rebidding problem

[jakob_r]

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=saq982hdaqt873c42]133|100|Scoring: MP

1♦-3♣;

?[/hv]

 

2/1

 

i quickly regretted my choice of opening bid after partner's 3♣ (nat., invite) response.

 

would you have opened 1♦ as well? even if you disagree with 1♦ what would you rebid in this auction?

[mcphee]

3S is next I expect to play at least 5C. I like 1D opening. I am not fond of 3C as an invite hand type but I expect partner to hold 6 + decent C.

[TylerE]

I like 1♠, but I usually do on this kind of thing. Would be nice if I had the agreement that 1S-1N-4m shows this kind of hand.

[peachy]

Some would open 1S but 1D is ok. No regrets. Now, I just describe by bidding 3S. 5C, 5D, and 4S are possible contracts, even slam in a minor.

[han]

I think 1D is normal, now I would bid 3S followed by 4S. 3C is not necessarily bad news.

[whereagles]

I think 3♠ now should show 5 cards. Why? 2 reasons:

 

1. Strong hands with 2 suits usually cannot afford to squander bidding space by jumping around. Thus either 3♣ is a 1-suiter or it shows some sort of diamond fit (unlikely)

 

2. It's way to high a level to try for a 44 side fit.

[kenrexford]

I think 3♠ now should show 5 cards. Why? 2 reasons:

 

1. Strong hands with 2 suits usually cannot afford to squander bidding space by jumping around. Thus either 3♣ is a 1-suiter or it shows some sort of diamond fit (unlikely)

 

2. It's way to high a level to try for a 44 side fit.

Completely opposite for me. I'm not even sure that 3♠ should even promise four spades. It probably has more utility as a notrump probe with club support. What's more likely -- 6-5 in the pointed suits or something with one club honor but a massive heart hole?

 

3♠...4♠ clarifies the pattern, but perhaps that's not right either. It buries the key probable fit -- clubs.

 

I would bid 3♠. If partner bids 3NT, I can now bid 4♣, which should clarify that my spade bid was legitimate. If partner does have three spades, he can bid 4♥ as a choice-of-games bid. When partner does not bid 3NT, he might raise to 4♠ with a three-card suit, in case I have this hand. Or, he might bid 4♣ or 4♦, calls that allow ME to bid 4♥ as choice.

[whereagles]

Completely opposite for me. I'm not even sure that 3♠ should even promise four spades. It probably has more utility as a notrump probe with club support.

Actually, I thought of that and dismissed it. Why? 2 reasons :)

 

1. It is more important for opener to show his shape than to give priority to 3rd order stuff like stoppers.

 

2. One probably need not worry of stoppers here because one hand has opened and the other is quite strong too. Besides, stoppers are only an issue if opener is unbalanced (thus with a possible major suit singleton). But in that case he has 5 diamonds (or a 4441 and thus massive club support) and can quietly rebid 3♦ and wait for developments. Example:

 

1♦ 3♣

3♦ 3♥ <-- now THIS is a stopper because responder shouldn't have 4 hearts.

[kenrexford]

Completely opposite for me. I'm not even sure that 3♠ should even promise four spades. It probably has more utility as a notrump probe with club support.

Actually, I thought of that and dismissed it. Why? 2 reasons :)

 

1. It is more important for opener to show his shape than to give priority to 3rd order stuff like stoppers.

 

2. One probably need not worry of stoppers here because one hand has opened and the other is quite strong too. Besides, stoppers are only an issue if opener is unbalanced (thus with a possible major suit singleton). But in that case he has 5 diamonds (or a 4441 and thus massive club support) and can quietly rebid 3♦ and wait for developments. Example:

 

1♦ 3♣

3♦ 3♥ <-- now THIS is a stopper because responder shouldn't have 4 hearts.

I hear the rebuttal and dismiss it for two reasons:

 

1. I have no clue what the heck you are talking about with these ideas. How is xxx a stopper, for instance? In what world do opening-strength hands opposite invitational hands negate the need for stoppers unless one hand has a stiff?

 

2. I think it would be more important to show stoppers than shape when the only relevamnt shape is wild-ass shape that can be shown later and when Responder has shown a very tight hand as to pattern (clubs, thank you).

[H_KARLUK]

1 ♦ ok, 3 ♣ unfamiliar, 3♠ now.

[mike777]

I think 1D is normal, now I would bid 3S followed by 4S. 3C is not necessarily bad news.

ditto

[the hog]

Completely opposite for me. I'm not even sure that 3♠ should even promise four spades. It probably has more utility as a notrump probe with club support.

Actually, I thought of that and dismissed it. Why? 2 reasons B)

 

1. It is more important for opener to show his shape than to give priority to 3rd order stuff like stoppers.

 

2. One probably need not worry of stoppers here because one hand has opened and the other is quite strong too. Besides, stoppers are only an issue if opener is unbalanced (thus with a possible major suit singleton). But in that case he has 5 diamonds (or a 4441 and thus massive club support) and can quietly rebid 3♦ and wait for developments. Example:

 

1♦ 3♣

3♦ 3♥ <-- now THIS is a stopper because responder shouldn't have 4 hearts.

Disagree Nuno. One of the few times i agree with ken. Why? How likely is it that you have a 6-5 shape as opposed to be looking for 3NT. So 3S would be stopper showing imo.

[benlessard]

3S followed by 4C describe my hand nicely but seems to bury spades. + partner might see 3S as an advanced cue-bid.

 

It might easily get messy.

