comments please

[jillybean]

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=saqjt52hadt987ct9&s=sk4hkqt732da52cq5]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

West North East South

 

 -     -     -     1♥

 Pass  1♠    2♣    2♥

 Pass  4♠    Pass  Pass

 Pass  

[brianshark]

I disagree with north's 4♠ bid. It seems a little unilateral both in terms of level and strain. 3♠ shows your hand I think... it's highly invitational with a good 6+ ♠ suit. Partner can choose between pass, 3NT, 4♠ or even 4♥.

[P_Marlowe]

Bidding was reasonable.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[kenberg]

I guess it's easy to arrange the cards so that 4H makes and 4S doesn't, and this is with S providing good spade cards, so one could think a bit about the wisdom of 4S.

 

I have found that when holding a stiff A or K in partner's suit, with an auction such as this, I might want to consider putting him in four of his major.

 

It's not clear to me what I would do here.

[ASkolnick]

I'm not quite sure what the problem is here:

 

You have 25 HCP and an 8 card spade fit, I would be in game.

 

To play:

 

I assume the play went 2 clubs followed by a diamond shift.

Win AD, cross to AH, cash 2 trumps ending with K and hope that either hearts split 3-3 or the person with less than 3 trumps also has the heart shortness.

 

Sure, in hearts you sort of need the same kind of breaks, except you need to follow to one extra round of spades.

 

So, I have no problem playing in about a 45-50% game.

[brianshark]

The fact that the final spot is a reasonable one has nothing to do with discussion on whether the auction was a good one.

[kenrexford]

Responder's hand could easily be worthless in a 4♥ contract.

 

Slam is remote after the 2-only-hearts rebid. Could be, but remote.

 

Responder can handle a "0-card fit" in spades reasonably well.

 

3♠...4♠ is a slam try and too rich, IMO.

 

Thus, I see no problem with Responder's calls. In fact, anything other than the exact sequence chosen would be wrong, IMO.

 

I also see no problem with Opener's sequence, either. I might chuckle approvingly if South had opened 1NT, but 1♥...2♥ seems appropriate.

[cherdano]

Ken, 3♠ would be non-forcing and invitational for the rest of us.

[neilkaz]

I don't find anything wrong with the bidding here. N could be a bit cautious and just invite with 3♠ but S is going to accept and the contract is the same. That being said, I'd probably have bid the direct 4♠ that N did.

 

.. neilkaz ..

[kenrexford]

Ken, 3♠ would be non-forcing and invitational for the rest of us.

If you play that 1♥-P-2♠ is natural with either a weak hand or an intermediate/constructive hand, then 1♥-1♠-2♥-2♠ shows the other, and 1♥-1♠-2♥-3♠ is GF.

[jdonn]

Ken, 3♠ would be non-forcing and invitational for the rest of us.

If you play that 1♥-P-2♠ is natural with either a weak hand or an intermediate/constructive hand, then 1♥-1♠-2♥-2♠ shows the other, and 1♥-1♠-2♥-3♠ is GF.

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts then everyone would have a merry Christmas.

[jillybean]

I was south and knew I'd have a problem rebidding this, I like rexfords 1nt! :huh:

4♠ took me by surprise but worked well, I would have bid 3♦ then my ♠ again whats wrong with this?

[kenrexford]

Ken, 3♠ would be non-forcing and invitational for the rest of us.

If you play that 1♥-P-2♠ is natural with either a weak hand or an intermediate/constructive hand, then 1♥-1♠-2♥-2♠ shows the other, and 1♥-1♠-2♥-3♠ is GF.

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts then everyone would have a merry Christmas.

That's true, but you do have to assume something, don't you? I assumed that a 3♠ rebid would be forcing. If 3♠ is not forcing, what the heck do you bid with the big hands but uncertainty as to strain? If you say, NMF or something, then you are assuming NMF.

[jdonn]

I don't decry the practice of assuming. I decry the practice of making unlikely assumptions instead of likely assumptions.

[kenrexford]

I don't decry the practice of assuming. I decry the practice of making unlikely assumptions instead of likely assumptions.

Wow. I cannot think of anyone with whom I play where 3♠ would not be forcing. It might exist in some strange world somewhere, I suppose. LOL

[cherdano]

I don't decry the practice of assuming. I decry the practice of making unlikely assumptions instead of likely assumptions.

Wow. I cannot think of anyone with whom I play where 3♠ would not be forcing. It might exist in some strange world somewhere, I suppose. LOL

What world do you live in, Ken?

