How to bid

[DWM]

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=shakqt87dkt87caj2&s=sak754h94da532ct7]133|200|[/hv]

 

Two part question.

 

How would you bid this from scratch, using a 2/1 system?

 

If you had the bidding sequence

 

1♠ 2♥

2♠ 3♦

4♦

 

What would you take 4♥ to be?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

your given seq. looks fine.

Now 4H is a cue, it certtainly

does not promise a solid 6 card

suit, and it certainly is no choice

of games.

 

Over 4H bid 4S.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[whereagles]

There's a lot of inferences to be taken, depending on the bidding style you use after a 2/1... Still, one thing is sure: 4♦ definitely shows shape, a good hand in support of diamonds, and almost certainly denies 3 hearts. That's a good enough case for treating 4♥ now as a cue bid (not a proposal to play 4♥).

 

Since you asked for it, here's how I would bid it

 

1♠ 2♥

2♠ 2NT

3♦ 4♦

4♠ 6♦

 

2♠ = min unbalanced hand or 15-17 with 6 cards and broken suit

2NT = semi-artificial, asking for opener to continue describing his hand

3♦ = shows 5-4 around 11-14 (cannot bid 3♥: it would show 3 hearts and 11-14)

4♦ = slammish, forcing

4♠ = cue

6♦ = spade wastage rules out a grand. There's a case for bidding 5♦ only, though.

[the hog]

Sun in Thailand must be frying my brain. I agree 100% with Whereagles again. The 2NT artificial relay is a great adjunct in naturalish systems.

[Finch]

Without any particular methods, I would take both 4H and 4S as attempts to play there.

 

What's wrong with

 

1S - 2H

2S - 3D

4D - 5NT (GSF)

6D - P

 

?

 

Responder has no need for any sort of cue-bidding auction, all he/she cares about is the solidity of the diamond fit.

[mike777]

<!-- NORTHSOUTH begin --><table border=1> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td>Dealer:</td> <td> South </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Vul:</td> <td> E/W </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Scoring:</td> <td> Unknown </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table border='1'> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td>  </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> AKQT87 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> KT87 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> AJ2 </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> AK754 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> 94 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> A532 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> T7 </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- NORTHSOUTH end -->

 

Two part question.

 

How would you bid this from scratch, using a 2/1 system?

 

If you had the bidding sequence

 

1♠ 2♥

2♠ 3♦

4♦

 

What would you take 4♥ to be?

typical argument I object to the 2s rebid........ongoing never ending debate!

 

I rebid 3d over 2H not promising extras but showing shape and not xxxx in D!

 

getting to 7H is tough but in any event you will get to small slam!

 

 

1s=2h

3d=3h

4h=5c(showing some funky hand since no rkc)

5d=6d( grand slam try in hearts)

?

[Echognome]

getting to 7H is tough but in any event you will get to small slam!

Why would we want to get to 7♥?

 

We relayed this hand after 1♠ then my partner mistakingly showed 2 controls (when he had 5!), so I played in 4♥. When both red suits broke 4-1, we got an undeserved average plus.

 

I think 6♦ is the best contract, although 6♥ at MP may be a reasonable gamble.

[the hog]

"typical argument I object to the 2s rebid........ongoing never ending debate!

 

I rebid 3d over 2H not promising extras but showing shape and not xxxx in D!"

 

Not promising extra values?? This argument will no doubt start again, but I really dislike this treatment. How on earth you can bid the same way with a minimum opener and a with a good 16+ is beyond me.

[DWM]

Is there anything wrong with this alternative?

 

1♠ 2♥

2♠ 3♥ (planning to bid 4♦ over most bids)

4♦/♥ .....

 

With the thinking that showing a 6 card major takes priority over a 4 card minor. Or is it a case of finding a 4-4 fit in any suit takes priority over a major fit when you think you are in slam land?

[mike777]

Without stealing the thread...partner just assumes a minimum 11-13 hcp hand and 5-4 shape with hcp in long suits. Keep in mind responder has a game force good hand across from a junky 11!

 

If you got 16+ hcp across from this type of responder hand you can show it later!

[Codo]

..But there is no need to show it later if you can limit your hand at once.

 

I liked the given auction but play that 4 Diamond is always RCKB for Diamond, so 4 Heart had shown 4 or 1 KC :-). Without that agreement, I had taken 4 Heart as a place to play in MPS and as a cuebid in IMPS.

[adhoc3]

1S----2H

2NT

 

Instead of 2S, 2NT could be showing rubbish, subjected to your agreement.

 

Regards,

 

Jack

[SoTired]

Ha ha - Some partners I play with insist that 3D shows nothing extra. Some insist that 2S shows 6s. But in any case: Once the diam fit is established, North should not settle for less than 6D.

 

I play that if a minor suit fit is established below 4m, then 4m is minorwood RKC. If 4m is needed to establish the minor fit, then 4m+1 is Kickback RKC.

[kenrexford]

All of these auction proposals seem strange to me in one respect.

