Who should take the extra step

[DWM]

[hv=v=e&n=sajhq6d9874ck9653&s=sqt43h42dkqcaqt87]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

Bidding opened by South

 

1♣ - (1♥) - 2♣ - (P)

P - (2♥) - 3♣ - (P)

P - (3♥)

 

Playing 2/1 with mini NT do you agree with the N/S bidding so far?

 

With the bidding so far does either N or S have a good argument to further compete?

[Fluffy]

2♣ is an underbid, 2♥ is reasonable.

 

3♣ is again an underbid, Double is reasonable.

[helene_t]

I think South rather than North should have bid 3♣.

 

Now North might double 3♥. Not sure if South should pull it.

[skjaeran]

2♣ is an underbid, prefer 2♥ (inv+ with support).

3♣ is an underbid too, prefer double.

Over 3♣ north might again double. IMO south should take this out knowing they're 55 in ♣'s and having too much strenght in ♣'s and too soft side values.

South has more than minimum, but it's not clear to bid over 3♥ in this auction if north passes.

[neilkaz]

This is a tough hand, and, I don't have any strong opinions and, for once ;) , won't criticize anyone strongly :unsure: .

 

I don't play 10-12 NT, but will do my logical best to work out the slight implications for a 1♣ opener. To me 1♣ means that opener has 13+ HCP or if less, he has several ♣ and is at least somewhat unbalanced (unsuitable for the mini-NT)

 

With that in mind, I think N's hand is just into the range of Q=LROB (cue bid is a limit raise or better) and would bid 2♥. However, some play Q and GF and while 2♣ is cautious, I don't think it is an clear error.

 

After 2♣, opener should definately rebid 3♣ since they two sides most likely have 9 or 10 ♣ and this leaves responder better poised to compete while making it more difficult for overcaller to speak again or mention ♦ where they also may belong.

 

Opener's 3♣ is NOT a game try as other bids exist for that purpose.

 

OK after 3♥ responder has allready shown 5♣ and likely the top range of his 2♣ raise. He should pass and let opener decide what to do.

 

EDIT: note this is the B/I forum so I won't be making the competitive or card showing doubles that some of you mention and will just bid what I have..ie ♣ and a borderline limit raise (noting my Q of ♥ on this bidding my be junk)

 

.. neilkaz ..

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I would prefer a stronger raise, but I can live

with 2C, which at least is certainly better than

3C, ... 3C sounds a whole lot weaker.

 

Over 2H you have a problem, but all you can do

is bidding 3C, and over 3H you have to pass.

 

You have no idea, how big your fit is, and the Mini NT

just eliminates 10-12?, i.e. you may face a weak NT,

3H can easily make.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[foo]

Playing 1N= 10-12 or 10-13, When opener opens 1ofasuit they have:

a= more points than your 1N opening, or

b= are more shapely, or

c= both

 

In this context, 1C-(1H)-2C is a clear underbid. Particularly playing this system, responder should show a LR+ by cubidding 2H.

 

E will pass as before.

 

S will rebid 3C to show a minimum (S is not good enough to reverse into 2S in most partnerships).

 

W may or may not bid (3H) now given that NS are showing considerably more strength than in the original auction.

 

If W does bid (3H), N is going to figure that

a= NS have at least a 9+ card ♣ fit and

b= no decent defense vs (3H) and

c= the enemy values rate to be favorably placed

...and rebid 4♣ competitive.

N will also plan to X 4H if EW bid it.

[mike777]

[hv=v=e&n=sajhq6d9874ck9653&s=sqt43h42dkqcaqt87]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

Bidding opened by South

 

1♣ - (1♥) - 2♣ - (P)

P - (2♥) - 3♣ - (P)

P - (3♥)

 

Playing 2/1 with mini NT do you agree with the N/S bidding so far?

 

With the bidding so far does either N or S have a good argument to further compete?

Being a strong Law believer I think south should rebid 3clubs (minimum hand) over 2clubs...Now North will know partner has 5 clubs and will bid 4clubs with the ten card fit.

[mikeh]

I agree with those who argue that the 2♣ was an underbid. So long as 1♣ promised 3+ (in my preferred style, it doesn't), then the hand is (just) worth 2♥. That ♥ Q is far from worthless: imagine partner with Ax(x) or K10x etc.

 

Having bid 2♣, I am full values for 3♣... I wouldn't double...certainly not in the B/I forum.

 

Over 3♥, I have no strong feelings: again, my concern with double is that it may be left in inappropriately...it may be read as more penalty oriented than it actually is.

 

I really don't agree that S should have raised 2♣ to 3♣ merely on some 'Law' analysis. S has a minimum, with a flat hand and only one Ace.... partner would/should bid 2♣ with some 2=4=3=4 shapes (or similar) lacking a stopper, or without the strength shown by a 1N bid (8-10 for me, maybe a very good 7).

[jdonn]

Agree north should have bid 2♥ not 2♣. It would be a bit silly of south to bid 3♣ on the second round when he hasn't even been pushed there, but next round either player has an automatic 3♣ bid. After that it's hard to tell since north should never be in this position.

[Apollo81]

I actually think that South should have bid 4♣ in the given auction. Surely North would have five clubs for his bidding, and if North was weaker he could have bid 3♣ directly over 1♥.

 

Of course I'd also have bid 2♥ with the North hand over 1♥, but I don't think the failure to do so kills NS chances to get to 4♣.

[neilkaz]

I actually think that South should have bid 4♣ in the given auction. Surely North would have five clubs for his bidding, and if North was weaker he could have bid 3♣ directly over 1♥.

 

Of course I'd also have bid 2♥ with the North hand over 1♥, but I don't think the failure to do so kills NS chances to get to 4♣ knowing we have almost certainly 10

♣Ah..I may have missed a point of the initial question. N should pass over 3♥ I strong believe, but S can carry on to 4♣ and expect to have decent play for it.

 

I don't like to bid 4m over opp 3 level contracts, but here, I doubt it pushes them to game and I think we have good chances (ie fav's) to defeat 4♥, while being at least 50% in 4♣ knowing we have almost certainly 10.

 

.. neilkaz ..