a large chunk of this hand's strength is in the club suit, so I think I'm going to try 2♣.

[P_Marlowe]

3NT, wtp?

 

If you have this agreement use it

or throw it out of the window in

case you dont like it.

 

Marlowe

[Trpltrbl]

3 NT, balanced 15 count with 3♥.

I love it when a plan comes together :lol:

 

GBB :)

[kenrexford]

3NT is a sick bid unless it shows what type of balanced hand is held. If it could show anything from quacks and a trashy four-piece to a great two-piece with Aces, the call is stupid.

 

If 3NT makes any sense, it should show 13-14 with Quacks and a poor four-card minor. Something like QJx-KJx-QJx-QJxx is ideal.

 

With this hand, 2C seems to be the only bid of a thinking bridge player. You hope for a raise to 3C. You can then bid 3D, either a slam cuebid or a notrump probe. If partner bids 3NT, you pass. If partner bids 4C (non-serious, no spade stop), you sign off at 4H. If partner bids anything else, you continue a slam probe.

 

Say partner bids 3S (serious slam interest). Now, you can bid 4C to show two top club honors. If partner's hearts are strong enough for slam, he will certainly take over. If he bids 4D, your style will dictate the next call.

 

If 4H is RKCB for clubs, cuebid 4S.

 

If 4S is RKCB for clubs, then cuebid 4NT, showing a spade control and denying a heart honor.

 

3NT ruins all of this. What? Will you find 6C opposite Kx-AQJxx-Kx-Kxxx? If partner would bid 4C, hoping you held your actual hand, he is sick.

[hrothgar]

3NT is a sick bid unless it shows what type of balanced hand is held. If it could show anything from quacks and a trashy four-piece to a great two-piece with Aces, the call is stupid.

 

If 3NT makes any sense, it should show 13-14 with Quacks and a poor four-card minor. Something like QJx-KJx-QJx-QJxx is ideal.

I am going to preface all this by saying that I would never willingly play this 3NT convention.

 

You seem to be assuming that the 3NT bid is primarily intended to suggest a hand that wants to declare 3NT... I suspect that that primary purpose of the convention is to transfer captaincy to partner and let him make an intelligent exploration for slam. If one of my partners trotted out that ridiculous collection of crap and tried to claim that it was a 13 count i"d laugh my ass off. K+R treats this as a 9 count. (In contrast, the original hand evaluates as 15.6) The disparity in strength is enormous.

 

My main worry about not bidding 3NT with this hand is one of negative inferences. If I am supposed to bid 3NT and decide to mastermind and do something different, I'm probably going to be mis-describing my hand something awful in a followup auction. Its all fine and dandyto "hope" for a perfect auction. I supect that partner is going to get confused either about range, turmp length, or the missing doubleton...

[han]

I COMPLETE AGREE WITH HROTHGAR.

 

 

 

 

(Since it might be a while before it happens again, I decided to use capital letters)

[Double !]

i might start with a 2C response (unless playing it as possibly a drury hand), and then simply support spades. With all of those aces, this hand could be very strong should opener have a 2-suited hand. An initial 3NT response eats up so much room, while a simple 2/1 gives opener time to describe and, if necessary, explore for fits and controls. There are high card points and there are high card points.

 

DHL

[luke warm]

i honestly don't understand any bid other than 3NT here... in their system, 3NT means 14-16, 3 card support in a 4333 hand... if that isn't a perfect description of this hand, nothing is

 

if you don't like that treatment, don't play it.. but as long as you *are* playing it, bid it systemically...

[Trpltrbl]

3NT is a sick bid , the call is stupid.

If partner would bid 4C, hoping you held your actual hand, he is sick.

Doesn't sound like you are on your way to making a lot of friends here :)

 

GBB :lol:

[Winstonm]

This is a "methods" answer, so take it as such. This hand is handled in my methods by using a modification of Bergen. With 3-card forcing values, we bid 3C Bergen, showing either a limit raise OR a 3-card forcing raise. Opener, if he would not accept the game try bids 3 of the agreed suit, after which responder can bid 3N or 4 of the suit with a 3-card forcing hand; if opener has a hand that would accept a game try, he bids the other major to ask: responder bids game with a limit raise, 3N as "serious" with 3-card support, or can cue bid a control.

