Who Should Bid Differently

[Walddk]

I don't have a problem with 4-3 fits at the 2 and 3-level, but I also know that many dislike it. As to your example hand: sure, notrump plays better, but you know as well as I that you can create hands that work better for whichever method you prefer.

 

Jxxx

Ax

Qxxx

Axx

 

Now you want to play in spades all of a sudden.

 

As I said in my first post, the actual opening hand is a little too good for 2♠. It qualifies for 3♠ in my book, and accordingly it's not at all obvious that you want to invite opposite a minimum - especially not non vulnerable.

 

Roland

[inquiry]

Hmm so what's the ZAR point range for a 2♠ raise?

 

It seems like the minimum shouldn't start at 26 or so anymore. After all, you presumably wouldn't open with less than 25-26 before counting for fit. Looking at the example hands, even the ones that you bid 2♠ on seem to be 28-29 ZAR (i.e. right on the threshold of 3♠) and these generally have a fair amount of wastage in the doubletons.

 

Seems reasonable to me to tone things down a bit and let the jump promise a bit more. This would be especially true without the 2NT raise (since your only stronger option than the jump involves forcing to game).

 

It's also worth a mention that your jumps to 3♠ on very minimum openings with four card support are somewhat protected by the knowledge that partner has five spades in your methods. Even if you reach an awful contract opposite a dead minimum partner, you have LOTT protection and are probably sacrificing against something. This level of aggression in raising opposite a 1♠ bid that could be four will get you too high substantially more often.

Well, don't blame ZAR for this method, this is my own doing...

 

As I said in the preamble to richard, I play kaplain inversion, so the bidding would be quite different on 1H-1S than shown, simply because responder has not promised any spades at all. On the ones were responder has 5S, just change the 1S response to 1NT and the bidding goes as shown from there.

 

Using 29 as dividing line (good versus bad), almost always gives a 3S raise if partner bids 1S due to the fit (there are examples, however where it doesnt). But there is also an important thing to bear in mind.. the biddign to this point is both opponents have passed at least once. The lighter you are with a fit, the more partner will have or else surely someone would have bid something. And if not, your 3S bid may steal their hand right out from underneath them (this has happened for me).

 

Of course, you could adjust the range up if good 29 is too risky for you. Make it a good 30 or a good 31 (as I said in an earlier post to richard). But richard was correct, you want to keep the range narrow, because over 3S, partner has to decide "Game or No Game"... the wider the range, the more often he will get it wrong.

 

And as for the level of protection, you are correct over 1NT to 1H, I am much more protected. But I bid with exactly the same scheme after 1m-1M (either major). Here partner only has 4. But this means, almost all the balanced junk goes to 2M, and all the jumps are distributional with support (else open 1NT). Let me also add, I open some pretty ratty hands 1C or 1D with shape, so I need to have a very discouraging simple raise available... :-)