Another what is wrong?

[cnszsun]

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=s9xhkxxdjxcakxxxx&s=sa10xxxxhaq9xdq10xc]133|200|Scoring: IMP

1♣-1♠

2♣-2♥

2♠-3♦

3♥-5♠

AP[/hv]

 

No special agreement. How will you interpret north's 3♥? Any wrong with the whole auction?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I dont like 2S, that should show 3 card support

and should set spades as trumps, keep it simple,

bid 3C.

 

Before I answer the question about 3H, please answer my

question, what is 3D? A game try with values, loosers,

shortage, 4th suit? If you answer my question, you answer

your question.

The beautiful contract was reached due to the 2S bid.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[han]

I do like 2S, to my mind this does not show 3-card spade support, just a minimum with a (false) spade preference. South should bid 4S over 2S imo.

[cherdano]

I agree with 2♠. Anyway, 5♠ deserves a double with ♠KQJx off-side. If you jump to 4♠ over 3♥, you have already overbid your hand.

[jtfanclub]

(I'm still not an expert)

 

I like the 2 spade bid, especially if 2♥ is only a 1 round force (which I think is standard in SAYC). Give partner a chance to back out early.

 

I think the bid to make over 3♦ is 3NT. To me, that would show a 6322 minimum with clubs well stopped, which is exactly what you have. I think it's more important to show the balanced shape than the heart support, since partner is making noises for slam. It's not like you've shown a powerhouse already, but it doesn't hurt any to push on the brakes a little harder.

 

I think 3♦ was pushing it...4♠ seems more reasonable, especially if 2♠ is nonforcing. 5♠ deserves to go down.

[Codo]

I hate 2 Spade

There is no need for a false preference, you have already limited your hand and you have at least one easy rebid.

Only if your definition for false preference is: This shows my weakest suit, 2 Spade is reasonable. :P

Else: If pd has 5/4 you don´t want to play spade. If he has 5/5 in the majors you are just heading towards a ridicolous contract.

 

Or do you want poor south to understand that 3 Heart later showed 3 good HEart and weak spades? NO way.

 

North should open 3 Club or bid 1 Club/2Club/3Club, in any case South will understand the nature if his hand. Well at least he should....

 

But south bids had been lunatic too. Pd shows a weak opening with a lot of clubs. Which hand do I dream of to invite for a slam?

KQx, Kxx,A, xxxxxx and the grand is coming???

[EricK]

The first 4 bids in the auction appear totally normal to me. At this stage, 4♠ looks correct with the south hand. Slam is possible but it needs partner to have very little in ♣ and lots outside - too much to expect IMO.

 

I suppose 3♦ was meant as FSF, but whatever it is 3♥ in reply can't be too bad - you do have about as good a ♥ suit as partner can expect, about as little in ♠ as he could fear, not enough in ♦ to suggest NT, and too short a ♣ suit to bid them for a third time.

[Free]

2♠ is just preference and minimum, ok. 3♦ is ridiculous, the rest is just a result of this.

[bhall]

It seems that you (but not your partner) were playing a very old-fashioned style, where 2♥ has a wide range and your 2♠ false preference can be passed. If 2♠ cannot be passed, then 3♣ is definitely the better rebid, as the spade preference should show at least xxx or Kx in that case.

 

Even if your partner thought that you had shown better spades, his 3♦ rebid is unjustified. Your 2♣ rebid just about denies the values that he needs for slam. Your 3♥ rebid is consistent with 2♠ being passable, bidding "where you live." Unfortunatley, partner was on a different track entirely. He probably hoped for Kxx Kx Ax QJxxxx, but that hand should jump to 3♠ over 2♥.

 

Bottom line: Have a long talk with your partner about the approach-forcing style (as Culbertson called it).

[Finch]

The first five bids are absolutely fine (as far as 2S).

 

South has a difficult call over 2S, to be honest I would have just bid 4S and gone off. If he had one spade fewer and one club more (5431) 2NT over 2S would have been quite descriptive - and would have ended the auction - but as it is he doesn't need much to make game. North had a minimum opening bid with only one useful honour.

[mikeh]

The first five bids are absolutely fine (as far as 2S).

 

South has a difficult call over 2S, to be honest I would have just bid 4S and gone off. If he had one spade fewer and one club more (5431) 2NT over 2S would have been quite descriptive - and would have ended the auction - but as it is he doesn't need much to make game. North had a minimum opening bid with only one useful honour.

agreed

 

Those who criticize 2♠ are way off the mark. Just what do they suggest instead?

[ArcLight]

The first five bids are absolutely fine (as far as 2S).

 

South has a difficult call over 2S, to be honest I would have just bid 4S and gone off. If he had one spade fewer and one club more (5431) 2NT over 2S would have been quite descriptive - and would have ended the auction - but as it is he doesn't need much to make game. North had a minimum opening bid with only one useful honour.

agreed

 

Those who criticize 2♠ are way off the mark. Just what do they suggest instead?

Its not that I like 2♠, but I'm not sure whats better?

 

3♥ would show 4, because 2♥ earlier is a reverse.

2NT with Jx in ♦ doesnt thrill me.

