Another Jump Shift Question

[Califdude]

You hold:

S xxx

H KJ9xx

D Axx

C Jx

 

Partner opens 1C, you respond 1H, partner now bids 2S. What do you do?

 

What would you expect partner's hand to look like, strength and shape?

 

Thanks for replies.

[1eyedjack]

I expect partner to have a hand with 4+ Spades, longer Clubs, and sufficient strength to game force opposite a 1-suit response to 1C.

 

I have a bit in reserve for the 1H response, but not a huge amount more, in what is beginning to look like a bit of a misfit, without ruffing potential in the short trump suit unless partner happens to have some Heart support. So while I am happy to co-operate as far as game, I am not very excited.

 

I would bid 3D (4th suit). If partner has something like Qx in Diamonds I would rather that NT were played by him. This also gives him the chance to show secondary Heart support.

 

Incidentally, the documentation on Standard English shows that 2S bid just shows sufficient values for a reverse without GF, but I think that this is neither optimal nor a majority view. Happy to be overruled on that.

[kenrexford]

3♣.

 

I'd expect partner's hand to look like 18+ HCP with 4♠/5+♣. Some 18 HCP hands with 4-5 shape will not be quite good enough. 2♠ is essentially GF.

 

I'd bid 3♣ because it sets the tone right, IMO, with the least expenditure of space. We have plenty of time to consider 4♥ if I bid 3♣, and we have plenty of time to consider 3NT as well. Any other response jams us a little too much, and 2NT seems like a bad move with the weaker hand and no particular reason to want a diamond lead into your hand.

[pclayton]

I think I prefer 2N. It allows pard a lot of room to clarify his hand quickly (which he's probably dying to do) and show long clubs, a 3rd heart or a 5th spade.

 

While we might be wrong-siding the NT, we give pard a little room.

 

3♣ is pointless (what does it accomplish?). 3♦ makes life difficult for pard holding a strong 4=2=1=6.

 

Ken: 2♠ is essentially GF.

Essentially? Of course its GF.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

5-4, game force.

 

3D, FSF.

 

The alternative is 2NT.

 

They will tell you, that 3D is natural,

but having a bid which buys time is

useful, say, you dont have the Ace

of diamonds.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS: Having read the argument in favour of

2NT, I agree, partner will have trouble with

6-4, if I bid 3D.

[TimG]

Essentially? Of course its GF.

On the forums, people who judge to pass during a forcing auction are often right.

[TimG]

I would bid 3D (4th suit). If partner has something like Qx in Diamonds I would rather that NT were played by him. This also gives him the chance to show secondary Heart support.

Opener will never bid 3N with ♦Qx if your 3♦ is artificial. And, 2N and 3♣ also allow partner to show delayed support of hearts. I generally prefer preference with a doubleton, but think that Phil's 2N is practical this time.

[655321]

2NT

[mike777]

2nt, no problem yet.

 

I got a balanced hand with scattered hcp, less than 4s, less than 6h, less than 3clubs.

[H_KARLUK]

[hv=s=sxxxhkj9xxdaxxcjx]133|100|

 

[/hv]

 

I rebid 3♦

 

5♣ and 4+♠ 17up. For sure principally i expect my partner's general strength in shown suits.

[han]

2S is GF.

[1eyedjack]

I would bid 3D (4th suit).  If partner has something like Qx in Diamonds I would rather that NT were played by him.  This also gives him the chance to show secondary Heart support.

Opener will never bid 3N with ♦Qx if your 3♦ is artificial. And, 2N and 3♣ also allow partner to show delayed support of hearts. I generally prefer preference with a doubleton, but think that Phil's 2N is practical this time.

Opener will opposite me. Responder would not be bidding 3D with Diamonds wide open with a marked D lead if angling for 3N. If opener reckons he has 9 in tops in NT without any D help from responder he will be bidding 3N next time with or without a 3D bid from responder.

[Codo]

Of course 2 Spade is gameforcing.

 

I bid 3 ♦ followed by 3 NT after most bids.

But if partner bids 3 HEart, I am happy to play at least game in hearts.