 

Whether Opener starts with 2♠ or 2NT at his first rebid is a matter of style. With 6-4 in the red suits, the obvious continuation seems to be 3D-P-3H, with Opener making a delayed raise of hearts. Why preference diamonds first, when 4♦ after 3NT works fine?

 

Once Opener gives a delayed raise in hearts (3♥), Responder cues 4♣ to express slam interest, hears 4♦ from Opener, and then uses judgment. Personally, I would consider this a zoom hand and leap to 6♦ as a choice bid. I will live with partner's choice.

[mikeh]

All of these auction proposals seem strange to me in one respect.

 

Whether Opener starts with 2♠ or 2NT at his first rebid is a matter of style.  With 6-4 in the red suits, the obvious continuation seems to be 3D-P-3H, with Opener making a delayed raise of hearts.  Why preference diamonds first, when 4♦ after 3NT works fine?

 

Once Opener gives a delayed raise in hearts (3♥), Responder cues 4♣ to express slam interest, hears 4♦ from Opener, and then uses judgment.  Personally, I would consider this a zoom hand and leap to 6♦ as a choice bid.  I will live with partner's choice.

the sequence 1♠ 2♥ 2♠ 3♦ 3♥ 4♣ 4♦ is NOT a fit in ♦... ♥ were set as trump and both players are cue-bidding.... this is how the bidding would go if opener were AKJxxx Jx Axx xx for example...

 

As for how the bidding would/should go.. it seems to me that responder could justify either 3♥ or 3♦ at his second turn...if the latter, then 4♥ over 4♦ should be a suit, and an offer to play 4♥ opposite a minimum...

 

Why? Because responder, when bidding 3♦, was not really expecting a 4♦ raise... he may have been hoping to hear a delayed 3♥ or a 3N, and his hand may not be anywhere nearly as strong as it actually is. Thus he might be x AKQxxx KQxx xx and be hoping that partner would bid 3N over 3♦...

 

I think those who say that 4♥ 'is keycard' or that it must be a cue are being influenced, I suspect, by the fact that the responder hand is so slam oriented... most responder hands will NOT be slam oriented and your bidding should cater to those.

 

As for the suggestion that responder should use a semi-artificial 2N over 2♠... I have long used 2N as a sort of catch-all bid by responder, but not on a hand with a void in partner's suit and such clear suit orientation. I essentially use 2N either as natural, or as a hand waiting for opener to show a second suit: the 2♠ bid not denying 54 or 55 shape on minimum hands. I would 100% agree with 2N with the same honour cards and 1=5=4=3 shape. The main problem with 2N on the given hand is what to do over 3N by partner... is he 6133 or 5233 or... etc... and our hand, altho strong, is really not well set up for us bidding over 3N.

[mikeh]

As for how I think the hand 'should' be bid... if responder bids 3♦ and collects a 4♦ raise (my actual preference), then I agree entirely with Frances... 5N. Sure, you may go down even in 6... catch partner with AKQJx xx Q10xx xx for example and we need to be very lucky in the ♦ suit...

 

If responder rebids 3♥, opener raises and now responder has to make a guess... it is easy to construct hands on which 5♥ fails... AKQJx xx Qxx xxx is an easy example.. .you may have NO dummy entry... but most of the time there will be 5-level safety so responder could and (I think) should try 5♣ and now 5♦ allows him to try slam with some hope that partner's hand will be adequate... but I can understand missing slam here, if responder rebids 3♥.

[Finch]

As for the suggestion that responder should use a semi-artificial 2N over 2♠... I have long used 2N as a sort of catch-all bid by responder, but not on a hand with a void in partner's suit and such clear suit orientation. I essentially use 2N either as natural, or as a hand waiting for opener to show a second suit: the 2♠ bid not denying 54 or 55 shape on minimum hands. I would 100% agree with 2N with the same honour cards and 1=5=4=3 shape. The main problem with 2N on the given hand is what to do over 3N by partner... is he 6133 or 5233 or... etc... and our hand, altho strong, is really not well set up for us bidding over 3N.

I happen to play the 2NT bid as totally artifical, asking for further description of opener's hand (so not promising anything like a balanced hand). But then I play opener's first rebid as semi-artificial as well...

 

But even playing this method (where openers' 2S rebid showed exactly 5S and a balanced or semi-balanced hand) I wouldn't use my 2NT relay here: responder wants to show, not ask; and what responder wants to show is a slam-orientated red 2-suiter.

[whereagles]

Hum.. it's not that responder wants to "show". It's more predicting what's going to happen. Can you, for instance, find the 6-2 ♥ fit if you bid 3♦ instead of 2NT? Unless you play that 2♠ absolutely denies 3 hearts (wrong strategy in my opinion), I don't think so...

[kenrexford]

Mike, I agree that 1S-2H-2S/2NT-3D-3H-4C-4D does not change the fit as hearts. That's why I would jump to 6D as a choice bid. If Opener happens to have four diamonds, great! Maybe the 4-4 is better. If not, he bids 6H.