 

3S-----3Nt

4C-----4S (will be a cue and not delayed support)

 

3S-----4D

Will also screw us a bit. (unless you are 100% sure that 5C is to play)

 

 

Probably

 

3S followed by 4S and partner can bid 4Nt as COG if he hold 2D.

 

he might raise to 4♠ with a three-card suit

partner will not raise you often because the 4-3 Fit is ruffing with the wrong hand.

[kfay]

I honestly don't see why 3♣ has made me regret 1♦. I'm happy partner has clubs.

 

I'm just going to bid spades a couple times now. This all seems completely normal.

 

If partner insists on clubs at this point well... my hand is pretty darn good for clubs too.

[P_Marlowe]

3S.

 

What is your problem, you have discovered a fit.

Now go looking, if you have enough for the 6 level.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Cascade]

I think 3♠ now should show 5 cards. Why? 2 reasons:

 

1. Strong hands with 2 suits usually cannot afford to squander bidding space by jumping around. Thus either 3♣ is a 1-suiter or it shows some sort of diamond fit (unlikely)

 

2. It's way to high a level to try for a 44 side fit.

Completely opposite for me. I'm not even sure that 3♠ should even promise four spades. It probably has more utility as a notrump probe with club support. What's more likely -- 6-5 in the pointed suits or something with one club honor but a massive heart hole?

 

3♠...4♠ clarifies the pattern, but perhaps that's not right either. It buries the key probable fit -- clubs.

 

I would bid 3♠. If partner bids 3NT, I can now bid 4♣, which should clarify that my spade bid was legitimate. If partner does have three spades, he can bid 4♥ as a choice-of-games bid. When partner does not bid 3NT, he might raise to 4♠ with a three-card suit, in case I have this hand. Or, he might bid 4♣ or 4♦, calls that allow ME to bid 4♥ as choice.

I agree with the problems of bidding 3♠ then 4♠ - it will be very difficult for partner to imagine that you are offering 5♣.

[jdonn]

3S followed by 4C describe my hand nicely but seems to bury spades. + partner might see 3S as an advanced cue-bid.

I would hope not. Advanced cuebids went out the door with dial-up internet access. And for good reason too.

[quiddity]

I'm surprised everyone is so bullish about this hand. The opps have a 10+ card heart fit with half the points, yet LHO couldn't find a bid over 1♦ and RHO couldn't bid over 3♣. I expect RHO has the hearts and LHO has the points, with length in spades and diamonds. If I bid on, I expect to play in a 5-2 spade fit or 6-2 diamond fit most of the time, with a minus score as a likely result if partner has the expected hand (a decent 6 card club suit and 3 hearts to an honor or two).

[whereagles]

Sorry all, I took 3♣ as a STRONG jump shift. It's actually invitational.

 

In this case, I'm not sure what I'd do.. I might just PASS because I don't like the looks of this :)

[jakob_r]

thanks a lot all for your thoughts. much appreciated!

 

here are both hands and how the auction continued:

 

 

[hv=w=saq982hdaqt873c42&e=skjhj54dk4cqt9653]266|100|1♦-3♣

3♠-4♦

4♥-4♠

5♣-5♦

a.p.[/hv]

 

our agreement is that the 3♣ bid must contain a decent suit. this ugly collection does not qualify imo. it turned out that that the distribution of opposing ♥s and strength was exactly as quiditty said and we only survived because of pd's great fillers. here's the full hand:

 

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=skjhj54dk4cqt9653&w=st43hkqtdj62cak87&e=s765ha987632d95cj&s=saq982hdaqt873c42]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

[Hanoi5]

I would bid 3♠ followed by 4♠. Partner should get my shape and either pass or bid 5♣ or 5♦. He also might bid 6 though I probably should help him, I mean bid it myself.

 

Edit: After watching the hands I do not think my partner has his bid. 1♦-1NT-2♠-3♣-3♠-4♠ (being MP's)

[benlessard]

I would hope not. Advanced cuebids went out the door with dial-up internet access. And for good reason too.

ACB are still around for sure. Im not too fond of them but this is a perfect case for them.

 

You ask for a stopper if partner show 1 (by bidding 3Nt) you give fit and partner know youve made a cuebid. If partner doesnt have the stoppers you know all his points are working all you ll do fine.

 

I think 3C is terrible since my suit is crap facing a stiff.

 

Speaking of crap that is what i think of "2C GF over 1D".

[mike777]

thanks a lot all for your thoughts. much appreciated!

 

here are both hands and how the auction continued:

 

 

[hv=w=saq982hdaqt873c42&e=skjhj54dk4cqt9653]266|100|1♦-3♣

3♠-4♦

4♥-4♠

5♣-5♦

a.p.[/hv]

 

our agreement is that the 3♣ bid must contain a decent suit. this ugly collection does not qualify imo. it turned out that that the distribution of opposing ♥s and strength was exactly as quiditty said and we only survived because of pd's great fillers. here's the full hand:

 

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=skjhj54dk4cqt9653&w=st43hkqtdj62cak87&e=s765ha987632d95cj&s=saq982hdaqt873c42]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

lol

 

 

YOu need to alert 3c........3c shows about 20 hcp not 10...lol......

[jakob_r]

lol

 

 

YOu need to alert 3c........3c shows about 20 hcp not 10...lol......

umm no. did you read the op?

[jdonn]

I agree that the club suit wasn't nearly good enough for 3♣, or to put it another way the hand wasn't nearly oriented enough toward clubs. The rest of the auction seems very good though by both players.

 

Edit: As I look back maybe not. 4♥ seems like a cuebid and 5♣ seems natural. Which way was west bidding? If bidding naturally it should be 4♠ instead of 4♥, or if cuebidding it should be 5♦ instead of 5♣.