What strenght does this show?

[Fluffy]

E-W Vulnerable

 

-W - N -E - S

1♣-1♠-ps-2♥

3♣-3 ♦-ps-??

 

♠Ax

♥AQ109xx

♦Jx

♣xxx

[P_Marlowe]

3S, partner did ask you to give preference,

2H was nf, but it certainly was not garbage, so

with 3S you show more or less what you hold.

 

If you believe 3S is an underbid go ahhead and bid

4S, but beawre, that partner will get forced in clubs.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[helene_t]

I'd bid 4♣, choice of game. 3♠ is certainly not unreasonable. Especially if 2♥ was forcing. In that case I've showed pretty much what I have already.

[Finch]

If 2H was non-forcing, 3D shows extras and I would bid game in spades.

If 2H was forcing, 3D doesn't particularly show extra strength, although implies extra diamond length. Now it's much closer between 3S and 4S.

[jtfanclub]

E-W Vulnerable

 

-W - N -E - S

1♣-1♠-ps-2♥

3♣-3 ♦-ps-??

 

♠Ax

♥AQ109xx

♦Jx

♣xxx

I play 2♥ as constructive non-forcing, which makes this hand on the low end.

 

With some partners, I would bid 3♥, because we have the understanding that that also shows spade tolerence (without it, I'd pass 3 clubs). I'd rather play in the 6-2 than the 5-2 particularly since, as somebody else mentioned, partner is going to get forced in clubs. Also, I think hearts are more likely to split than spades- if RHO had 4 hearts, he could X 1 spade with a minimal count. If he had 4 spades, he would pass 1 spade.

 

The more I think about it, the more I like 3♥.

[Apollo81]

What style of 2♥ are you playing? Forcing? NFConst? NF? My knee jerk reaction would be 3♠ with this hand; I usually play NFConst.

[mikeh]

The standard NA treatment of 2♥ is that it was forcing: certainly, I think that is the BWS (Bridge World Standard) treatment and BWS is a consensus system compiled from input from a large number of experts/serious players. Of course, regional and individual treatments vary, and, as has been pointed out, the choice of call here depends on what you've shown already.

 

I would not choose 4♣, choice of games, because my partners would almost certainly take that as a cue agreeing ♦s... altho I like the COG use..on this hand. Give me xx AQxxxx AJxx x, and I'd prefer the cue meaning, altho one can imagine untangling some auctions if he took it a COG and I bid again over 4Major.

 

Not knowing what 3♥ showed, I vote with Frances

[Halo]

I like the idea of bidding 3H here (with implied spade support). It's true that the three small clubs in my hand are a downer, but then partner could struggle to get full value out my hand playing in spades.

[jdonn]

I like the idea of bidding 3H here (with implied spade support). It's true that the three small clubs in my hand are a downer, but then partner could struggle to get full value out my hand playing in spades.

I actually don't mind 3♥ at all, in fact I'm surprised everyone is going to spades instead of rebidding this very good heart suit. However, in what world does 3♥ imply spade support?

[P_Marlowe]

The standard NA treatment of 2♥ is that it was forcing: certainly, I think that is the BWS (Bridge World Standard) treatment and BWS is a consensus system compiled from input from a large number of experts/serious players.

<snip>

But those eperts were manly from NA.

Which is not surprising since Bridge World is

an Amercian Bridge magazine.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[skjaeran]

For me the alternatives are 3♥ and 4♣ (choice of major suit game). With ♦ support I'd make a forcing raise. 3♥ seems best to me. I don't think we're missing game if partner passes this.

[Fluffy]

our definition of 2♥ is 'forcing unless you have garbage', I think this is same as non forcing constructive.

[Finch]

I like the idea of bidding 3H here (with implied spade support).  It's true that the three small clubs in my hand are a downer, but then partner could struggle to get full value out my hand playing in spades.

I actually don't mind 3♥ at all, in fact I'm surprised everyone is going to spades instead of rebidding this very good heart suit. However, in what world does 3♥ imply spade support?

In my world, I've already shown a decent 5-card heart suit. I haven't said anything about spade support. I prefer to tell partner I have something good in spades, than rebid 3H, which could be something like

 

x

KQJ10xx

Qxx

Kxx

 

or whatever, make the high card values whatever you think is suitable, but the point is my hand is very good for spades in context of what I've shown.

[cherdano]

The standard NA treatment of 2♥ is that it was forcing: certainly, I think that is the BWS (Bridge World Standard) treatment and BWS is a consensus system compiled from input from a large number of experts/serious players.

That's wrong. The default is

After our simple overcall of a one-bid:

(a) [default]A new-suit bid by an unpassed advancer is natural and nonforcing in all cases.

BWS 2001, VI.C

[whereagles]

I would bid 3♥. I think there's a good chance pard has Hx of hearts on this bidding.

[jtfanclub]

In my world, I've already shown a decent 5-card heart suit. I haven't said anything about spade support. I prefer to tell partner I have something good in spades, than rebid 3H, which could be something like

 

x

KQJ10xx

Qxx

Kxx

And in the world I come from, I smile and say "Good luck partner" as I put my hand down. I'm perfectly happy with playing at 3 diamonds- why shouldn't I be? If partner didn't want to play in 3 diamonds across Qxx in diamonds, he wouldn't have bid them. 3♥ might be worth a little more, but it's far more dangerous.