 

The choices are 3♣ or 2♠.

3♣ implies more clubs than 6 as the 2♣ bid implied that.

 

 

A question for the 2♠ bidders:

 

How do you bid

3=(1/3)=6 hands or 3=2=3=6 hands?

 

1♣ 1♠ - ?

Bid 2♠? Rather than 2♣?

 

You frequently raise spades with just 3. When would you rebid clubs, planning on showing spades later?

What if your clubs are AKJTxx, and spades are x x x?

Would you bid 2♠ or 2♣?

[P_Marlowe]

The first five bids are absolutely fine (as far as 2S).

 

South has a difficult call over 2S, to be honest I would have just bid 4S and gone off. If he had one spade fewer and one club more (5431) 2NT over 2S would have been quite descriptive - and would have ended the auction - but as it is he doesn't need much to make game. North had a minimum opening bid with only one useful honour.

agreed

 

Those who criticize 2♠ are way off the mark. Just what do they suggest instead?

How about 3C?

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

The first five bids are absolutely fine (as far as 2S).

 

South has a difficult call over 2S, to be honest I would have just bid 4S and gone off. If he had one spade fewer and one club more (5431) 2NT over 2S would have been quite descriptive - and would have ended the auction - but as it is he doesn't need much to make game. North had a minimum opening bid with only one useful honour.

agreed

 

Those who criticize 2♠ are way off the mark. Just what do they suggest instead?

Its not that I like 2♠, but I'm not sure whats better?

 

3♥ would show 4, because 2♥ earlier is a reverse.

2NT with Jx in ♦ doesnt thrill me.

 

The choices are 3♣ or 2♠.

3♣ implies more clubs than 6 as the 2♣ bid implied that.

<snip>

No way does the 2C bid already shows a 6 carder,

what do you rebid with 5-4 in the minors and a hand

to weak to make a revers? Throw in a spade singelton,

and 3 weak hearts.

 

You may rebid 1NT, but that definitely is not a must do.

 

I ommit 2-2-4-5, someone will suggest, that you should

rebid 1NT, and another one will say, you should open

1D anticipating the rebid problem, fair enough, but playing

standard down the middle, the usually opener is 1C followed

by a 2C rebid.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[bhall]

Those who criticize 2♠ are way off the mark. Just what do they suggest instead?

Its not that I like 2♠, but I'm not sure whats better?

 

3♥ would show 4, because 2♥ earlier is a reverse.

2NT with Jx in ♦ doesnt thrill me.

 

The choices are 3♣ or 2♠.

3♣ implies more clubs than 6 as the 2♣ bid implied that.

 

 

In most Standard partnerships 2♣ can be bid on 5♣-4 Red -(3,1). And if 2♠ cannot be passed, then it is misleading to bid it. In that case, 3♣ says "maybe we should play right here if you only have invitational values." That's about as honest a message as opener can convey with this hand.

[mikeh]

Those who criticize 2♠ are way off the mark. Just what do they suggest instead?

Its not that I like 2♠, but I'm not sure whats better?

 

3♥ would show 4, because 2♥ earlier is a reverse.

2NT with Jx in ♦ doesnt thrill me.

 

The choices are 3♣ or 2♠.

3♣ implies more clubs than 6 as the 2♣ bid implied that.

 

 

In most Standard partnerships 2♣ can be bid on 5♣-4 Red -(3,1). And if 2♠ cannot be passed, then it is misleading to bid it. In that case, 3♣ says "maybe we should play right here if you only have invitational values." That's about as honest a message as opener can convey with this hand.

Of course 2♠ can be passed. I know of no bidding method (other than forcing club systems :P ) where 2♠ is even constructive, let alone a one round force. It is a MINIMUM PREFERENCE.

[skjaeran]

For me 2♥ would be NF, non-invitational, so I'd not make a 2♥ call with this hand. That said, I fully agree with the 2♠ bid - anything else is nonsense to me.

 

Over 2♠ south has a clear 4♠, the only alternative being an invitational 3♠. IMO north bid very sensibly all the way here - pinpointing his 2326 distribution and uncertainty about what contract to play. 5♠ is way out - partner has shown a minimum opening.

[cherdano]

In most Standard partnerships 2♣ can be bid on 5♣-4 Red -(3,1). And if 2♠ cannot be passed, then it is misleading to bid it.  In that case, 3♣ says "maybe we should play right here if you only have invitational values." That's about as honest a message as opener can convey with this hand.

If partner is 5431, do you want to play 2S or 3C? Or 5521? or 5530? Even when he is 5422 2S will often be better.

 

Even if I were to play a misguided ( :P ) style where 2♣ may often be based on a 5-card suit, then AKxxxx is so suitable for playing in other strains (as compared to KQJxxxx with 12 in the majors) that I would never ever rebid clubs a 3rd time.

A question for the 2♠ bidders:

How do you bid

3=(1/3)=6 hands or 3=2=3=6 hands?

 

1♣ 1♠ - ? 

Bid 2♠? Rather than 2♣?

 

You frequently raise spades with just 3.  When would you rebid clubs, planning on showing spades later?

What if your clubs are AKJTxx, and spades are x x x?

