Rebid, Where art thou?

[Winstonm]

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sakq9873hk10dj4cqj]133|100|Scoring: IMP

N E S W

P P 1♠ P

1N p ?[/hv]

 

System is 2/1 and the passed hand NT is semi-forcing. What is your rebid?

 

Winston

[mikeh]

3♠: a slight underbid, but those side J's are not worth much.

 

If I wasn't intending to bid this way, I would have opened 4♠ (I agree with 1♠)

 

3N may work, but it is not for me

[mike777]

3♠: a slight underbid, but those side J's are not worth much.

 

If I wasn't intending to bid this way, I would have opened 4♠ (I agree with 1♠)

 

3N may work, but it is not for me

Very well said, as usual.

[Guest Jlall]

I'll try 3N. Maybe it'll make...shows this hand type but better lol (yeah yeah overbidding as usual).

[bearmum]

3♠ as my doubleton honours are not worth upgrading my hand to a game force opposite a passed hand :o

[newmoon]

3♠ as my doubleton honours are not worth upgrading my hand to a game force opposite a passed hand :o

Concur.

 

:angry:

 

Sid

[joker_gib]

I'll try 3N. Maybe it'll make...shows this hand type but better lol (yeah yeah overbidding as usual).

3NT is my bid too.

 

Alain

[leboulepat]

I'll try 3N. Maybe it'll make...shows this hand type but better lol (yeah yeah overbidding as usual).

3NT is my bid too.

 

Alain

It is not often but i agree with you Joker i bid 3NT too. :o

[joker_gib]

It is not often but i agree with you Joker i bid 3NT too. :angry:

LOL

 

More often than you think, friend ! :o

[luke warm]

3nt for me

[Fluffy]

Since I play 2NT GF, 3NT shows 7+ solid ♠s and that's what I would bid. Not playing that I would just bid 4♠

[pclayton]

3N's easy.

[Winstonm]

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=s65hqj754da82c1076]133|100|Scoring: IMP

Here is what happened:

 

P-P-1♠-P

1N-P-2♠-P

P-3♦-3♠-P

P-P[/hv]

 

Opening leader held: J10, Axx, Q108xx, Axx. Diamond lead beats either game contract.

 

It's hard to argue with success, so I didn't say anything at the time. Later I asked about the choice of rebids. Partner said he thought it close but not quite enough for 3S due to the lousy shape and soft values. A lucky guess or keen insight into evaluation?

 

My opinion is this shows reasonable evaluation of a single hand but shows dreadful evaluation of the potential for both hands. The QJ, Jx are of little to no use, but the solid spades puts a twist on these cards - partner cannot hold anything in spades so the only cards he can hold must be in the other three suits. The missing cards are 5 prime covers and 3 rags. Any two of the prime covers makes game a reasonable shot.

 

I could not imagine bidding less than 3S on these cards and have no strong objections to either 4S or 3N. I do have an issue with 2S, though.

 

Winston

[P_Marlowe]

3S.

 

Marlowe

[Gerben42]

3NT for me. Agree that lack of forcing bids is a problem. I guess Italians would bid 3♠ with this, showing a hand unsuitable for Gazilli but with appropriate playing strength, i.e. solid ♠?

[Elianna]

3NT for me. Agree that lack of forcing bids is a problem. I guess Italians would bid 3♠ with this, showing a hand unsuitable for Gazilli but with appropriate playing strength, i.e. solid ♠?

Adam and I play a version of gazilli, and I agree with you that this hand is not quite there to rebid 2c, but it almost is. I think that if you transformed the ♣QJ into ♣Kx that would be enough. Adam might even rebid 2c, I don't know (I've seen him bid 2c with hands that it wouldn't have occurred to me to rebid that with those hands).

 

Anyway, I'm bidding 3s with this hand, whether I'm playing gazilli or not.

[Kalvan14]

I prefer to play 3♠ as an unbalanced hand, strong but not necessarily with running spades (and this time the running suit is 7 cards!): therefore I'll tell a white lie, and rebid 3N on the given hand.

[awm]

I'll go with 3♠ also. The gazilli variant Elianna and I use has a 3♠ rebid showing something like a very good 14 to a bad 17, with 2♣ followed by 3♠ showing a stronger hand; I suppose some could play a version of gazilli where this distinguishes suit quality instead of strength but I'm not aware of that version.

 

A 3NT bid is okay, but there are not many hands where 3NT is really that good and partner won't be able to find a call over 3♠. Even if partner actually has a stopper in every suit, the opponents can knock one of these stoppers out and there may only be eight tricks (seven spades and partner's stopper). So it seems like partner really needs an ace, plus some secondary help in each side suit, plus at least one spade... this is getting pretty close to a hand that will find a call over 3♠. Change the heart king to the ace (so we have eight tops in hand) and I'd bid 3NT though.

[ArcLight]

I would bid 3♠ showing a long running self sustaining trump suit/source of tricks

 

According to Mike Lawrences 2/1 CD, a jump rebid of your suit (to 3♠)

shows either a solid or semi-solid suit (depending on partnership agreement, Mike prefers the second) plus a little something on the side, which you have.

 

I would discount a single bad result, as that can happen any time and shouldn't cause one not to use an effective response.

[kenberg]

3S is the least I would bid, and in fact 3S would have been my choice (easy to say after I see the other hand of course). Notice that the 1NT bidder could in fact have less, for example the ace of diamonds might have been the king. It seems to me that 3S pretty much expresses the hand and allows partner to get out at a (perhaps) makeable contract if he has not much. As a matter of partnership coordination I ask would winstomm, or others, have passed 3S holding the 1NT hand? It's true that the NT bidder could have less, but also, especially since the NT was semi-forcing rather than 6-10, he could also have had a good deal more. It's a tough hand to make a decision on, imo. I expect that at imps, with my 2 card spade support, the ace of diamonds, and a possible source of slow tricks in the heart suit I would press on. While this may argue in favor of the 2S bid, I still think it is wrong. Bidding 2S with such a hand, as well as on a hand that is just over a 2S opener, puts way too much strain on the NT bidder's esp abilities. There really is no way to bid all games that make and no games that don't make.

[Winstonm]

As a matter of partnership coordination I ask would winstomm, or others, have passed 3S holding the 1NT hand?

 

Generally speaking the 3S bidder will hold 5 1/2 to 6 losers using LTC - responder only holds one prime cover in the ace - the QJ combination is of some value but how much is unknown - probably worth 1/2 cover. Therefore it is unlikely this hand can cover enough losers to make game a good bet so pass is probably best.

 

Winston

[kenberg]

Thanks, Winston. Sounds reasonable.

 

Arc, Are you sure about the advice from Mike Lawrence? I don't have his CD but I have his book somewhere. As I recall, the 3S=semi-solid suit advice comes up after a 2/1 response: 1S-2D-3S is semi-solid. You can have this precise agreement because you are already in a forcing auction. After 1S-1N, it seems to me that 3S will sometimes need to be bid on suits that may be called semi-solid only by a public relations practitioner. Of course you need a fair amount of extra stuff to invite four with a shaggy suit but with truly good values, a suit oriented hand and a somewhat shaggy six card suit what else is available but 3S? I am assuming you don't have a gadget. In the play you may lose an uncomfortable number of tricks in the trump suit but you may also be able to retain control while establishing the long spades, while in NT you won't have the time to set up the long but shaggy spades.