IMPS

[pigpenz]

[hv=d=s&v=e&s=s6hj5da64cakqjt98]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

Maybe I am trying to be too delicate but what is your best bid over partners rebid of spades playing standard.

 

 

auction:

1♣ 2♦ 2♠ pass

you

[pigpenz]

i opted for 3♦ at the table partner bid 3♠'s i bid 3NT and then he rebid 4♠'s, maybe i should have just rebid 3NT to start with :(

[Walddk]

I would rebid 3NT as I would have if LHO hadn't overcalled 2♦. I know I don't have a heart stopper, but there is nothing that suggests that opps are able to take 5 heart tricks.

 

Agreed,

 

x

Kx

Axx

AKQJ1098

 

would have been better, but I've got to bid the hand I am dealt. 3♦ with 8 certain tricks doesn't do this hand justice. I would have had a much tougher problem is they had overcalled hearts. If they did, 3♥ would be my rebid.

 

Roland

[han]

3NT for me too. I hope that partner doesn't take this as a balanced 14-count. He may take it as a balanced 18-count, but that's ok with me.

[mikeh]

I agree with Roland: an imperfect 3N is a better description that the slow cue-bid route.

 

Whenever you have two ways to a destination, the slow way shows doubt, while the fast way sends a strong message that this is right.

 

Yes, you have doubt.... they may run ♥. But the more common reason for doubt is that you have some support for partner. Thus I think that partner may legitimately interprete your sequence as allowing him to remove 3N quite readily. A fast-arrival 3N can only be removed if he has a very good reason for doing so.

[Walddk]

I agree with Roland: Yes, you have doubt.... they may run ♥.

Glad to see that MikeH has come to his senses. Must be sea breeze off Vancouver. The fear of rebidding 3NT could be transferred to this simple example:

 

Axx

xx

KQxx

AQxx

 

Playing 15-17 NT, we would all open 1NT although there is a risk that opps may start with the first 7-8 heart tricks. One has to live with that and get on with things.

 

Roland

[Guest Jlall]

I think the fear of bidding 3N is hearing 4H/4S from partner.

[junyi_zhu]

[hv=d=s&v=e&s=s6hj5da64cakqjt98]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

Maybe I am trying to be too delicate but what is your best bid over partners rebid of spades playing standard.

 

 

auction:

1♣ 2♦ 2♠ pass

you

If you play transfers, you can bid 2nt to transfer to 3C then rebid 3nt over 3C(minimum response), so partner knows you hold long clubs and want to play NT, you give up natural 2nt here though.

[pigpenz]

If you play transfers, you can bid 2nt to transfer to 3C then rebid 3nt over 3C(minimum response), so partner knows you hold long clubs and want to play NT, you give up natural 2nt here though.

nothing elaborate here, thats why i said we were playing standard.

prettymuch maybe the two choices on the poll should just have been 3NT or 3♦.

 

I think i was blinded by trying to get 3NT played from the right side but if partner has qx or qxx ♦'s shouldnt matter then.

[Finch]

If you give up on a natural 2NT bid, what do you bid on a 2434 12-count?

[tysen2k]

3NT for me too. Gamble it up.

[Al_U_Card]

3 NT is typical with 5C being one of those "it only makes game but at least it makes" shots that are hard to explain when they go down and 3NT is there.....

[whereagles]

I think the fear of bidding 3N is hearing 4H/4S from partner.

Well, that is exactly what 3NT means: "I am not interested in any contract other than 3NT" :angry:

[Guest Jlall]

I think the fear of bidding 3N is hearing 4H/4S from partner.

Well, that is exactly what 3NT means: "I am not interested in any contract other than 3NT" :angry:

I'm not sure this is so clearcut. With 18-19 balanced and one stopper, starting with 3D is easy. What about 2 stoppers...or 3 stoppers? Doesn't 3D followed by 3N show doubt? Perhaps just flexibility...ok. What if we are 1345 with a 16 count? Do we bid 3D then 3N to show flexibility? We aren't really very flexible...we don't want to hear 4S ever. What about with a nice 14 and a double diamond stop? Must we make a non forcing 2N call? Can we cuebid with this weak of a hand? What if we had a similar hand with Qxx of diamonds and the HK instead of the DA. We would cue, then over 3S bid 3N right? If we could possibly have a triple diamond stop for this, partner won't pull some of the time that it's right to pull.

 

My point is basically this is very murky. 3N covers a LOT of ground imo, and does not just show solid clubs with a diamond stopper and no interest in 4 of a major. In practice I bet everyone who bid 3N has bid it on some sort of balanced hand. It's easy to say when we hold this hand that this is what 3N shows, but when we hold x KJx AQJx KQxxx I'm curious what our bid will be.

 

All that being said, I'll take my chances with 3N. I think the REAL problem on this hand is that neither 2N nor 3C is forcing which overloads both the cuebid and the 3N bid. But I'm not really happy with this choice.

[Chamaco]

I think the REAL problem on this hand is that neither 2N nor 3C is forcing which overloads both the cuebid and the 3N bid. But I'm not really happy with this choice.

I agree.

BTW, junhi zu'z suggestion of artificial 2NT does not seem to me too much offtrack.

 

In many other auctions, where there is no room to invite, we just bid 3NT holding a good 11 and signoff in a partscore otherwise.

