Good hand, but how good, exactly?

[matmat]

EDIT: I suck. the 2D in the poll is actually supposed to be 2C. so just pretend it's 2C (unless some mod sees this and edits it, thanks in advance)

 

you hold:

 

xxx KQJx x AKJxx

 

you open 1♣, p responds 1♠. opps remain silent

 

(i expect lots of WTP replies :o)

[655321]

2♠

 

The hand is close to being too good for 2♠, but other bids are not satisfactory.

If the majors were reversed, and partner bid 1♥ I might rebid 1♠, planning to bid 2♥ next. Here, though, I don't want to reverse then support spades, and rebidding 1NT will not show a stronger hand than the immediate 2♠.

[mike777]

2s, no problem yet.

[jdonn]

An unhappy 2♠.

[Echognome]

I join the unhappy camp with 2♠.

[matmat]

i actually think it's really close between 2s and 2h. With an understanding p i'd probably 2h, which is what i voted :rolleyes:

 

at the table this hand jumped to 3s, p barreled into 6s holding an 18 count with 4 spades and proceeded to go down a couple.

 

the postmortem consisted of the holder of this hand for chastising partner for insisting on a spade slam holding only 4 cards in the suit.

[pclayton]

2S. An old fashioned 1H opening or 2C rebid might work better this time.

[655321]

at the table this hand jumped to 3s, p barreled into 6s holding an 18 count with 4 spades and proceeded to go down a couple.

 

the postmortem consisted of the holder of this hand for chastising partner for insisting on a spade slam holding only 4 cards in the suit.

3♠ is a joke.

[Cascade]

at the table this hand jumped to 3s, p barreled into 6s holding an 18 count with 4 spades and proceeded to go down a couple.

 

the postmortem consisted of the holder of this hand for chastising partner for insisting on a spade slam holding only 4 cards in the suit.

3♠ is a joke.

Not as big a joke as the chastising :-)

[Guest Jlall]

2S wtp

[han]

I don't understand all that unhappiness either, this is a clear call.

[jdonn]

I don't understand all that unhappiness either, this is a clear call.

It's not that I'm unhappy because I feel it's a close decision, since I don't. I'm unhappy that what is clearly the best option is still a bad option, just not nearly as bad as the others.

[jtfanclub]

I would bid 2♠, but I have partners who would bid 2♣, and I don't have a problem with that. 2♣ will often have 5 cards, and God knows the suit is strong enough.

[sceptic]

a happy 2 spades wtp

[benlessard]

Happy 2S bid here. In MP im one of the few player who doesnt mind to bid 3S with only 3cards support. Just make sure your partner agree and is on the same wavelenght because its quite uncommon. This hand is a king short for a 3S with 3 cards.

[jdonn]

Happy 2S bid here. In MP im one of the few player who doesnt mind to bid 3S with only 3cards support. Just make sure your partner agree and is on the same wavelenght because its quite uncommon. This hand is a king short for a 3S with 3 cards.

If you had a king more then how is 3♠ possibly better than 2♥ followed by 3♠?

[benlessard]

If you had a king more then how is 3♠ possibly better than 2♥ followed by 3♠?

agree

 

When a non-Gf reverse is possible then of course the reverse is better but with

 

Kxx

x

AKJxx

KQJx

 

1D---1S

???

 

 

Some might consider this hand strong enough for 3C others will bid an heavy 2C but in MP i like my odds in 3S.

[jdeegan]

:P 2♥

I feel seriouly out of step on this one, but why is this so? Obviously there is no good bid here, but TWO things are wrong with 2♠ - trumps too weak and the hand too strong. Only ONE thing is wrong with 2♥ - the hand is too weak even though it is not game forcing.

 

I like the chunky 4-5 hand with all 14 HCP working like crazy plus a useful stiff. Somehow I can envision old-time players like Oswald Jacoby or Terence Reese liking the round suited 4-5 hand much better than today's panel evidently does.

[jdeegan]

:P 2♥

I feel seriouly out of step on this one, but why is this so? Obviously there is no good bid here, but TWO things are wrong with 2♠ - trumps too weak and the hand too strong. Only ONE thing is wrong with 2♥ - the hand is too weak even though it is not game forcing.

 

I like the chunky 4-5 hand with all 14 HCP working like crazy plus a useful stiff. Somehow I can envision old-time players like Oswald Jacoby or Terence Reese liking the round suited 4-5 hand much better than today's panel.

[Gerben42]

Add me to the 2♥-camp. Partner will usually apply One-Two-That'll Do and we'll be making as many as 2♠+3 if we bid that. Since my hand has improved, I'll honor it and claim it's worth 16+ and reverse.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

it is either 2S or 2C, depending on

partnership agreement.

 

For me the hand is nearly perfect for

a 2S bid, ... I raise rarely with only 3

card support.

The only thing missing is a spade honor,

but on the other hand, one does have

some HCP compensation.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[the hog]

2S and certainly not unhappy about it.

[gwnn]

I'm the biggest overbidder of the world but I want to bid 2♥ here. I learned that 2♠ with 3 is only good on minimum hands - I know it's not std, but that's what I'm used to and all.

[Guest Jlall]

I'm the biggest overbidder of the world but I want to bid 2♥ here. I learned that 2♠ with 3 is only good on minimum hands - I know it's not std, but that's what I'm used to and all.

This is a minimum hand as in..not close to reverse strength

[pclayton]

As I said, I'm in the 2♠ camp, but this could be an outright silly contract. Imagine the opponent's drawing our trump then cashing a few diamonds when we have a 5-3 or 5-4 club fit.