 

Without this agreement, I'd bid 2C because I need room to find the best contract and I don't want to wrong side the NT.

 

Winston

[mike777]

3NT is a sick bid unless it shows what type of balanced hand is held.  If it could show anything from quacks and a trashy four-piece to a great two-piece with Aces, the call is stupid.

 

If 3NT makes any sense, it should show 13-14 with Quacks and a poor four-card minor.  Something like QJx-KJx-QJx-QJxx is ideal. 

 

With this hand, 2C seems to be the only bid of a thinking bridge player.  You hope for a raise to 3C.  You can then bid 3D, either a slam cuebid or a notrump probe.  If partner bids 3NT, you pass.  If partner bids 4C (non-serious, no spade stop), you sign off at 4H.  If partner bids anything else, you continue a slam probe.

 

Say partner bids 3S (serious slam interest).  Now, you can bid 4C to show two top club honors.  If partner's hearts are strong enough for slam, he will certainly take over.  If he bids 4D, your style will dictate the next call.

 

If 4H is RKCB for clubs, cuebid 4S.

 

If 4S is RKCB for clubs, then cuebid 4NT, showing a spade control and denying a heart honor.

 

3NT ruins all of this.  What?  Will you find 6C opposite Kx-AQJxx-Kx-Kxxx?  If partner would bid 4C, hoping you held your actual hand, he is sick.

I thought I was clear what the 3nt choice shows. 4333 with 3 card heart support and stopper in the unbid suits and 14-16 hcp. I am not saying that is your only choice on this hand, just one choice.

 

Winstonm I fail to see how your method is an improvement over this bid choice with this hand type but willing to listen :lol:.

 

In any event, perhaps as usual, my hand has the real problem and not responder :).

 

The other table opened 4h in first seat and this hand bid rkc.

[luke warm]

Without this agreement, I'd bid 2C because I need room to find the best contract and I don't want to wrong side the NT.

 

Winston

winstonm, i don't understand your answer... first of all, you aren't playing your 'method', you're playing the one mike plays... how can you bid 2C here when your system *demands* a 3NT bid? the question isn't whether or not we agree with what 3NT should mean, it's whether or not that's the bid that should be made when 3NT is defined as it is

 

it seems too obvious, the bid is a perfect description of their systemic understandings

[Winstonm]

Without this agreement, I'd bid 2C because I need room to find the best contract and I don't want to wrong side the NT.

 

Winston

winstonm, i don't understand your answer... first of all, you aren't playing your 'method', you're playing the one mike plays... how can you bid 2C here when your system *demands* a 3NT bid? the question isn't whether or not we agree with what 3NT should mean, it's whether or not that's the bid that should be made when 3NT is defined as it is

 

it seems too obvious, the bid is a perfect description of their systemic understandings

Geez, Jimmy, I thought I answered Mike's question. He said I had 3 options, one of which was 2C. If the systemic response was only 3N, it wouldn't be much of a question, would it? :lol:

 

A 3N bid is a blunderbuss bid and a slam killer - it takes too much room so it needs very precise definitions: opening NT without 3 card support and without Aces and Spaces, which is basically all this hand has. IMO, 2C is the better start if my choices are limited - it leaves room for exploration and has better chances of getting the NT from the correct side.

 

Winston

[Winstonm]

3NT is a sick bid unless it shows what type of balanced hand is held.  If it could show anything from quacks and a trashy four-piece to a great two-piece with Aces, the call is stupid.

 

If 3NT makes any sense, it should show 13-14 with Quacks and a poor four-card minor.  Something like QJx-KJx-QJx-QJxx is ideal. 

 

With this hand, 2C seems to be the only bid of a thinking bridge player.  You hope for a raise to 3C.  You can then bid 3D, either a slam cuebid or a notrump probe.  If partner bids 3NT, you pass.  If partner bids 4C (non-serious, no spade stop), you sign off at 4H.  If partner bids anything else, you continue a slam probe.

 

Say partner bids 3S (serious slam interest).  Now, you can bid 4C to show two top club honors.  If partner's hearts are strong enough for slam, he will certainly take over.  If he bids 4D, your style will dictate the next call.

