Balance decision

[cnszsun]

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=sakxxhaqxxdk1085cx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

1♦-ps-ps-?[/hv]

 

Would you bid 1nt (a little underbid?) or double first then convert partner's 2♣ to 2nt or just pass 2c?

[hrothgar]

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=sakxxhaqxxdk1085cx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

1♦-ps-ps-?[/hv]

 

Would you bid 1nt (a little underbid?) or double first then convert partner's 2♣ to 2nt or just pass 2c?

I'm tempted to bid 1♠

[Guest Jlall]

I'd X, if partner bid 2C I would bid 2N. This is not even wrong on values and keeps both major suits in play.

[whereagles]

obvious dbl ^^

[Halo]

I have to bid, and to bid 1NT would mean changing my system.

 

Double and if partner get's to bid 2C I'll bid 2NT.

[foo]

I'd X, if partner bid 2C I would bid 2N. This is not even wrong on values and keeps both major suits in play.

agreed.

[han]

There are many upsides to doubling (right on values, both majors) and the only downside is that we are not quite balanced. It seems clear.

[nige1]

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=sakxxhaqxxdk1085cx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

1♦-ps-ps-?[/hv]

 

Would you bid 1nt (a little underbid?) or double first then convert partner's 2♣ to 2nt or just pass 2c?

IMO 1N = 10, P = 9. X = 8.

Even in the protective seat, we play this as 15-18 flat with a stop.

I don't like X but if I did and partner bid 2 ♣ then IMO

- P = 10, 2 ♦ = 4, 2 ♥ =3. 2 N =2, 2 ♠ = 1

I dislike 2N no matter what system we play.

[kenrexford]

At the table, I would double and then bid 2NT.

 

Question, though. I frankly do not know what 1♦-P-P-X-P-2♣-P-2♦ shows, or for that matter 1♣-P-P-X-P-1♦-P-2♣.

 

In thinking through options, including the fact that pass-out seat has tools like jumps and even 2NT to show various strong hands, it seems that it would be nice for these auctions to show 4441's with Opener's minor.

 

However, if I were to use that technique, I then think that this specific sequence of 1♦-P-P-X-P-2♣-P-2♦ is unique, in that the correction is a bid of Opener's minor. It seems more utilitarian to have ELC bids all the way up:

 

1♣-P-P-X-P-1♦-P-1♥ = 4414 (roughly...)

1♣-P-P-X-P-1♥-P-1♠ = 4144

1♣-P-P-X-P-1♠-P-2♣ = 1444

 

1♦-P-P-X-P-1♥-P-1♠ = 4144

1♦-P-P-X-P-1♠-P-2♣ = 1444

1♦-P-P-X-P-2♣-P-2♦ = 4441

 

This would seem to solve a world of hurt whenever pass-out seat has 4441 with any short suit (or 5440 with a long minor, or 5431's especially if long in Opener's minor, etc.). I also suspect that this ELC meaning would be far more useful than whatever the ELC call would otherwise mean, and that this gain would outweigh the loss of requiring some other action on the other hands (especially as I have no idea what these calls show, either).

 

That would solve this problem.

[helene_t]

Actually I was about to write that I would start with a double and bid 2♦ over 2♣, allowing p to bid a 3-card M which might be easier than 2N. Then I realized that although the short hand would have to ruff diamonds in a 4-3 fit M, the opening lead would come thourgh my ♦K so I might as well bid 2N to rightside the contract.

 

Seriously, I think X followed by 2♦ is useful in its normal meaning: 4423 or maybe 4432, typically without a diamond stop.

[skjaeran]

I'd X, if partner bid 2C I would bid 2N. This is not even wrong on values and keeps both major suits in play.

agreed.

Ditto

[neilkaz]

I'd X, if partner bid 2C I would bid 2N. This is not even wrong on values and keeps both major suits in play.

agreed.

Ditto .. neilkaz ..

[jdonn]

Easy double then 2NT to me. I don't see the point to bidding a major since double gets us there anyway when partner has 4 and not when he has 3, which seems perfect.

 

Double then pass 2♣ is nullo.

[BebopKid]

I double

[pclayton]

Double here too. 1N has too many flaws and pass is just too deep, although it might work.

[Fluffy]

I seem to play different reopening structures than most again :/.

 

I have no good bid for this hand, I could lie with 1♥, 1♠, double or direct 2NT (17-19). But if I doubled I would pass 2♣ because 2NT is 20-22.

 

I like 1♥ the most.

[foo]

I seem to play different reopening structures than most again :/.

 

I have no good bid for this hand, I could lie with 1♥, 1♠, double or direct 2N (17-19). But if I doubled I would pass 2♣ because 2N is 20-22.

 

I like 1♥ the most.

