another mundane bidding problem

[goobers]

x Ax KQJTxxx AKx

 

You open 1D, partner of course responds 1S, your bid?

 

To me, the options are 3D (preferred) or 3C, are there any other options? Is 3C even considered by people here?

[jillybean]

..

[the hog]

I agree that this hand is a bit good for 3D, but that is what I bid. I absolutely loath manufactured bids like 3C with a passion.

Fwiw we have a 2NT gadget here to show various hand types including this one, but that is not for this forum.

[Echognome]

To me it's a pretty clear 3♦ bid. It's ok to be good for our bids sometimes.

[jtfanclub]

x Ax KQJTxxx AKx

 

You open 1D, partner of course responds 1S, your bid?

 

To me, the options are 3D (preferred) or 3C, are there any other options? Is 3C even considered by people here?

3 diamonds in IMPs, 3NT in MPs. We're going to play it in 3NT in Match Points, unless partner has a heck of a hand.

[TimG]

To me it's a pretty clear 3♦ bid.  It's ok to be good for our bids sometimes.

A slow 3♦ might be more descriptive. :P

[pclayton]

3♦ wins the post-mortem, but many 5 counts give us 3N. I have a 4 loser hand and I'm not doing less than 3♣.

 

3N is an option too.

[kenrexford]

Once the diamond Ace is knocked out, you have nine rippers. So, to make 3NT, you need partner to have a heart card or length and reasonable spades.

 

If you bid 3♦, I don't think partner will bid 3NT enough.

 

If you bid 3♣, partner will get us to 3NT the right number of times.

 

If he bids something unfortunate, like a minor at the four-level, that seems OK.

 

So, 3♣ looks right.

 

This is a key concept for B/I -- a jump shift by Opener (to 3♣ especially) might be a "convenient" jump shift, because a jump rebid is not forcing. The classic auctions are 1♦-1M-3♣ and 1♥-1♠-3♣. The "diamonds" exception is 1♥-1♠-3♦.

 

So, after 1♥-1♠, Opener might jump shift into his "better minor" when he has a really big hand.

[jdonn]

3♦ wins the post-mortem

Not with me. If partner has xxxx xxxx x QJxx they have to lead or switch to hearts to prevent 5♦ from making. Without an artificial 2NT or some such thing, 3♣ is clearly best to me. If forced to not make that bid I would rebid 3NT. If forced to rebid diamonds I would bid 5♦. If forced to not do that either I would go back and open 2♣. 3♦ is for people who live and die by high card points. This isn't just a maximum for 3♦, or even barely too good, it is WAY too good. Make one of the diamonds a spade and it would still be too good.

 

To me it's a pretty clear 3♦ bid.  It's ok to be good for our bids sometimes.

Calling this good for 3♦ is like calling a 20 count good for opening 1NT.

[mike777]

x Ax KQJTxxx AKx

 

You open 1D, partner of course responds 1S, your bid?

 

To me, the options are 3D (preferred) or 3C, are there any other options? Is 3C even considered by people here?

Yes, I bid an ugly 3clubs. Sure this may cause problems.

[jtfanclub]

If you bid 3♦, I don't think partner will bid 3NT enough.

I don't recall EVER passing 1m-1M-3m in IMPs. If it's not game forcing, it may as well be. Who wants to play in an 100% 3 diamond bid when you could play in a 40% 3NT?

 

Not true in MPs, obviously.

[the hog]

As many of the US posters here respond to 1m on absolute s***, I would like to ask how often you are going to get to a 3NT contract and go quite a few off. eg opposite

QJxxx xx xx Jxxx or worse as some have posted in the past. This won't do well on a H lead eg 3-4 off vul!

 

The tendency to respond on very weak hands and the inclination to bid 3NT on this hand do not appear to mesh well at all.

[Echognome]

Not with me. If partner has xxxx xxxx x QJxx they have to lead or switch to hearts to prevent 5♦ from making.

And exactly how are you getting to 5♦ and not the failing 3NT?

 

To me it's a pretty clear 3♦ bid.  It's ok to be good for our bids sometimes.

Calling this good for 3♦ is like calling a 20 count good for opening 1NT.

I guess we differ on what a 3♦ rebid looks like. I was always taught it was 16-18 with a good 6 card suit. I did mention I thought we were good for it, but apparently we differ in how good. But I'm listening!