And if he rebids 3 NT, I am really happy that this is played from his side.

[mike777]

wow and I thought 2nt was easy but.......lots of other responses.

[TimG]

I would bid 3D (4th suit).  If partner has something like Qx in Diamonds I would rather that NT were played by him.  This also gives him the chance to show secondary Heart support.

Opener will never bid 3N with ♦Qx if your 3♦ is artificial. And, 2N and 3♣ also allow partner to show delayed support of hearts. I generally prefer preference with a doubleton, but think that Phil's 2N is practical this time.

Opener will opposite me. Responder would not be bidding 3D with Diamonds wide open with a marked D lead if angling for 3N. If opener reckons he has 9 in tops in NT without any D help from responder he will be bidding 3N next time with or without a 3D bid from responder.

If, when he holds Axx KJxxx xxx Jx, responder does not bid 3♦ because he doesn't have any help there, then 3♦ isn't really artificial (4th suit).

[1eyedjack]

I don't believe that it is either original or unique for a bid in the 4th suit to imply a little something in the suit, but without sufficient to commit to NT in the absence of some assistance in the suit from partner.

 

As for other comments, I take the point that 2N leaves opener an easier time if he has 4-6 distribution. I am unconvinced that 3C leaves him any better placed than 3D, however.

[Finch]

The easy part:

 

Partner has 5+ clubs, 4+ spades (with longer clubs than spades) and fewer than 4 hearts. He is unlikely to be exactly 4=0=4=5 simply because he may want to investigate a diamond fit as well, and 2S will make that very difficult.

 

2S is unconditionally game forcing. Quite how strong it is depends on what you need as a minimum to respond to 1C, but the strength is such that he expects to miss game if you were to pass 1S with a very weak hand and no real fit.

 

If he is 4=2=2=5, or 4=1=3=5 he will likely have at least 19 HCP, probably more. 3-card heart support, a 5th spade or a 6th club will lower the HCP requirements as game is more likely opposite a minimum.

 

The difficult part:

As you have seen from the responses, it's not obvious what to do next on your hand, which has an embarrassment of riches. The following are all vaguely sensible options:

 

2NT = natural, and you do indeed have a diamond stop

3C = preference to clubs. You would prefer to have three of them, but you do have an honour and it may help partner describe his hand further

3D = fourth suit forcing. This has to imply something in diamonds, because otherwise you would bid 3C, or rebid hearts, or raise spades.

3H = shows a fifth heart. Personally I don't like this, as it's too high a call, and makes it hard for partner to do something more sensible over it, and he might think we have 6 of them.

 

Other calls are less sensible.

 

Personally I would bid 3C, because the diamond stop is the ace. With KJx of diamonds instead, I would bid 2NT.

[vuroth]

Ok. I'm a little bit confused. People are talking about 3♦ as being fsf. Is/should 3♦ still be an artificial game force, when we're already in a GF auction?

 

(I really know very little about 2/1, but is 1♥ 2♣ 2♠ 3♦ also artificial fsf?)

 

Personally I would bid 3C, because the diamond stop is the ace. With KJx of diamonds instead, I would bid 2NT.

 

Is that because you're trying to "right-side" a NT contract, making sure the tenace/whatever is led up to?

 

More generally, do both 2NT and 3♦ both promise a diamond stopper? I would have thought that if 3♦ was fsf, it would not necessarily promise a stopper.

 

Fwiw, my vote was going to be for 2NT - showing a stopper, and communicating that based on my shape and partner's known shape, we might be best suited for NT.

 

V

[jdonn]

I would bid 2NT as being the cheapest reasonable option. 3♣ also makes some sense to me, and I can definitely understand the desire to not declare notrump.

 

3♦ makes no sense at all to me. It just endplays partner in the bidding.

[Finch]

Ok. I'm a little bit confused. People are talking about 3♦ as being fsf. Is/should 3♦ still be an artificial game force, when we're already in a GF auction?

 

(I really know very little about 2/1, but is 1♥ 2♣ 2♠ 3♦ also artificial fsf?)

