Seam in bidding

[jdonn]

completely normal.

"Normal"?, maybe? "completely? maybe not. Both sides unberbid a little, especially West.

 

I am going to assign blames for the missing game, opener (East) 10%, responder, 50%, 40% due to cards lie perfectly. I would raise to 3S as west.

 

The reasonable sequence would be

1S - 1N - 2S -3S- 4S.

Neither side underbid, they were both simply complete maximums that also happened to fit perfectly. It seems anyone who is a maximum for his bid gets chastised these days.

 

Whose fault would it be if west didn't have the club jack or spade ten?

[Finch]

Vulnerable at imps I would probably be in it, because I have a method for East to show a "good" 2S bid (typically 14-17 HCP with 6 spades), which East is easily worth with such good controls.

 

1S - 1NT

2C* - 2S**

3S/4S - 4S/P

 

2C = clubs or min balanced or good 2S bid

2S = 7-9 doubleton spade

 

 

That will indeed end up with being in game with the red suits reversed, but I'm happy to say that 50% of the time I end in a virtually cold game (the actual hand might make 11 tricks) and 50% of the time I end in a poor but not hopeless game: that equals a greater than 50% chance of making game, so it is worth bidding.

 

Without playing methods, West might raise 2S to 3S, though it is very aggressive (and depends on your weak 2 style).

[1eyedjack]

I play

1S-1N-2D shows a 6 card Spade suit (may be but need not be particularly good).

Over which 2H by opener is artificial and stronger than 2S, and certainly appropriate on this hand.

Opener is then marginal for action stronger than 2S. If I expect the other table to be swinging then perhaps I should also, but I rarely get these predictions right so tend to ignore that aspect now.

 

Incidentally, reverse the red suits and as you say 4S is not great. But then you are not a million miles away from 3N. As the cards lie, 3N is not a horrendous contract, although 4S is clearly superior.

[jtfanclub]

Sorry, I was thinking SAYC. For a hand to have a lot of hearts, not have the strength to bid 2♥ over 1♠ but to have enough strength to bid 3♥ over 2♠ seems impossible to me. So logically, 3♥ should be 4 hearts and about 10 hcp, with spade tolerence. A weak hand with no spade tolerence has no business bidding at the 3 level.

 

But then, I've been wrong before.

[skjaeran]

In our methods:

P - 1♠ - 1NT - 2♥ - 4♠.

We play transfers after 1♠-1NT. 2♥ shows a good 2♠ rebid.

This is somewhat plausible, however the jump to 4♠ looks a little rich, even though opener shows a max 2♠ call. Note my prior comment about reversing the red suits.

 

If there was a way responder could make a game try to showed the hands meshed better, I'd put more faith in this idea.

 

Question: how do you show clubs? Is 1N semi forcing for you too?

The jump to 4♠ is not rich IMO. The 2♥ is sub-minimum here. With a reasonable 10-count we'd "never" stop short of game. The alternative to raising directly to game would be to respond 2NT, showing a maximum 1NT response (10 to a bad 12), but that would normally show short ♠'2.

 

Currectly new suits by responder is natural. But you might play them as game tries, showing values and doubleton ♠.

 

1NT in non-forcing in our methods. I know that's unusual playing 2/1, but it's quite normal over here (Norway), although 2/1 is far from what the majority play here.

 

Showing ♣'s is a little problematic, unless we're 5-5 or have GF values. (We open 1♣ with 5-5 and minimum (11-13/14 bad).) What we do is open some 5-2-2-4 hands 1NT (if in the 14+-17 range) and pass 1NT with weak 5-x-x-4 hands. You might add semi-strong ♠-♣ hands in the 2♥ transfer, but we prefer to keep it pure.

 

We've had several successes playing this method. Some 6-4 hands with ♠+♦ are problematic playing standard methods, especially at MP. If you've got a little more than minimum, but aren't strong enough to jump to 3♠ over a 1NT response, most are forced to rebid 2♠, since that contract often would be higher scoring than the ♦ partscore. We can transfer to 2♦ and rebid 2♠ if partner accepts the transfer. Recently we bid 1♠-1NT-2♣-3♦-3♠-4♠ in a big tournament. More than half the field played 2♠.

[inquiry]

skaeran's transfers over 1NT might make a lot of sense if you play the 2♥ and 2♠ opening bids the way henri taught me. These 2 bids show the major (5+) and clubs (4+) and a minimum hand. This frees 2♣ rebids as "ritong 2♣", but having transfers available would be another good idea. If you have clubs, you have a goodish hand. Not that I have plans right now to change ritong 2♣ approacht that I use.

 

The reason I like Ritong 2♣ so much, is that I open, er, extremely lightly. I need such tools to help me distinquish between sound openings (but not rock crushers) and the run of the mill frequent openers.

 

Playing against Justin yesterday, I am sure I shocked the kibitzers when I passed this hand first seat....

 

J

Qx

AK9xx

QT98x

 

This is probably the best hand i have passed in a month of sundays, but I was playing with a pickup partner and didn't want to test his understanding of my willingness to bid on a whim. So I choose to pass and go the unusual 2NT route with this one. Normally for me, this is a clear opener, and would still be without the major suit honors (just the 9 hcp in the minors).