Raising partner

[nbailey]

With all vul, imps, partner deals and opens 1♠. RHO overcalls 2♣, and you have Qxxx/x/xxxx/xxxx. Are you going to raise, by how much, and why?

[mtvesuvius]

3♠, pre-emptive. It decribes my hand perfectly. 2♠ is an extreme overbid and pass is very pessimistic imo.

[Gerben42]

Both unanimous and quite anonymous so far :)

 

3♠ describes the hand perfectly.

 

2♠ will cause partner to play you for more defense, and Pass is just bad bridge. For completeness, "Other" will be a psyche :)

[Mbodell]

Yeah, I think the only way I can find a 2♠ bid here instead of 3♠ would be if the auction was changed to you dealt and a strong club context and it went P-P-1♠-2♣ and now I might bid 2♠ in some partnerships because my hand is a passed hand and partner is a limited 3rd seat opener and now we'll each know the 1♠ and 2♠ bids can be more obstructive jokerish bids.

 

But with the auction as given 3♠ is much, much better than 2♠.

[rogerclee]

Yeah, I think the only way I can find a 2♠ bid here instead of 3♠ would be if the auction was changed to you dealt and a strong club context and it went P-P-1♠-2♣ and now I might bid 2♠ in some partnerships because my hand is a passed hand and partner is a limited 3rd seat opener and now we'll each know the 1♠ and 2♠ bids can be more obstructive jokerish bids.

This logic is backwards. Anyway yes, 3♠ with the given hand.

[zasanya]

3♠.Preemptive.2♠ for my regular partners would be constructive 3 card raise.To show a sound raise to 3 or better we use cue bid.

[whereagles]

textbook 3♠, wtp

[Trinidad]

Count me as 3♠, wtp.

 

Rik

[brianshark]

3♠ for me too. I know it seems scary with a 2 count when you are vul, but you have a bit of shape, length in your RHO's suit can often be a good thing and you have a singleton in a side-suit which LHO almost surely has a few cards in.

[PeterGill]

The only minus to bidding 3S is that the opponents, judging from my shortness, will often be able to make 4H, and if the bidding continues (Dbl for t/o) Pass 4H,

I'm not meant to bid my hand twice by bidding 4S, am I? And partner might not

be able to visualise my singleton heart, so we ill often miss a "19 or 20 combined trumps" 4S save over 4H.

 

So there is a case for 4S at imps, as an advance save over 4H, due to my singleton heart. Interesting that nobody has voted for 4S.

[jdonn]

3♠ seems obvious, but 2♠ is fine just ineffective.

[JLOL]

3S

[pirate22]

3 spades,pard will know its a barrage,if one had a good raise one would bid 2/nt,

 

ref 4spades because one could advance that opps cannot make 4 hts,pard may have 4 of them----------3spades tidies up the whole hand

[gnasher]

If you bid 3♠ with this (and I'm not saying you shouldn't), what would you bid with Qxxx xx AQxx xxx? I realise that some partnerships solve this problem by having three ways to raise to the three level, but I'm talking about the context in which the original question was asked, where apparently there are no special methods available.

[mtvesuvius]

If you bid 3♠ with this (and I'm not saying you shouldn't), what would you bid with Qxxx xx AQxx xxx?  <snip>

2♠, wtp?

[gnasher]

If you bid 3♠ with this (and I'm not saying you shouldn't), what would you bid with Qxxx xx AQxx xxx?  <snip>

2♠, wtp?

Well, one of the problems is that your 2♠ has a very wide range, from Kxx xxx Kxxx xxx (or worse?) to the hand I posted (or a bit better).

 

Another is that you're likely to have to compete to 3♠ anyway, and if so it's better to do it straight away rather than after they've had a chance to exchange information.

 

A third is that a 4243 8-count is rather more common than a 4144 2-count.

 

Look at it another way: in an uncontested auction many partnerships think it worth using 3♣ or 3♦ to show a "mixed" 4-card raise. Does the intervention really make it less desirable to be able to show this hand?

[Trinidad]

If you bid 3♠ with this (and I'm not saying you shouldn't), what would you bid with Qxxx xx AQxx xxx?  <snip>

2♠, wtp?

Well, one of the problems is that your 2♠ has a very wide range, from Kxx xxx Kxxx xxx (or worse?) to the hand I posted (or a bit better).

 

Another is that you're likely to have to compete to 3♠ anyway, and if so it's better to do it straight away rather than after they've had a chance to exchange information.

 

A third is that a 4243 8-count is rather more common than a 4144 2-count.

 

Look at it another way: in an uncontested auction many partnerships think it worth using 3♣ or 3♦ to show a "mixed" 4-card raise. Does the intervention really make it less desirable to be able to show this hand?

No, if anything, the intervention makes it more desirable to show this hand. But... after interference not all the raises that one would like to play are available anymore. In theory, you could play 3♦ as some type of artificial raise after a 2♣ overcall, but then you have the same problem when opponents overcall 2♥. And I think it is better to have one system than many systems.

 

So, you want 3 bids to describe something like:

 

- Kxx xxx Kxxx xxx (the "normal" raise)

- Qxxx xx AQxx xxx (the mixed raise)

- Qxxx x xxxx xxxx (the weak raise)

 

and you have only 2 (2♠ and 3♠). Something has to give way. Fortunately, in many cases, you can bid 2♠ first and than bid 3♠. The question is what category hands should use this auction?

 

Obviously, the choice is between the mixed raise and the weak raise. With a "normal" raise you don't want to bid higher than 2♠. I think you can make a case for both choices.

 

From a pure constructive point of view (assuming the opponents don't bid anymore), it would probably be best to bid 2♠ with the weak raise of category III. It has about the same playing strength as a "normal" 2♠ raise whereas a mixed raise definitely has better playing strength than a normal raise or a weak raise.

 

But the opponents are not likely to stay quiet when you have a weak raise and bid only 2♠. Now you can still bid 3♠, saying that you have a weak raise, but the opponents are much better placed in deciding whether to double you or whether they should go for their own contract.

 

On the other hand, opponents are a little more likely to stay quiet when you bid 2♠ with a mixed raise. That's too bad, since you can't finish your description of your hand. But if they still compete, you can complete the picture by bidding 3♠.

 

So, concluding, if you play in a field with quiet opponents, bid 2♠ with the weak raise. But if you play in a field with busy opponents, bid 2♠ with the mixed raise. I think opponents are getting busier and busier. That means that I choose to put the mixed raise in 2♠.

 

Rik

[jdonn]

Personally I don't have the slightest problem bidding 2♠ with both Kxx xxx Kxxx xxx and Qxxx xx AQxx xxx. I would far rather have the lower bid include the mixed raise hand for a number of reasons.

- We have an extra level of bidding to sort out whether or not we belong in game.

- The opponents may simply let me play in 2, especially given that they don't know how many trumps I have.

- They usually don't have game anyway when I have an 8 count opposite an opener, so bidding 2 then 3 isn't much of a loss over bidding 3 directly.

 

I don't see what the fact that some players use bergen raises has to do with what I want my bids to mean.

[petergreat]

3♠ definitely.

 

According to the Law of Total Tricks you bid at three-level with 9 trumps. You do, so 3♠. Obviously weak and competitive, the fact that partner doesn't know how much you hold does not matter. The opponents don't know too. If you had points you'd bid 3♣ or some other cuebid.