If you believe Mike Lawrence in _Balancing_, then the direct 2N balance is stronger than the balancing X followed by 2N rebid.

 

You appear to play them the opposite way from the book.

[han]

What does that mean, "believe Mike Lawrence"?

 

Gonzalo, it seems that you play the balancing 1NT overcall as up to 16 pts, right? So then that would be the straightforward call in my opinion. This is a little heavier than what is standard for balancing over 1m in the US.

[Fluffy]

What does that mean, "believe Mike Lawrence"?

 

Gonzalo, it seems that you play the balancing 1NT overcall as up to 16 pts, right? So then that would be the straightforward call in my opinion. This is a little heavier than what is standard for balancing over 1m in the US.

No, when LHO opens a minor it is X + 1NT = 13-16, but there is no way I will bid 1NT here because I would raise partner's major instead.

 

1NT is played as 9-12

 

 

 

After 1M-pass-pass the X+1NT just doesn't exist so 1NT is 10-14 and direct 2NT is 15-18.

[han]

What does that mean, "believe Mike Lawrence"?

 

Gonzalo, it seems that you play the balancing 1NT overcall as up to 16 pts, right? So then that would be the straightforward call in my opinion. This is a little heavier than what is standard for balancing over 1m in the US.

No, when LHO opens a minor it is X + 1NT = 13-16, but there is no way I will bid 1NT here because I would raise partner's major instead.

 

1NT is played as 9-12

 

 

 

After 1M-pass-pass the X+1NT just doesn't exist so 1NT is 10-14 and direct 2NT is 15-18.

I don't understand Fluffy. Say you have some 4-2-4-3 or 4-3-4-2 15-count. The systemic way to bid this hand is to double and then bid 1NT over the expected 1H, yet you have no way to show your hand if partner bids 2C? How is this playable?

[foo]

What does that mean, "believe Mike Lawrence"?

 

Gonzalo, it seems that you play the balancing 1NT overcall as up to 16 pts, right? So then that would be the straightforward call in my opinion. This is a little heavier than what is standard for balancing over 1m in the US.

Not everyone plays the various balancing NT bids as Mike Lawrence suggests in _Balancing_.

 

foo-pa-pa-1N= 11-14 or as much as 16 if foo was a Major

foo-pa-pa-2N= Big NT

foo-pa-pa-X followed by NT if pd takes a bid= Medium NT.

 

If you play Crowhurst AKA "range finder Stayman" in balancing auctions (for NA readers, see Barry Rigel's book on Precision for a write up on this method), then your balancing 1N can always be 11-16. Thus making X, then 2N= 17-18; and a balancing 2N= 19-20.

[ArtK78]

Double, and bid 2NT over a 2C response.

 

This is standard. 1NT in balancing seat is typically 11-14, and double followed by a minimum NT rebid is typically 15-18.

 

The short club is a flaw, but you can't have everything (I had a spade mixed in with my clubs).

 

The question was raised "What is the meaning of double followed by 2D?" For most players, this is an easy question to answer - it is the replacement for a strong cue bid. Clearly, it shows a strong hand. In this day and age, it does not create a game force (it is not THAT strong). But the 2D bidder is going to show a very strong hand that is not appropriate for any other bid - either too strong for a jump balance (1D-P-P-2H, for example) or the hand cannot be accurately described by any no trump bid (by the way, 2NT in balancing seat is typically 19-21 HCP). It could be a super strong balanced hand without a diamond stopper, for example.

 

Those few posters who stated that a 1NT balance shows 15-18 or that the 2NT rebid over partner's 2C response to your balancing double would show 20-22 are out of the mainstream. That doesn't mean that they are wrong, just that their methods are not common.

[kenrexford]

Yeah, the more I think about it, the more I like ELC's after 1minor-P-P-X. That being said, I'm not sure that this appraoch would cover a hand this strong anyway. So, I'm still stuck with 2NT no matter what.

[Fluffy]

What does that mean, "believe Mike Lawrence"?

 

Gonzalo, it seems that you play the balancing 1NT overcall as up to 16 pts, right? So then that would be the straightforward call in my opinion. This is a little heavier than what is standard for balancing over 1m in the US.

No, when LHO opens a minor it is X + 1NT = 13-16, but there is no way I will bid 1NT here because I would raise partner's major instead.

 

1NT is played as 9-12

 

 

 

After 1M-pass-pass the X+1NT just doesn't exist so 1NT is 10-14 and direct 2NT is 15-18.

I don't understand Fluffy. Say you have some 4-2-4-3 or 4-3-4-2 15-count. The systemic way to bid this hand is to double and then bid 1NT over the expected 1H, yet you have no way to show your hand if partner bids 2C? How is this playable?

Nothing is perfect,you are suposed to pass 2♣ with those hands.