Superflights#2

[CSGibson]

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sj94ha983d8cakjt4]133|100|Scoring: IMP

1♣-(1♠)-2♦-(P),

?[/hv]

 

2 ♦ is a one round force. If you bid 2♥, it shows extras. Your call?

[rogerclee]

3♣

[dicklont]

Under this agreements you must bid 3♣ now.

 

I don't agree that 2♥ shows extra's. It's lower than the simple rebid 3♣ so it's just the second colour.

[gnasher]

It's unusual, and barely playable, to have 2♥ promise extras. With that agreement, I'd bid 3♣.

[andy_h]

It's unusual, and barely playable, to have 2♥ promise extras. With that agreement, I'd bid 3♣.

Agree

[655321]

Agree with gnasher. But why would you make such an agreement?

[the hog]

Well I suppose you could bid 2S in your system, whatever that means...In mine it woud initially ask for a S stopper, but show a considerably better hand.

3C playing your way, I guess.

[effervesce]

It's unusual, and barely playable, to have 2♥ promise extras.  With that agreement, I'd bid 3♣.

2♥ as showing extras seems a reasonable agreement to me. With both diamonds and hearts and a not-that-strong hand partner could just make a neg X. So unless partner has a decent hand, he won't have heart support anyway. If he does have one, you're not gonna miss a heart fit anyway when partner bids them later after a 3♣ call by you now.

[gnasher]

A natural 2♥ is useful because it reduces the number of hands that have to bid 2♠, 2NT or 3♣. It might not be so bad having to bid 3♣ with J94 A983 8 AKJT4, but it's unappealing to have to bid 3♣ (or whatever other distortion you choose) with J94 AKJ10 8 A9843.

[han]

2♥ extras is unplayable imo and my first call goes to my system designer.

[neilkaz]

2♥ extras is unplayable imo and my first call goes to my system designer.

We agree ! And note how difficult auctions can be where responder bids two that is higher than opener's suit and both hands are near minimal. Many auctions still untangle just fine, but some don't.

 

This is a reason is it nice to toss in a 1♠ overcall over 1♣ (and also 1of anything) with the slightest excuse.

[jdonn]

In my system 2♥ is extras, so is 2♠, 2NT is conventional, and 3♣ is artificial. What do you bid?

[whereagles]

2♥. If we get to a bad contract after this and pard starts that "you didn't have your bid" yadayada, I'll just tell him to shut up and come up with a better system.

[CSGibson]

[snip]

[Finch]

It's unusual, and barely playable, to have 2♥ promise extras.  With that agreement, I'd bid 3♣.

Agree

Agree^2

[Apollo81]

A reverse should not show extras if it is forced (that is responder makes a non-jump 2-level response above 2 of opener's suit). That is standard and is the "right" conclusion on this hand.

 

I would bid 3♣ under the conditions stated.

[skjaeran]

2♥ for me - natural and not showing extras.

Reverse showing extra strength here is unplayable IMO, and I'd not be having such agreements.

[kenrexford]

This is such a bizarre question.

 

First, what are "extras?" Is this "extras" by the virtue of 5431 shape, three full quicks, and five controls? Maybe.

 

Second, as 2♥ showing extras is weird, then presumably the partnership has a plan for what to bid with this pattern and less than "extras." That bid could not possibly be standard, as 2♥ showing extras is not standard. Because that bid is not standard, it must be agreed systemically. However, the agreement is not mentioned. Am I supposed to guess the agreement? Or, is there no agreement other than "2♥ shows extras," which is a dumb agreement for its lack of completion of thought.

 

So, I'll guess. 2♥. I have "extras" because I have five controls and three quicks.

[Halo]

If 2H is extras I would make my system bid.

 

Possibly 2S - half stop + no extras

 

Possibly 2NT - no extras less than a spade stop.

 

Possibly 3C.

 

Don't really understand that 2H extras (opposite a partner who didn't double) is unplayable. Wouldn't be my choice, but not incomprehensible or unworkable.

[benlessard]

♥ for me - natural and not showing extras.

Reverse showing extra strength here is unplayable IMO, and I'd not be having such agreements.

 

Agree 100%

 

You are forced to bid. So if you want to differentiate hands with extras you need a waiting bid somewhere to show the minimum hands. On this sequence 3C to show a minimum hand is simply unplayable.