[jdonn]

In my world, I've already shown a decent 5-card heart suit.  I haven't said anything about spade support.  I prefer to tell partner I have something good in spades, than rebid 3H, which could be something like

 

x

KQJ10xx

Qxx

Kxx

And in the world I come from, I smile and say "Good luck partner" as I put my hand down. I'm perfectly happy with playing at 3 diamonds- why shouldn't I be? If partner didn't want to play in 3 diamonds across Qxx in diamonds, he wouldn't have bid them. 3♥ might be worth a little more, but it's far more dangerous.

3♥ dangerous?? I might bid 4♥. A♠ AK♦ and partner is 5-5 and you make.

[Guest Jlall]

The standard NA treatment of 2♥ is that it was forcing: certainly, I think that is the BWS (Bridge World Standard) treatment and BWS is a consensus system compiled from input from a large number of experts/serious players.

That's not true, in fact I had this same argument with jdonn like 2 years ago when he insisted 2H forcing is standard. It's strange, it seems like a very regional thing though even in USA, I know of no expert from texas who plays this as forcing.

[jdonn]

The standard NA treatment of 2♥ is that it was forcing: certainly, I think that is the BWS (Bridge World Standard) treatment and BWS is a consensus system compiled from input from a large number of experts/serious players.

That's not true, in fact I had this same argument with jdonn like 2 years ago when he insisted 2H forcing is standard. It's strange, it seems like a very regional thing though even in USA, I know of no expert from texas who plays this as forcing.

I do not remember that at all lol, though I don't doubt I said that. I truly have no idea how a random partner will take it nowadays but I think NF is more common, and that yes it's very regional.

[whereagles]

The standard around here is "new suit after overcall is forcing except a 2/1, which is constructive but NF. At 3 level it is GF".

[Guest Jlall]

The standard NA treatment of 2♥ is that it was forcing: certainly, I think that is the BWS (Bridge World Standard) treatment and BWS is a consensus system compiled from input from a large number of experts/serious players.

That's not true, in fact I had this same argument with jdonn like 2 years ago when he insisted 2H forcing is standard. It's strange, it seems like a very regional thing though even in USA, I know of no expert from texas who plays this as forcing.

I do not remember that at all lol, though I don't doubt I said that. I truly have no idea how a random partner will take it nowadays but I think NF is more common, and that yes it's very regional.

well as usual we were both wrong, I actually said that no one plays it as forcing, and you said its standard that it's forcing, then you looked it up in BWS and said forcing was a leaf but NF was BWS.

[bhall]

One common practice in NA is to play 3/2 forcing, 2/1 nonforcing constructive, and 2M/2m forcing one round. This last allows advancer to explore for a 5-3 major fit when he holds invitational values in overcaller's minor.

 

On the hand in question, 2♥ would be NF constructive, and I would rebid 3♠ as showing tolerance for a game contract in either major. I would expect partner, if he bids again, to allow for 6 cards in my suit by offering 4♥ on the way to 4♠ with a 6=2=4=1 pattern.

 

Of course, my expectations have been disappointed once or twice in past events. :D

[Halo]

I like the idea of bidding 3H here (with implied spade support).  It's true that the three small clubs in my hand are a downer, but then partner could struggle to get full value out my hand playing in spades.

I actually don't mind 3♥ at all, in fact I'm surprised everyone is going to spades instead of rebidding this very good heart suit. However, in what world does 3♥ imply spade support?

Slow to respond because I wasn't taking credit for the 3H bid.

 

I think the logic is that you are not screwing partner. He asked for preference and instead you make an alternative (IMO forward going bid), that implies if he bids 3S you are OK (Hx).

 

This is the 'expert' zone and I hope that doesn't mean that there is some magical answer out there that successful players divine in some way.

 

There is a kind of obsequious tendency occasional on the Forum. Great players perform well in the real world under pressure. Their opinions (so far as they choose to share them) are therefore a bit better than average, but not so much better than then majority at any point.

[jdonn]

I like the idea of bidding 3H here (with implied spade support).  It's true that the three small clubs in my hand are a downer, but then partner could struggle to get full value out my hand playing in spades.

I actually don't mind 3♥ at all, in fact I'm surprised everyone is going to spades instead of rebidding this very good heart suit. However, in what world does 3♥ imply spade support?

Slow to respond because I wasn't taking credit for the 3H bid.

 

I think the logic is that you are not screwing partner. He asked for preference and instead you make an alternative (IMO forward going bid), that implies if he bids 3S you are OK (Hx).

The problem is where you say partner "asked for preference". He did not, he simply described his hand. If you have bad holdings in both his suits and very long hearts, which is not the least bit unlikely, there would seem to be no choice but 3♥. After all what else could that hand do?

[Halo]

The problem is where you say partner "asked for preference". He did not, he simply described his hand. If you have bad holdings in both his suits and very long hearts, which is not the least bit unlikely, there would seem to be no choice but 3♥. After all what else could that hand do?

I see your point, but if so limited I would have passed partner's 1S overcall - if you would not then we are on different tracks.