Jump rebid of 2NT

[PedroG]

Hi All,

 

 

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=sat92h54d987ck652&s=s4hak9dakt653ca43]133|200|Scoring: IMP

1♦ - 1♠

3♦ - All Pass[/hv]

 

Yesterday I was given this nice hand, and when the came back to me I though I had a easy rebid of 3♦, my partner complained I should have bid 2NT to show my strength...

 

I though that 3♦ would show also strength and a unbalanced hand, and that 2NT would always promise a balanced hand beside the point count.

 

To the issue of the balanced hand, she replied to me that ♠ was his suit so I could think of my hand has balanced.... :( :blink:

 

ty for all

Pedro Gil

[whereagles]

Well... playing a standard system, the 2NT rebid shows a balanced 18-19 count and 3♦ shows about 15-17 with 6 diamonds. Your hand looks pretty much more like a 3♦ rebid than 2NT :( Your pard has an absolutely TRIVIAL bid of 3NT after 3♦, so he's by far the one to blame.

 

Incidently, it is true your hand is a bit heavy for a 3♦ rebid, but, unless your system has a strong 2 bid available, you're stuck with bidding the hand 1♦-xxx-3♦. Either that or you have to "invent" a 3-card suit, that is, bid 1♦-xxx-3♣. This latter "solution" is very common in the US, but almost inexistant elsewhere.

[Flameous]

Both bids are acceptable in my books. With good side controls, 2NT looks somewhat promising as it's not a big danger if p happens to blast 4♠ with six cards.

I don't think 3NT is absolutely trivial as whereagles said but atleast I'd end up bidding it. I wonder if 3♥ here denies or shows a stopper? I don't think it would lose to ask... only that with 6-5 majors need to jump but is propably less of a problem than hands like these.

[matmat]

two calls come to mind here -- 3NT, showing running diamonds and outside stoppers, or, if i want to emphasize the hand for slam, I'd reverse into 2♥

[Cascade]

two calls come to mind here -- 3NT, showing running diamonds and outside stoppers, or, if i want to emphasize the hand for slam, I'd reverse into 2♥

I hate the reverse into a three-card major.

 

Standard is:

 

1♦ 1♠

 

2♥ 16/17+ with four hearts and five diamonds

 

2NT 18-19 balanced

 

3♦ 16-18 hcp with six diamonds

 

3NT too strong for 3♦.

 

Maybe 3NT is not standard but we have to make something else up if we don't play this way.

 

With 18 hcp we are right at the maximum for 3♦. In this hand we have great honour cards - all aces and kings. This suggests upgrading. On the other hand we have only a singleton in partner's suit which suggests downgrading.

 

I might be more inclined to upgrade but would understand someone bidding 3♦.

[vuroth]

Well... playing a standard system, the 2NT rebid shows a balanced 18-19 count and 3♦ shows about 15-17 with 6 diamonds.

As low as 15 points? That sounds kind of low, considering partner only promised me 6....

[helene_t]

I prefer 2N or 3N myself, but I don't think 3♦ or even 2♥ as Mat suggests are wrong. The hand is probably too strong for 3♦ but the alternatives have flaws as well, unless you have specific agreements about how to handle 18+ one-suited hands.

[whereagles]

As low as 15 points? That sounds kind of low, considering partner only promised me 6....

Openings have 3 levels of strength: min 11-14, med 15-17, max 18-21

 

If you're going to start pushing the med upwards, you'll end up with a very, very wide min. You can do that, of course, but I prefer bringing the med range down. I do the same with reverses.

[kenrexford]

For me, 3♣ seems obvious.

[jtfanclub]

I would never bid 2NT with this hand. This hand is much stronger than a 19 count 2-3-4-4.

 

I could be talked into 3NT or 2♥, but I don't see anything wrong with 3♦. I consider 3♦ to be 'forcing unless fooling', and with 7 hcp, partner was not fooling with his 1♠ call.

