Invite hand at IMPs

[awm]

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sxhaj9daxxcaxxxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

After two passes, you open 1♣ on this hand. Partner bids 1♠ and you rebid 2♣.

 

At this point partner invites, either by bidding 2NT or 3♣. What do you think about this? Do you accept both invites? Neither? One and not the other?

[655321]

Accept any invite, not close for me.

 

This is a very good hand, better than many 1♣-2♣.

[kenrexford]

It seems that I want partner to have the club KQ and the spade Ace or a red King, or at least one top club and two other cards. I don't think he needs all of that to invite. For instance, I think he can invite with something like ♠Axxx ♥xxx ♦xxx ♣Qxx. I would.

 

So, which is the stronger invite? I think 2NT is. So, I'd accept 2NT.

[inquiry]

I clearly accept the 3♣ game try. I have 31 ZAR points, and once partner supports clubs, superfit comes into play (read ZAR stuff if your interested). Partner needs around 24 ZAR points here, so we have 31+24 = 55. Then add in the fit points which puts us in 5♣/6♣ range.

 

Over 2NT, it is a little more dicey. If parnter lacks club support we are high enough, maybe too high as a matter of fact. Partner with a fitting club and near opener may have jump to 3NT rather than bid 2NT anyway (we are vul, this is imps). I hate to miss a vulnerable game, but I think I would correct 2NT to 3♣, as a two way shot. If he bids 3NT over that I would be delighted, if he passes, I will accept that decision happily too.

[the hog]

Accept 3C, but I would not accept 2NT. Agree with Ben's comments.

[rogerclee]

I think I would accept either. It is too likely that we get a favorable lead and have the time to set up clubs.

[benlessard]

Some like to play that 3C can be a weakish courtesy raise while 2Nt show a better hand with club tolerance. They tend to pass 2C with pretty good hands without clubs tolerance. I dont really like that style.

 

My 3C are sound raises, i dont pass 2C with a stiff and 10-11 pts. and my 2Nt tend to show a stiff clubs with 10-12 pts or a club fit & stoppers that need protection. Because i have the 2 red ace partner can have a fit and Kx or Kxx in a red suit but he is still way more likely to have a stiff clubs and extras values. So under these condition pulling 2Nt to 3C make no sense. 3nt might need the clubs to split 3-3 so 3Nt doesnt seems like a good bet. However if clubs dont break 2Nt is also in Jeopardy so trying for a 25% 3Nt might not be so bad after all. But i still think passing 2Nt is best.

 

As for 3C its clear cut accept i wish i could find a way to let partner play the hand but i cant so i bid 3Nt.

[Gerben42]

I only accept 2NT and not 3♣. The latter is not really invitational.

[jdonn]

I only accept 2NT and not 3♣. The latter is not really invitational.

I think we have a much better shot at 3NT opposite an almost-invitational hand with club support than an invitational hand with no club fit.

[andy_h]

Accept 3C, but not 2NT

[Gerben42]

I think we have a much better shot at 3NT opposite an almost-invitational hand with club support than an invitational hand with no club fit.

 

Shouldn't a hand with a singleton ♣ bid something else than 2NT? Perhaps... 2♦? Only the rare case of an invitation with 4441 comes to mind, but shouldn't partner respond 1♦ with that?

[whereagles]

Accept both. This is totally obvious over 3♣. Not so over 2NT but it's easy to accept if you reason like this:

 

"Pard hasn't got 5 spades nor 4 hearts, so he must have at least a doubleton club. Since he's bid 2NT, with my red aces there's a good chance we stop the reds well enough before clubs are setup."

[kenrexford]

Warning! Breakdown occurring!

 

I think the thread is breaking down because people have different, unspoken assumptions as to the meaning of Responder's bids and are making calls upon differing assumptions without stating them. I think (hope) that's what is happening.