Would you bid 2♠ or 2♣?

With 3(31)6 I would often raise to 2♠, yes. If I have ♠ xxx, or sometimes with a very minimal hand, I would bid 2♣ and still bid 2♠ over 2♥, but so what? If partner needs to know whether I have 2 or 3 spades he can still find out. For example in the auction of this thread, 3♥ over 3♦ clearly denied 3 spades and gave a very good picture of opener's hand.

 

By the way, in the methods I play with Han, 2♥ is game-forcing, and I would still rebid 2♠. 2N would show a diamond stopper, 3♣ would show a lot of clubs (as 2♣ already showed 6 of them), 3♥ would promise 4 hearts, and whatever 3♦ is it is not this hand.

[mike777]

The first five bids are absolutely fine (as far as 2S).

 

South has a difficult call over 2S, to be honest I would have just bid 4S and gone off. If he had one spade fewer and one club more (5431) 2NT over 2S would have been quite descriptive - and would have ended the auction - but as it is he doesn't need much to make game. North had a minimum opening bid with only one useful honour.

agreed

 

Those who criticize 2♠ are way off the mark. Just what do they suggest instead?

Its not that I like 2♠, but I'm not sure whats better?

 

3♥ would show 4, because 2♥ earlier is a reverse.

2NT with Jx in ♦ doesnt thrill me.

 

The choices are 3♣ or 2♠.

3♣ implies more clubs than 6 as the 2♣ bid implied that.

 

 

A question for the 2♠ bidders:

 

How do you bid

3=(1/3)=6 hands or 3=2=3=6 hands?

 

1♣ 1♠ - ?

Bid 2♠? Rather than 2♣?

 

You frequently raise spades with just 3. When would you rebid clubs, planning on showing spades later?

What if your clubs are AKJTxx, and spades are x x x?

Would you bid 2♠ or 2♣?

Arc to answer your questions:

1) Yes, most of the time I would rebid 2clubs with 6 and not 2s but I suppose I would rebid 2s with some hands you may come up with.

2) After rebidding 2clubs I would rebid 3spades with 3 card support so:

1c=1s

2c=2h(invite+)

3s

 

I would use reverse flannery for the 4H, 5s less than invite hands.

1minor=2h!

[bhall]

As the comments above demonstrate, myriad are the ways that partnerships play these continuations. For some, 2♥ is not forcing; for others, it is game forcing. I know of expert partnerships that play 1♣-1♠-2♣-2 Red as forcing on both partners to the level of 2N. And others for whom 2♣ absolutely guarantees six clubs.

 

All of that does not help Michael resolve his problem. Only specific agreements with his partner can minimize future disasters of this kind.

[cnszsun]

Thanks a lot.

I held the north hand.

My partner and i played a lot, but we never deeply discussed such sequence.

As to my understanding, 2♥ is one round forcing.

After 2♥, i have first tough choice. I don't want to emphasize my ♣s again, so i bid 2♠. With 3♠s and a maximum hand, i will bid 3♠, so 2♠ now is either 3♠s with bad hand or 2 cards false preference. Surely it's passable and it also stays low.

After 3♦ from partner, I had to make second choice. I chose 3♥ because i thougth it showed exactly what i had: ♦ unstopped, no good ♠, ♥ support.

I'm glad to see my understanding is close to most posters'.

[jdonn]

Given that they play 2♥ as forcing, the auction was going fine for a while and 2♠ was completely normal, then I do not know where 3♦ or 5♠ came from, south seems to have been drunk.

[pclayton]

2♠ should show Hx or better, but nothing else is satisfactory either, so its fine.

 

3♦ is asking for trouble. This hand isn't slammish opposite a 2♣ rebid.

 

5♠ is from outer space.

[Impact]

2S= simple preference but is NOT the equivalent of a reversion to set a trump suit in the position of 2/1 GF style (after a 2/1). These 2 positions are not analogous - and seems (absent specific partnership agreements) to be the root of a few correspondents' arguments.

 

After responder establishes that opener has at least a doubleton S, 4S appears clearcut. When opener has rebid his C - showing a hand which he is willing to let responder believe is about 6 cards in length or equivalence (albeit there are hands in most standard systems where he does not hold such), it is the height of optimism on the part of responder to look for slam - and worse to proceed uninvited to the 5-level!

 

Hands which fit for slam tend to look like long C with no values there:

eg KQ Kxx AJx xxxxxx or 7C with neither A nor K!! That is against the odds to look for, and the problem is that if he has a slightly less suitable hand but rich in controls he will move - and thereby get you to a hopeless or at least against the odds slam:-

 

eg Kx Kxx Kx ATxxxx 5 controls including Keycards in both your suits, and slam is awful, but if you make any slam-going move, opener legitimately should believe he has gold.

 

regards

[Fluffy]

Those who criticize 2♠ are way off the mark. Just what do they suggest instead?

3♣, but maybe this has something to do with my rebids if I have 3145 or 3136 (2♣ for me, 2♠ for you).

 

Not sure if I make it clear, but I mean that with the hands I bid 2♠ now, I think most of the people here would have already raised to 2♠ the round before.