[jdonn]

It's a maximum but perhaps reasonable 3♦ bid, and likewise partner has a maximum but acceptable pass over that. I have some sympathy.

 

If south does decide to upgrade then 3♣ seems obvious.

[whereagles]

If south does decide to upgrade then 3♣ seems obvious.

Obvious and wrong. But I don't think I'll ever convince ye yanks of the need to stick a strong 2 somewhere :P

[jdonn]

If south does decide to upgrade then 3♣ seems obvious.

Obvious and wrong. But I don't think I'll ever convince ye yanks of the need to stick a strong 2 somewhere :P

Thank you for your repetition of your earlier opinion, but this time stated as fact.

[whereagles]

any time, dude

[pclayton]

I think the hand is just too good for 3♦ with an 18 count, 8(!) controls and an AKT suit. K and R is well over 20.

 

I prefer 2♥. It shows "where I live" and allows pard to efficiently rebid 2♠. With the actual hand, pard should give you a direct 3♦ raise and you can place it in 3N.

 

I'm not wild about 2N with this pattern and a hand this sharp.

[kenrexford]

I don't get the 2♥ bidders.

 

Things that can go wrong:

 

1. Partner bids 3♥ with 5♠/4♥. Now, everything I do is surely a slam try with hreats agreed.

 

2. Partner bids 4♥. Worse yet!

 

3. Partner bids 2NT as a weak relay. This is not hopeless, unless partner wanted to show a crap hand with hearts. When I bid anything below 4♥, he will bid 4♥. Delayed pain.

 

If y'all have a method to unwind a reverse into a major as contrived, please share. I'd imagine that any unwind techniques must of necessity deprive the partnership of descriptive calls that are quite valuable.

[pclayton]

I don't get the 2♥ bidders.

 

Things that can go wrong:

1. Partner bids 3♥ with 5♠/4♥.  Now, everything I do is surely a slam try with hearts agreed.

 

3N is a slam try? 4♦ is a slam try?

 

2. Partner bids 4♥.  Worse yet!

 

Worse? Pard should have 5-5 in the majors for this call. Tricky to get to 6♥ when pard bids 3N over your 3♣ Ken.

 

3. Partner bids 2NT as a weak relay.  This is not hopeless, unless partner wanted to show a crap hand with hearts.  When I bid anything below 4♥, he will bid 4♥.  Delayed pain.

 

So he bids 3♥ over 3♣. Not the end of the world IMO. Given that you are calling this a GF by rebidding 3♣, how is that better? I'll play a 4-3 with 4♥'s opposite my monkey's 5 count, and you'll play 3N with flimsy black suit stoppers.

 

By the way, what would you rebid with: ♠x ♥AKx ♦AKTxxxx ♣Ax?

[ArtK78]

IMO, 3NT should show running diamonds and is meant as a gambling type bid - typically a solid 6 or 7 card suit and a card or two on the outside.

 

I will mention a treatment that a minority of players have adopted that is perfect for this hand - a jump rebid of a minor suit as forcing. So, this hand would be a forcing 3♦ bid.

 

Obviously, if you play the jump rebid as forcing, you have to find some other call if you have the traditional invitational jump rebid. But that should not be too difficult. For example, if the diamond suit on this hand were KQTxxx instead of AKTxxx you could rebid 2♣ if you had to find a call. Partner would be aware of the possibility that 2♣ could be shorter than 4 cards.

[kenrexford]

I don't get the 2♥ bidders.

 

Things that can go wrong:

1. Partner bids 3♥ with 5♠/4♥.  Now, everything I do is surely a slam try with hearts agreed.

 

3N is a slam try? 4♦ is a slam try?

 

2. Partner bids 4♥.  Worse yet!

 

Worse? Pard should have 5-5 in the majors for this call. Tricky to get to 6♥ when pard bids 3N over your 3♣ Ken.