 

My take is that 2NT is a power raise of clubs, 3♣ closer to a courtesy raise of clubs, and 2♦ covering any strongish hands that do not fit either. It sounds to me like this is a minority view, with many people using 3♣ as a power club raise, 2NT as a power-no-clubs bid, and no "near courtesy" club raise.

[Guest Jlall]

I would easily accept both, but I agree with kenrexford that 3C is much more of a courtesy kind of raise and 2N is much more of a power kind of raise. I think with this hand you should accept the courtesy raise though, I mean with Kxx of clubs and the SA you make 3N on 2-2 clubs and he can easily have more than that even for a courtesy raise. I don't really understand accept over 3C and not 2N though, I guess that shows an opposite interpretation than I have.

[Guest Jlall]

I think we have a much better shot at 3NT opposite an almost-invitational hand with club support than an invitational hand with no club fit.

 

Shouldn't a hand with a singleton ♣ bid something else than 2NT? Perhaps... 2♦? Only the rare case of an invitation with 4441 comes to mind, but shouldn't partner respond 1♦ with that?

4-4-4-1 would at least respond 1H not 1S.

[ASkolnick]

3C Yes, 2N no.

 

If your tricks aren't coming from clubs, you don't have enough. I don't believe 2N is a "power" raise to clubs, if anything it denies strength in clubs.

[awm]

Seems like there is some interesting split on the meanings of various calls here. In particular:

 

(1) Should responder bid 2♦ with shapes like 5242 and 5341? Is this forcing by a passed hand? Is it necessarily natural? Does it matter if opener tends to raise spades with 3-card support?

 

(2) Should responder ever bid 2NT with 3♣, or does this call basically deny three clubs?

 

(3) How light can a 3♣ raise be? Is it just a "courtesy raise" or a more or less a real invite (subject to a mild upgrade for a real club fit)?

 

These issues appear to be more of a concern than really evaluating this hand, although there is some disagreement about how good the hand is opposite a non fit. It appears that most people want to be in game opposite an invite with 3-card support for clubs, want to avoid game opposite singleton club, and feel like game is shaky but probably worth bidding opposite doubleton club...

 

Funny that there seems to be no standard here. My partner and I had different interpretations and this caused us to "miss" a reasonable game bid at the other table (which happened not to make, but had chances).

[mikeh]

I read the posts so far with a mounting sense of disbelief, in terms of the meanings ascribed to the choices of 2N and 3♣

 

2N as a power raise in clubs?

 

Well, if we play that 2♦ over 2♣ is an artificial force, then I can see it, but otherwise, count me out. I concede that partner will always hold 2 clubs for 2N but I completely fail to understand why he promises 3+

 

BTW, Adam, I also fail to see why he couldn't have 3 clubs: there will often be hands on which 3N is unbiddable after 3♣, and where notrump should be played by responder.

 

I like 2♦ here, even by a ph, as artificial, but it isn't standard, as far as I know, so we are in an area of standard bidding that is ill-defined: how good a hand is shown by 3♣?

 

I think it is clear that 2N is a strong statement that responder has 10-11 hcp with at least a semblance of a stopper in the 3 side suits, while 3♣ is a slightly wider range (lower low end, same high end) and denies stoppers in all 3 side suits (or maybe denies both reds, leaving his bid suit of spades to look after itself).

 

In practice, I think that the two calls ask opener slightly different questions.

 

2N asks a more purely quantitative question, with particular emphasis, when opener lacks the 14-15 count he might have, on the trick-taking potential of clubs.

 

3♣ suggests that partner be optimistic about his club suit but be worried about stoppers in the reds.

 

I would have passed 2N here because my club suit really isn't robust, and it is too much to expect partner to have adequate help in the side suits AND good clubs. 3♣ otoh would make me slightly more optimistic about the trick taking power of my hand.. I'd still not be thinking that 3N was a favourite (picture Q10x opposite... we can easily lose 2 club tricks opposite that.. he was hoping for AJxxxx)

[kenrexford]

I would easily accept both, but I agree with kenrexford that 3C is much more of a courtesy kind of raise and 2N is much more of a power kind of raise. I think with this hand you should accept the courtesy raise though, I mean with Kxx of clubs and the SA you make 3N on 2-2 clubs and he can easily have more than that even for a courtesy raise. I don't really understand accept over 3C and not 2N though, I guess that shows an opposite interpretation than I have.