Welcome to the joys of an international forum!

 

There are two difference approaches to bids of the fourth suit in an auction which is already game forcing.

 

The first (typically "European") approach plays that a bid of the fourth suit is still an artificial bid, saying "I don't know what else to bid, so I'm just making a noise". Playing this way, it makes other calls more meaningful.

 

The second (typically "North American") approach plays that a bid of the fourth suit is natural, if the auction is already game forced. Playing that method, it's usual to give simple preference to opener's suit on any hand which can't do anything more constructive.

 

Personally I would bid 3C, because the diamond stop is the ace. With KJx of diamonds instead, I would bid 2NT.

 

Is that because you're trying to "right-side" a NT contract, making sure the tenace/whatever is led up to?

 

Yes.

 

More generally, do both 2NT and 3♦ both promise a diamond stopper?  I would have thought that if 3♦ was fsf, it would not necessarily promise a stopper.

 

Fwiw, my vote was going to be for 2NT - showing a stopper, and communicating that based on my shape and partner's known shape, we might be best suited for NT. 

 

V

 

If 3♦ is fsf, it does not necessarily promise a stopper, I agree. I was suggesting that it is likely to have something, even if only length, in diamonds, simply because if you are bidding fourth suit you don't have 3-card club support, you don't have a heart suit you want to rebid and you don't have spade support... so what is left?

 

 

To make things slightly more subtle, the order of the suits tends to be quite important in these auctions. If the auction starts 1D - 1H - 3C (say), then bidding a 4th suit 3S will endplay partner much of the time. Better to give preference to diamonds on the balanced-ish/neutral type hands and let partner show 3-card heart support, or let partner ask for a spade stop with 4th suit himself. But if the auction starts 1H - 1S - 3C, you have 3D available as a very cheap bid to find out more about partner's hand, and you can reserve other calls to make a definite statement about your hand.

 

[WARNING: BIZARRE BIDDING PHILOSOPHY FOLLOWS

With a sort of kenrexford hat on, you could go even further, and play that after opener's jump shift rebid, step 1 by responder is the neutral "I don't know what to bid" bid, and the fourth suit bid is a positive bid in whatever step 1 would have been. This strikes me as quite a good method, but I don't actually play it (these auctions don't come up enough).]

[vuroth]

With a sort of kenrexford hat on...

3 days late for scary costumes. :) :D :D

[1eyedjack]

3♦ makes no sense at all to me. It just endplays partner in the bidding.

Would you ever bid 3♦? And if so, what would it show?

[jdonn]

3♦ makes no sense at all to me. It just endplays partner in the bidding.

Would you ever bid 3♦? And if so, what would it show?

For me 3♦ would be a natural bid, showing 5-5 with good suits. I will say that it takes up so much room from opener, I would prefer a system that never bids 3♦ to one that bids it on this hand.

[RichMor]

[WARNING: BIZARRE BIDDING PHILOSOPHY FOLLOWS

With a sort of kenrexford hat on, you could go even further, and play that after opener's jump shift rebid, step 1 by responder is the neutral "I don't know what to bid" bid, and the fourth suit bid is a positive bid in whatever step 1 would have been. This strikes me as quite a good method, but I don't actually play it (these auctions don't come up enough).]

Not so bizarre methinks. This is similar to the BWS default treatment after opener's reverse. Responder makes the cheapest rebid in the 4th suit or NT with a hand lacking direction. Any other rebid by responder is natural and forcing.

 

After opener's jump shift rebid, responder can bid 2NT as a punt - not showing or denying anything in Diamonds. That makes responder's 3♦ rebid natural in the sense of showing some Diamond values but not promising real length.

[kenrexford]

3♦ makes no sense at all to me. It just endplays partner in the bidding.

Would you ever bid 3♦? And if so, what would it show?

For me 3♦ would be a natural bid, showing 5-5 with good suits. I will say that it takes up so much room from opener, I would prefer a system that never bids 3♦ to one that bids it on this hand.

I agree. However, I'd rather have 3♦ be a "super-acceptance" of clubs, actually.