 

Even Buratti and Lanzarotti in their Nightmare system have altogether eliminated from the system game invitation: it's either game or partscore.

Perhgaps that is too extreme, however, doing so in a few sequences to improve others does not seem to me too big of a loss (and yes, I know sometimes it won't work, it's the same old tradeoff issue :angry: )

[pigpenz]

I think Justin is right, which bid does the hand more justice the 3♦ cue bid or the nebulous 3NT call.

[mikeh]

All that being said, I'll take my chances with 3N. I think the REAL problem on this hand is that neither 2N nor 3C is forcing which overloads both the cuebid and the 3N bid. But I'm not really happy with this choice.

I play that 2♠ promises a rebid: I had thought (mistakenly?) that this was common practice by an unpassed hand. Thus I do NOT see a problem with the balanced hands which so concern Justin: partner cannot pass 2N nor 3♣ Playing any other way puts far too much load on opener who has heard only one, unlimited, bid from partner.

 

For me, 3N does not involve 4 of a major unless partner has a very unusual hand.

[mike777]

All that being said, I'll take my chances with 3N. I think the REAL problem on this hand is that neither 2N nor 3C is forcing which overloads both the cuebid and the 3N bid. But I'm not really happy with this choice.

I play that 2♠ promises a rebid: I had thought (mistakenly?) that this was common practice by an unpassed hand. Thus I do NOT see a problem with the balanced hands which so concern Justin: partner cannot pass 2N nor 3♣ Playing any other way puts far too much load on opener who has heard only one, unlimited, bid from partner.

 

For me, 3N does not involve 4 of a major unless partner has a very unusual hand.

I believe Mike Lawrence suggests that 2s is forcing but does not promise a rebid, even by an unpassed hand. He wants responder to be able to bid with light hands like:

 

AJ873=83=KJ3=JT4

 

1) Responder can pass when the opponents compete and opener doesn't rebid.

2) Responder can pass when opener rebids 2nt.

3) Responder can pass when opener raises responder's suit.

4) Responder can pass when opener rebids her suit.

[Guest Jlall]

All that being said, I'll take my chances with 3N. I think the REAL problem on this hand is that neither 2N nor 3C is forcing which overloads both the cuebid and the 3N bid. But I'm not really happy with this choice.

I play that 2♠ promises a rebid: I had thought (mistakenly?) that this was common practice by an unpassed hand. Thus I do NOT see a problem with the balanced hands which so concern Justin: partner cannot pass 2N nor 3♣ Playing any other way puts far too much load on opener who has heard only one, unlimited, bid from partner.

 

For me, 3N does not involve 4 of a major unless partner has a very unusual hand.

Ahh well if you think 2N/3C are forcing then 3N should show a solid suit and a stopper :) All makes sense now...I think 2N/3C being forcing is better but I'm not sure if it's standard (in the sense of what a majority of people play).

[Free]

3NT (also depends if 2♠ is forcing or not, and how weak it can be). Shows 15+HCP, no support for ♠, long ♣ suit and ♦ stopper. Perfect description (and yes, this sometimes turns out bad).

[jdeegan]

:) I wanna lay down the predicate for an investigative auction. Six or seven clubs looks possible given the bidding so far.

 

As far as the actual hand goes, we don't have it to judge. If pard has his bids (given my style of 3♦ cue bid being a general game force), then 4♠ should be an OK contract. If we miss six, so be it.

 

Some may play that the 3♦ cue bid confirms spades as trumps. So, I would never have bid 3♦ playing with that understanding.

[ehhh]

If you had a way of asking partner to bid NT if s/he has a ♥ stopper then further decision making would be a lot easier would it not?

[Winstonm]

All that being said, I'll take my chances with 3N. I think the REAL problem on this hand is that neither 2N nor 3C is forcing which overloads both the cuebid and the 3N bid. But I'm not really happy with this choice.

I play that 2♠ promises a rebid: I had thought (mistakenly?) that this was common practice by an unpassed hand. Thus I do NOT see a problem with the balanced hands which so concern Justin: partner cannot pass 2N nor 3♣ Playing any other way puts far too much load on opener who has heard only one, unlimited, bid from partner.

 

For me, 3N does not involve 4 of a major unless partner has a very unusual hand.

This is probably the key and most interesting issue in this thread - what do these 2/1s in competition mean and how high do they force?

 

I agree with MikeH on this one that 2S should be forcing to at least 3S simply because if opener does not fit and cannot bid NT the partnership is forced to the 9-trick level; notice how this does not apply over 1S-2D-2H.

 

Playing this way makes negative doubles a little messier but adds clarity to the free bid.

 

A simple rule of thumb might help: if partner can cue bid or rebid his suit at the 2 level then the free bid is a 1-round force only; however, if the free bid forces the partnership to the 3 level with no guarantee of a fit, then responder must be able to bid again.

 

Winston

[Kalvan14]

3N, without any doubt. It's a classic bid, based on running clubs (and the lack of ♥ stopper does not worry me too much).

If you want to mess atound (remembering that for me 2♠ is not forcing), you need to introduce a 2N Lebensohl style (see the other thread with the same bidding). Now a direct 3♣ would be forcing (but I think I would still prefer 3N on this hand, to make clear to partner I am not interested in playing ♠; 3♣ would indicate at least a spade tolerance)