Yeah, I suppose it is IMPs. The concern was some mess of junk with the spade Ace and club Queen. If I had even AJ9xxx in clubs, that would be clear enough. Ace-empty is ugly.

[kenrexford]

I read the posts so far with a mounting sense of disbelief, in terms of the meanings ascribed to the choices of 2N and 3♣

 

2N as a power raise in clubs?

 

Well, if we play that 2♦ over 2♣ is an artificial force, then I can see it, but otherwise, count me out.

I think you just answered your question...

 

2NT = Power club raise

3♣ = courtesy club raise

2♦ = PUNT

[Guest Jlall]

I would easily accept both, but I agree with kenrexford that 3C is much more of a courtesy kind of raise and 2N is much more of a power kind of raise. I think with this hand you should accept the courtesy raise though, I mean with Kxx of clubs and the SA you make 3N on 2-2 clubs and he can easily have more than that even for a courtesy raise. I don't really understand accept over 3C and not 2N though, I guess that shows an opposite interpretation than I have.

Yeah, I suppose it is IMPs. The concern was some mess of junk with the spade Ace and club Queen. If I had even AJ9xxx in clubs, that would be clear enough. Ace-empty is ugly.

I always bid game what can I say :)

[kenrexford]

I would easily accept both, but I agree with kenrexford that 3C is much more of a courtesy kind of raise and 2N is much more of a power kind of raise. I think with this hand you should accept the courtesy raise though, I mean with Kxx of clubs and the SA you make 3N on 2-2 clubs and he can easily have more than that even for a courtesy raise. I don't really understand accept over 3C and not 2N though, I guess that shows an opposite interpretation than I have.

Yeah, I suppose it is IMPs. The concern was some mess of junk with the spade Ace and club Queen. If I had even AJ9xxx in clubs, that would be clear enough. Ace-empty is ugly.

I always bid game what can I say :)

"3♣"

"Sir, what does 3♣ show?"

"That's a courtesy raise. He might have barely a heartbeat, keeping the auction open in case I have the absolute perfecto hand."

"Is it forcing?"

"Yes, for me."

 

LOL

[awm]

Partner held:

 

♠KJxx

♥Qxx

♦Jxx

♣KJ9

 

At my table, partner selected 2NT and I passed. My reasoning was much like that expressed by others who would accept a 3♣ invite but reject 2NT -- I feared that opposite a doubleton club (or even singleton!) the odds of running my suit would not be so good.

 

Game is just okay on this hand; clubs are not guaranteed to play for six tricks and even if they do there is no sure ninth trick (but many chances).

 

The defense at my table started with a high diamond which partner ducked, and continued a second high diamond (perhaps not best) to dummy's ace. Partner proceeded to play clubs, which were QTx offside (so no way to pick up the suit). LHO won the third round and played a heart, which partner ducked to RHO's king. RHO now played a spade; partner has lost three tricks at this point (one diamond duck, one club, one heart) and needs to guess the spades correctly to make three. He guessed wrong, fortunately we were only in 2NT so we scored up +120.

 

Our opponents bid game and went one down. Of course, this is luck -- if clubs had behaved we would probably have lost six imps instead of winning five.

[skjaeran]

To me 2♦ as a conventional tool here is standard.

Thus 2NT is strongly invitational with at least club tolerance, whild 3♣ is more of a courtesy raise. I'd rebid 3NT over both though.

[kenrexford]

To me 2♦ as a conventional tool here is standard.

Thus 2NT is strongly invitational with at least club tolerance, whild 3♣ is more of a courtesy raise. I'd rebid 3NT over both though.

So, you employ the most intelligent structure (the one I use, of course :P ), but you are also a lunatic like Justin? LOL