Jump to content

Very simple rebid


paulg

What is your bid?  

27 members have voted

  1. 1. What is your bid?

    • 1NT
      8
    • 2D
      1
    • 2H
      13
    • 3H
      5
    • Other
      0


Recommended Posts

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

1 (1) 1* (Pass)

 

*5+ hearts[/hv]

You are the opener playing 4-card minors and a weak (12-14) 1NT, with a 1NT rebid showing 15-17 points. Partner has shown at least 5 hearts but may still have four spades.

 

Your bid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1NT, which should still show 15-16.

 

I am bal. (4333), have a stopper, what better description

of my hand is out there?

 

I am not against 3 card raises, but dont likey them, if I

happen to ve bal. and have sensible alternative.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS: Sry, missed the fact that 1H promises 5 cards.

Oh well, I go back to sleep. => 2H

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Raise to 2.

 

I've never played 12-14 in an overall standard context, but I'll assume that I'm supposed to do the same thing as if I were playing 15-17 and had xxx AJx Axx Axxx. Since I can't have balanced minimums like that, I assume the raise shows a better hand than it would if I were playing 15-17 notrumps. Thus I'm either showing an unbalanced minimum or a balanced 15-16 hand that falls short of a raise to 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2.

 

My hand is in the range of a raise to 2 playing a weak NT. It shows either a balanced strong NT with hearts or a distributional raise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1N. Please don't tell me this denies 3 hearts.

 

2 in a weak NT system is a tricky bid because it can be so wide ranging, especially if your 1m openings aren't super strong.

 

1N tells pard about our 15-16 and NT might be a better strain anyway. Imagine KQxxx and the A for instance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've already voted for 2.

 

...but I find myself wondering what 2 means.

 

At the table I would take this as a general force without really knowing how far it was forcing.

I just dived into Robson/Seagal (again) and see that they recommend it as showing 3 card support and a fair hand.

 

Something else to discuss with partner ;). Thanks for the thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1NT seems best to me.

 

In this context of methods, defining 2 as a strong three-card raise seems like a good idea to me. This hand type comes up often.

 

In our precision club system we play

1-(1)-1 as showing five, and opener's rebid of 2 and 2 is respectively a good and a bad 3card raise. If RHO bids 2 then X is the good raise.

 

We play similarly on the 3-level (3 good, 3 bad). Some might not want to always go to the 3-lvl with 4card support, but for us 1 is never balanced, so we have no problem at all with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm wildly confused here. How is this actually a question?

 

2 is so obvious it hurts.

 

I mean, having played weak notrumps, I learned one thing really quickly. If you open a minor and then raise partner's major, you have one of two hands:

 

1. 15-17 with support, or

2. Opener HCP strength, support, and an unbalanced hand, the shortness now elevating the count to 15-17 with distribution.

 

Hence, it all works perfectly.

 

What's the problem?

 

What, I'm supposed to bid 2 to distinguish 15-17 HCP from 2 showing 15-17 with distribution? Please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A friend asked me the question and I did not think it was clear.

 

I started by saying 2 was right but perhaps the control-rich nature of the hand meant that 3 was in the picture. It will probably play quite well opposite shortage in partner's hand and you could miss a low point-count game. The more I wrote the closer to 3 I thought the hand was.

 

But it was matchpoints and non-vulnerable. So less incentive to push ... unless it's a short BBO tourney and you need the points.

 

But I still don't think it is obvious.

 

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I voted for 3. Despite what Ken says, I think what people actually do here in Acol-land is bid 2 only if at the minimum end of the 15-17 range. Decent 16s raise to three. And despite being a bit flat this hand is a rather good 16.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[Wow, agree with kenrexford and not with MFA Oo

what's the matter with you? skipped medication? :lol:

Right, remember those pills :)

 

Well, I'm not convinced that the distributional raise plays the same as the strong notrump raise. The distributional value is much less when one holds only three trumps, and the difference in high card strength is a full ace (11-13 vs 15-17).

 

3NT is also a likely best spot, and that is much easier to investigate if we know what our raises are showing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...