 

3. Partner bids 2NT as a weak relay.  This is not hopeless, unless partner wanted to show a crap hand with hearts.  When I bid anything below 4♥, he will bid 4♥.  Delayed pain.

 

So he bids 3♥ over 3♣. Not the end of the world IMO. Given that you are calling this a GF by rebidding 3♣, how is that better? I'll play a 4-3 with 4♥'s opposite my monkey's 5 count, and you'll play 3N with flimsy black suit stoppers.

 

By the way, what would you rebid with: ♠x ♥AKx ♦AKTxxxx ♣Ax?

1. After 1♦-1♠-2♥-3♥, yes, everything is a slam try. Partner's 3♥ call showed GF and slam interest, with hearts. So, 3NT is serious, and 4♦ is a non-serious cue.

 

2. If the sequence is 1♦-P-1♠-P-2♥-P-4♥, why should partner have 5-5 in the majors? You just showed four hearts, so he only needs four hearts. In fact, he might even have three of them and want to try the Moysian. 4♥ just shows a non-slammish heart acceptance, I would think.

 

3. 1♦-1♠-2♥-2NT-3♥ could be something like 5314 and bust. Now, I like Moysian fits, but 3-3 is asking a bit.

 

4. ♠x ♥AKx ♦AKTxxxx ♣Ax? 1♦-1♠-3♣; I might bid 3NT with that hand, though. If a suit is fake, and lower-ranking, the degree of "fakeness" is irrelevant.

[Echognome]

1. After 1♦-1♠-2♥-3♥, yes, everything is a slam try.  Partner's 3♥ call showed GF and slam interest, with hearts.  So, 3NT is serious, and 4♦ is a non-serious cue.

Is 3♠ a cuebid agreeing ♥ for you? Or could it be my example from the other thread of a 3=3=6=1?

[jdonn]

I really don't understand 2♥. If you are calling this a game force then I don't see the gain over 3♣, merely added risk that partner raises and insists on hearts. If you are not calling it a game force then 3♦ is easy, as the only reason to avoid that bid is you consider the hand too good.

[cherdano]

I really don't understand 2♥. If you are calling this a game force then I don't see the gain over 3♣, merely added risk that partner raises and insists on hearts. If you are not calling it a game force then 3♦ is easy, as the only reason to avoid that bid is you consider the hand too good.

2♥ saves spaces. If partner bids 2N, then depending on agreements you might be able to show your 6th diamond with a GF by bidding 3♦. If he bids 2♠, then you can show a GF with a 3-suiter by bidding 3♣.

I am not sure whether I would bid 2♥ or 3♣, but I certainly see the advantages of 2♥ (in particular since this hand has such great diamond slam potential -- 2♥ might find a diamond slam after 2H 2S 3C 3D 4D when the other auction would go 3C 3D 3H 3N).

[pclayton]

If you are calling this a game force then I don't see the gain over 3♣, merely added risk that partner raises and insists on hearts.

 

If you are not calling it a game force then 3♦ is easy, as the only reason to avoid that bid is you consider the hand too good.

That's part of the issue.

 

Is there a range (along with a hand type) that is:

 

--too good for a jump rebid, yet

 

--not enough for a GF?

[jdonn]

Is there a range (along with a hand type) that is:

 

--too good for a jump rebid, yet

 

--not enough for a GF?

No

[jtfanclub]

Is there a range (along with a hand type) that is:

 

--too good for a jump rebid, yet

 

--not enough for a GF?

No

It's a maximum but perhaps reasonable 3♦ bid, and likewise partner has a maximum but acceptable pass over that. I have some sympathy.

 

That doesn't seem to fit.

 

My choices are to force to game across a misfit 0 count or watch partner pass with a balanced 7 count? Considing the ridiculousness of some of the "tennis" game tries and the need to differentiate between, say, a 'good' nine and a 'bad' nine, how can we have a 7 point spread between forcing game and a strong invite?