Everybody bid and you have a mega-hand

[helene_t]

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=shakj9xxdxxcajtxx]133|100|Scoring: XIMP

(1♠)-2♦-(2♠)-?[/hv]

 

Would 3♥ be forcing? Let's say it's not, otherwise it's not so difficult.

 

Suppose you bid 3♠, would that lead to anything?

What about 5♥? Would partner make the right decision? How real is the risk of ending up in hearts when it should have been a minor?

What about double? Suppose partner passes, how bad would that be?

What about 4♥ or 6♥? What are the odds that you guess right?

Any creative uses of 2NT is this situation?

[adhoc3]

3S showing Diamond Fitting as for me. Even not, I dont want to hear 3NT from Pard --- I'll have to bid 4H along.

 

How possible pard passes if I double? Very likely. He could have 4 or more spade.

 

So I just bid 4H to make it simple, feeling fixed.

[Free]

3♥ is enough: first of all it's forcing and second you show either a fitted hand or a strong hand with ♥ only. We already have a ♦ fit (unless partner frequently overcalls at 2-level with a 5 card suit) and we have to get the message across that we have a good hand with ♥ and ♦ tollerance.

 

I plan to bid 5♣ when opponents bid on to 4♠ and partner passes. But if he bids 5♦ it looks very attractive that I should bid 6 :)

[whereagles]

3♥. Regardless of being forcing or not.

[mikeh]

This is a non-problem for me, and (I suspect) for the vast majority of good players: 3♥ is forcing. It's like posing a problem as to an strong opening bid choice when you have no forcing bid in your system: the solution is to change system.

[whereagles]

Actually, if 3♥ is non-forcing, then the cue-bid must show either support or some wierd strong hand like this one. That's bound to mess up your bidding, so I prefer 3♥ as forcing :)

[neilkaz]

I don't believe that 3H is forcing, but many play it that way and it would be forcing if a jump.

 

However, regardless of whether it is forcing or not, I don't pussy foot around and just bid 4H, bypassing science and hoping to put the opps to the last guess. Red vs White, PD should be aware that my hand has much trick taking potential.

 

However, I certainly have no complaints with the slower approach here.

 

4H for me.. neilkaz ..

[HeartA]

3H forcing or not needs agreement. I prefer it as forcing.

[mike777]

When the opp have opened and partner has overcalled I do not see how you can play a new suit bid at the 3 level by an unpassed hand as not forcing. That just seems to make bridge too tough.

[helene_t]

I thought it was non-forcing based on the idea that there are only 40 HCPs in the board. Opps are known to be rather conservative.

 

Then, thinking more about it: 3♥ is more useful as a fit-bid or as an ambigious "fit or one-suiter" than as purely length showing. Now if partner has support she will raise. If she doesn't have support, what then? At this vulnerability, 3♥ in a 4-1 fit when we also have a 6-4-fit in diamonds is very bad even if opps have game.

 

On the other hand, I would like to play it as non-forcing at other vulnerabilities, and it's too confusing to let the forcing character of a call depend on the vulnerability.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

for me, 3H would be non-forcing.

 

But I also play 2NT as artificial

(kind of reverse Good-Bad 2NT),

most likely 2NT would be a 3D limit

raise but it may be something different.

 

3S should be a fit bid.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[jdeegan]

:( 3♥ even though it is non-forcing. What are you worried about? That it will go all pass? If so, would that be bad? The opponents are 50 to 1 to have nine or more spades, so they are likely to bid one more. Or, perhaps partner will bid 3NT. Either way, you can try 4♣.

 

Consider that this hand may have fewer tricks in it than the participants will think. Spades split badly. Your side probably has only one eight card fit. You need to find it, and then be prepared to stop at a ten trick contract. Let partner double 4♠, if he has a chance, but don't encourage that with your void. 3♥ has the merit of indicating the best lead against any spade contract.