[brianshark]

I was south and knew I'd have a problem rebidding this, I like rexfords 1nt!  :)

4♠ took me by surprise but worked well, I would have bid 3♦ then my ♠ again whats wrong with this?

In my opinion:

 

3♦ is GF and I think this is not quite worth GF and invite (but most others think you should GF so this is no big deal)

 

3♦ tends to show a ♦ stop and asks about a ♣ stop. You're ♦ stop is a tad flimsy, if pard has a small doubleton or singleton in ♦s, he will not worry about the suit. And maybe those tricks that they can cash and you can't ruff are tricks 4 and 5 for the defence.

 

3♦ tends to show a 5-4 hand, so with a good doubleton in your suit, pard is still unlikely to play you for 6 and will rarely raise to 4♠, especially if he holds a ♣ stop. And 4♠ is often the correct spot.

 

I think 3♠ solves all the above, it shows 6 good spades, can be passed, leaves 3N, 4♥ and 4♠ open and brings pard attention that there may be a weakness in both minors.

[Finch]

I was south and knew I'd have a problem rebidding this, I like rexfords 1nt! :P

4♠ took me by surprise but worked well, I would have bid 3♦ then my ♠ again whats wrong with this?

There's nothing wrong with the theory of bidding both your suits, it's just that on this particular hand:

 

- Your spades are so good that they can play opposite a void.

- You don't have any real interest in playing in diamonds.

- You know partner doesn't have a decent diamond suit, because she didn't take the trouble to bid them at the 2-level

 

I think the 4S rebid is fine. 3S (invitational) would also be OK, but a bit cautious.

[y66]

I think I would have bid 3S there, intending it as invitational. I like FH's arguments for 4S.

[mikeh]

I don't decry the practice of assuming. I decry the practice of making unlikely assumptions instead of likely assumptions.

Wow. I cannot think of anyone with whom I play where 3♠ would not be forcing. It might exist in some strange world somewhere, I suppose. LOL

That strange world is called reality, Ken :)

 

BTW, a new year's resolution for me is to be nice to Ken :)

 

JB I agree entirely with Frances on this hand.

 

If you want, as north, to create an unambiguous gf, the way to do it is to cue 3♣... it says nothing other than 'we are going to game, do something descriptive'. It is NOT purely a stopper ask, altho South should strain to bid notrump if that is the descriptive bid... I would not advise 3♣ here, because when one bids 3♣ and then pulls 3N to 4♠, you are making a slam try.... if all you wanted to do was to play 4♠, you'd bid it over 2♥... thus creating the force THEN bidding 4♠, while not forcing, would be a very strong move, and south would be expected to consider moving on.

[keylime]

I think I'd start with 3♦ and then spades so that I can give pard a chance to bid spade tolerance. This way I can deny heart tolerance.

 

FWIW, I play 3♠ jump rebid here as highly invitational.

[kenrexford]

Does no one actually play weak jump shifts (or intermediate) any more? Am I missing some new trend? Apparently...

 

I mean, for about maybe 5 years, everyone in my area with whom I play has switched to 1♥-P-2♠ as constructive-intermediate (8-11 or so), where 1♠...3♠ would be GF. For maybe 20 years before that, everyone I knew played 1♥-P-2♠ as weak, rendering 1♠...2♠ as 8-11 or so, and 1♠...3♠ as GF.

 

I'd have to go back to when girls had coodies to remember strong jump shifts, where 1♠...3♠ was NF.

[nige1]

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=saqjt52hadt987ct9&s=sk4hkqt732da52cq5]133|200|Scoring: IMP

West  North East  South

-     -     -     1♥

Pass  1♠    2♣    2♥

Pass  4♠    Pass  Pass

Pass  [/hv]

I'd have to go back to when girls had coodies to remember strong jump shifts, where 1♠...3♠ was NF.

What are coodies, Ken? I can't find the word in the dictionary <_<

:) Happy New Year :)

Just to be different :)

1♥ (_P) 1♠ (2♣)

2♥ (_P) 3♦ (_P)

3♠ (_P) 4♥ AP

[Winstonm]

The only help I can think of is if South elects to pass 2C - which IMO isn't that bad of choice with the Qx of clubs. Discounting the club Q the hand is then pretty minimal with not good shape and only a fair heart suit - so maybe pass to alert partner to the minimum values is O.K.

 

Then you get:

 

1H-P-1S=2C

P-P-X-P

2H-P-2S-P

3S-P-?

 

Then maybe I'm dreaming.... <_<