lots of clubs

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

ok, maybe I was wrong with my claim, that Acol uses a

3NT is gampling opening since 1960.

... would not be the first, and will certainly not be the

last.

 

But at least I found a reference, which mentiones a Acol

variantion, which uses a gampling 3NT opener.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acol

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[bhall]

Give partner two Ks outside of ♣ and game is unlikely. The problem arises when he has somewhat more, but ♣ shortness. Or somewhat less, but the ♣K. The opponents' silence suggests that they won't find 5 tricks in spades - maybe partner is 10xxx Qxxxx Jxx K, as an extreme example.

 

Some partnerships play that the 2♦ reverse is totally artificial and not game forcing. With a sufficiently comprehensive set of responses and rebids, this can include the single-suit hands with too many tricks for the jump rebid, and still cater to the natural reverse. However, I don't think anyone is using 2♥ as an artificial force after 1♦-1♠; some do play that 1♦-1M-3♣ is only forcing to 4m, and may be artificial.

 

With no such agreements in place, 3♣ is appealing, but what will you rebid over partner's likely continuations?

[skjaeran]

I'd rebid 3♣ as others mention too.

Sure this hand has more potential than any 3♣ rebid I've seen, but all other alternatives has greater flaws than 3♣. The closest other possibility is 3NT. 4♣ would imply a ♥ fit to me (4♥-6+♣ no void).

[whereagles]

Another hand that's good publicity for strong 2s/polish club/etc.

 

Anyway, having bid opened 1♣, I'll now follow up with 3NT and hope for the best. This is because I think 3♣ is an underbid.

[DYates]

Q1: 3♣ seems fine. But as an underbid, I suspect it did not work on the actual deal. 3NT is the slight overbid.

 

Comments about oppts not in the bidding are misplaced. RHO could easily been shut out by a light 1H response. Or just not have a bid. Why can’t hands be:

 

LHO: Axx,xxx,Qxxxx, Kx (1D is hopeless)

Pard: Q10xx, Q10xxx, Jxx, x (“Technically” light, but even all the non-experts respond 1H. Perhaps even without that powerful J♦)

RHO: KJxx, KJxx, K10x, xx

 

Partners floats 3C and that is the last making spot. 3NT has no play on the routine diamond lead.

 

I dislike a 3NT rebid because (1) no spade stop. Likely not a problem for 3NT as partner probably has some length/strength there and the oppts have not bid them. However, if partner holding the Q-S drives to slam expecting a spade card you can be down off the top in a silly slam (2) the suit texture is not good enough. I like solid or at least AKJ10xxx. You may need to play the suit for no losers, and AQJ(8) opposite one is not good % for running tricks. Again, partner may put you in the wrong slam thinking your KC response shows: A, AKQ.... (6NT thinking clubs are running, instead of 6C where you can ditch the losing spade or diamond on K-H before losing the trump king).

 

There is some risk of missing game with 3♣. (Say Pard = Q10xx, Jxxxx, Kxx, x). If my partner did choose 3NT, it won’t be a “bad” action because of his two outside aces. (3NT with Jx, A, KQ, AQJ10xxxx is a really bad bid). On any given day - without methods - either bid could work. In the end, the choice of 3C or 3NT may well depend on the type of partner you are playing with. 3N with conservative, 3C with aggressive. Speaking of methods. . .

 

Q2: 2♦. I like the opening 2♦ as intermediate (any hand which would rebid 2♦ after 1♦-1x / similar to a Fantoni-Nunes 2D but a bit heavier. Plus my 2D is <4S). This means 2♦ after 1m-1x; is Gazzilli-ish and F1. Opener can now describe good 3-card major raises, strong 1-suiters, 5/4m reverses, 6C/5x and a good hand etc. Even huge raises with 4-M support and void. Best is you don’t lose 3-card M support with SJR/SJS hands. Playing this way a direct 3♣rebid is lighter. Maybe: Axx, Ax, xx, AQJ10xx. (and 1D-1x; 3C is also shape & texture 13-16 NF) I played that way for years and wonder no one else ever thought of it. (Esp since Wk 2D is as useless as Flannery). You need to work out good responses to 2D opening and follow-ups after 2D rebid, also after 1D-1NT, but it works great and is legal under ACBL GCC. (If you are worried the folks at Asinine Convention and Bidding Limitations might be a problem where you play). Obviously one needs an established, motivated partnership.

 

I don’t know if that meets your definition of “natural”. My method works with either “natural openings” or within a strong club system.

[fullers]

I tried all the makeable bids, 1♠ , 1N , 2♣ ...7N ;) . I found no bid better than 3♣. So it is 3♣ .

[Edmunte1]

I tried all the makeable bids, 1♠ , 1N , 2♣ ...7N ;) . I found no bid better than 3♣. So it is 3♣ .

Agree, as long as your system doesn't allow you to make a better descriptive bid (showing a 18+ one suiter hand), 3♣ is the smallest lie, and keeps all roads opened.