 

If 4H is RKCB for clubs, cuebid 4S.

 

If 4S is RKCB for clubs, then cuebid 4NT, showing a spade control and denying a heart honor.

 

3NT ruins all of this.  What?  Will you find 6C opposite Kx-AQJxx-Kx-Kxxx?  If partner would bid 4C, hoping you held your actual hand, he is sick.

I thought I was clear what the 3nt choice shows. 4333 with 3 card heart support and stopper in the unbid suits and 14-16 hcp. I am not saying that is your only choice on this hand, just one choice.

 

Winstonm I fail to see how your method is an improvement over this bid choice with this hand type but willing to listen :lol:.

 

In any event, perhaps as usual, my hand has the real problem and not responder :).

 

The other table opened 4h in first seat and this hand bid rkc.

Just because you asked:

 

The reason to separate the 3-card forcing raise is because you can now better define all other bids, not because the 3-card force is all that great:

 

Examples:

3N=15-17 and no 3-card support.

2C/2D=5 card suits

2N=balanced forcing raise with 4 card support (Denies a decent 5 card suit.)

 

Bids like Bergen have a built-in option that most people (including Bergen) did not use. Because they are artificial and forcing, they can be assigned two meaning.

 

Without going into a long disertation, here is what I mean:

 

1S-3C

3S(3H)-4C

 

This can mean a 3 card forcing raise with the AK of clubs and no diamond control.

 

Winston

[luke warm]

A 3N bid is a blunderbuss bid and a slam killer - it takes too much room so it needs very precise definitions: opening NT without 3 card support and without Aces and Spaces, which is basically all this hand has. IMO, 2C is the better start if my choices are limited - it leaves room for exploration and has better chances of getting the NT from the correct side.

 

Winston

i agree with your opinion of 3NT ... but you said "..it takes too much room so it needs very precise definitions.." what precise definition is given to a 3NT response? 4333 with 3 card support and 14-16 hcp... if this hand doesn't fit that *precise* definition, no hand ever will

 

do away with the 3NT response (or that definition) if you want... but if it exists, use it... at least opener knows i have 15 hcp on average, 4333 shape, and 3 card support... i hate it too, but it's (systemically) the most perfect bid available

[Winstonm]

A 3N bid is a blunderbuss bid and a slam killer - it takes too much room so it needs very precise definitions: opening NT without 3 card support and without Aces and Spaces, which is basically all this hand has.  IMO, 2C is the better start if my choices are limited - it leaves room for exploration and has better chances of getting the NT from the correct side.

 

Winston

i agree with your opinion of 3NT ... but you said "..it takes too much room so it needs very precise definitions.." what precise definition is given to a 3NT response? 4333 with 3 card support and 14-16 hcp... if this hand doesn't fit that *precise* definition, no hand ever will

 

do away with the 3NT response (or that definition) if you want... but if it exists, use it... at least opener knows i have 15 hcp on average, 4333 shape, and 3 card support... i hate it too, but it's (systemically) the most perfect bid available

I think there is a significant difference between these two hands:

 

KJx, xxx, AQxx, AJ9

 

and

 

Axx, xxx, Axx, AQJx

 

Given the definition, the first hand qualifies; IMO, the second hand is not suitable (although it may qualify) so I don't want to make this bid - just because the system allows a bid doesn't make it best. System allows me to open 1N on xx, Axx, AKx, KQJxxx but I think it's better to open 1C and rebid 3C.

 

Winston

[flytoox]

I am in the camp of 2C. If pd can raise, that would be very sweet. If pd bids sth else, I can cope it too.

[adhoc3]

well the problem is you really dont want to play 3N and you wrongside the hand.

Indeed.

 

 

Is there "right and only" answer?

 

 

:lol: ;) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

[dirtbag]

too many players find 8 major suit cards fits and then try to play the hand in 3nt. clearly the original poster plays some form of 'jacoby 3nt' style of bid where 1h/s-3nt shows 3 card support and 14-16 hcp. but the fact of the matter is, partner opened and u have a 5 trick hand, cropping the bidding space has to be the least constructive method i can imagine.

 

to quote truscott....'points smoints'