[jdonn]

When I mention super light hands opposite that might make 5♦ or 3NT I am not trying to suggest I would reach any or most of those contract*, but only trying to make the point that if game makes opposite hands as light as that, imagine how many games make opposite hands on which partner would actually respond to the opening bid but would pass 3♦. I agree with you in principle that I don't mind being at the top end of my bid, something which seems to bother many people. But calling this hand 17 is ridiculous. It's an absolutely amazing 17 with a 7th diamond. It's worth at least 20 if you must assign it a value. It even has the ten of diamonds in case of a bad break. Would you not pass a 3♦ rebid with KQTxx xxxx x xxx? Hands with about 7 or less and a stiff diamond are pretty much automatic passes of 3♦

 

*Although if partner did for some reason respond on that hand (which oops is a 1♥ not 1♠ response), he would raise the 3♣ rebid and we would get to 5♦ after all.

[Guest Jlall]

3D is a HUGEEEEEEEEEEEEE underbid. I would bid 3C.

[helene_t]

If this hand is too good for 3♦, the systematic rebid is 3NT. I don't think 3NT should show a balanced hand half a point stronger than 2NT, even acknowledging that this is B/I forum. But 3NT pretty much asks for a heart lead.

 

Some would rebid 2N. But then you'd like a gadget for partner to ask if you happen to have a singleton spade. Some fabricate a 3♣ bid. I think that's a very bad idea. Fabricating a minor suit is sometimes the lesser evil, but a jump takes up a lot of bidding space and really needs to be more specific. I'd rather fabricate 2♣, then.

 

In any case you''d like a gadget to see if partner has some help in hearts and/or the ace of diamonds. And also if he has ♣Q you may belong in 5♦. This is overwhelming. I think you'll have to guess, eventually. There's no way of assuring that you reach the right contract.

 

Count me in for 3♦, second choice 3N. I wonder if p has the guts to bid 3N without a club guard. He might be more scared about clubs than hearts because your LHO could have bid 1♥ if he had hearts, but could still have a threatening club suit just short of a 2♣ overcall.

[Echognome]

But calling this hand 17 is ridiculous. It's an absolutely amazing 17 with a 7th diamond. It's worth at least 20 if you must assign it a value. It even has the ten of diamonds in case of a bad break. Would you not pass a 3♦ rebid with KQTxx xxxx x xxx? Hands with about 7 or less and a stiff diamond are pretty much automatic passes of 3♦

I agree with you that the diamond texture is great and can play opposite a stiff.

 

I would say that a typical 3m rebid would be a suit of about AQTxxx.

 

By the way, I wasn't calling this hand 17, but rather a good 18. ;)

 

But I do take your point!!

[Gerben42]

This is a huge weak point of the system unfortunately. 3♣ seems to be the least of evils.

[P_Marlowe]

3D

 

In case partner passes

playing IMP: partner knows, that we are playing IMPs

playing MP: missing some 50% games is not the end of

the world

 

There was a similar discussion a while ago,

there are solutions out there, of course having

some side effects, but playing standard you

either bid 3D (a slight underbid) or 3C (a slight

overbid).

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[ochinko]

I recently played with a guy that bid

 

1♠ - 2♣

2♥ with

 

AK108763

AJ3

6

J5

 

We lost 8 IMPS because we didn't reach a grand. I thought inventing a suit without necessity was a weird blunder, now I understand it's a whole school of thought.

 

FSF is one thing, but here I can't see the method behind the madness. Why would you distort your hand by bidding 3♣? 7:3 is not exactly like 6:4, or is it? It's not like 3♣ is forcing. You can't be sure you'd be given an opportunity to steer the contract from your 6 cards towards your 9 cards fit.

 

If you really feel 3♦ is an underbid, bid 3NT like helene_t suggests.

 

Edit: Sorry, I haven't realized 3♣ was a jump. There is some merit in it, as 3NT from partner would be properly sided.

[Edmunte1]

1. About hand evaluation: this is a 4 loser hand, and we should be in game after partner's response.

2. Playing natural we have the only game focing bid below 3nt to show this 3♣. If we play this as conventional with a 3♦ relay for description is perfect, or if partner can understand that many times we can have some strong hands with solid/semisolid diamond or a very strong hand 3 card fit, and act properly is OK. If that's not possible, then i'll bid 3NT

3. Of course there some other systems (like strong club systems), methods (like playing 2♥ with more meanings), that require learning/discussing to improve this. But this is not the object of this forum.

[han]

I don't bid 3NT without solid diamonds so that's out. I'm in the 3C camp, I admit I've been down in 3NT in the past.

[goobers]

Okay so basically what happened was that my friend rebid 3N, which I thought was a bad idea basically because I understand that you're supposed to have a running suit for this bid, and that bad things are going to happen if they lead any major (hey, we've all responded with absolute garbage before...)

 

I suggested 3C if he wanted to force, I thought 3D was a reasonable bid (being aware that I am an absolute absolute maximum), but I see now that a lot of people consider this hand good enough to force.

 

Thanks all