A black weak NT hand

[jeffford76]

In case it matters, it's all white at IMPs.

 

Edit: Sorry, 1S should be 2S, obviously.

[Jlall]

2S

[jjbrr]

2S. we have ways of asking how many spades and how strong the hand is, so we can raise on 3 not infrequently.

[skjaeran]

Easy 2♠ raise in any natural system I've played.

[mtvesuvius]

2♠

[Gerben42]

1NT, the hand does not contain a singleton so no raise on 3 cards.

There are good ways to find out a 5-3 fit after this (NMF). I'm surprised that so far it's so unanimous for 2♠, after all I do not know the way ask if it were 3 cards or not after 1m - 1M - 2M in vanilla 2-over-1 (perhaps someone here can tell me).

 

With regular partners I use a relay, allowing for a 3-card raise with a singleton. But here...

[Cascade]

2♠ looks very normal

[jdonn]

2♠, and then partner doesn't have to strain to rebid lousy five card suits after you rebid 1NT, and then you get to rebid 1NT with a singleton in his suit if it seems like the best option, and then your minor suit rebid shows 6+ instead of 5+ which is better for a variety of reasons, and all of a sudden the pieces fit into a very logical and congruous system. The thought makes me happy.

[Phil]

This is one of the classic hands that makes a 3 card raise.

 

I pity those that feel the need to rebid 1N on this pattern and this dispersion of honors.

[Codo]

This is one of the classic hand that makes a 1 NT rebid.

 

I pity those that feel the need to rebid 2 spade on this pattern and this lack of ruffing values.

[jdonn]

I pity those that feel the need to rebid 2 spade on this pattern and this lack of ruffing values.

There is a ruffing value.

[Mbodell]

I'd rather play 2/1 with weak nt than strong nt, and this is a hand I'd rather have been able to open 1nt then bid suits. The fact that partner has 5+ points and 4+ spades doesn't change this. If partner has more than minimum strength and/or shape 2-way nmf can figure it out. But 1nt may well be the right place to be.

[marcD]

2♠ guarantees 4 trumps so .. 2♠. I'ill pretend I missorted my hand. Even if we belong in 3NT rightsiding the contact may be critical

[rbforster]

The poll is very insightful - rebidding 1S after (1C-1S) is a nice way to separate 3 card raises from "real" 4 card ones :)

[gnasher]

The poll is very insightful - rebidding 1S after (1C-1S) is a nice way to separate 3 card raises from "real" 4 card ones :)

Yes. That's why you should play transfer responses to 1♣.

[the hog]

Easy 2S bid.

[Fluffy]

What about rebidding what you have agreed with partner?, for most people I know this is a 1NT no brainer rebid.

[skjaeran]

for most people I know this is a 1NT no brainer rebid.

It's a cultural thing. In some areas/environments this is an just as obvious 1NT rebid as it is a 2♠ rebid other places. For me, 2♠ is clear.

[marcD]

What about rebidding what you have agreed with partner?, for most people I know this is a 1NT no brainer rebid.

That's always a good thought : wins the post mortem :( Still even though the no brainer systemic bid is 1NT I think the right bid seems to be 2♠. Will take the blame if the experiment goes wrong but system is supposed to help no to get in the way

[jmcw]

2S. we have ways of asking how many spades and how strong the hand is, so we can raise on 3 not infrequently.

Ditto. The ♠ are just barely good enough

[mcphee]

For those who insist on 4 card raises of partners major response, I feel sorry for you. These are the partners who return to the table down in 3N because it was wrong sided. "Sorry nothing I could do on the H lead".

 

2S a standout, it is not your fault partner has 4S, it's theirs. A point of interest for the NON S raisers, often on these hands when partners do not respond in H prior to S indicates the chance of 3H's not unrealistic. If you do not have methods to inquire about the length of the raise, get some. Do the NT re-bidders honestly think it is unreasonable for partners to bid 3N holding 5S, full opening values and KJX in H?

 

Insisting on 4 card support to raise a major is similar to insisting you always have 4 cards in the other major to make a t/o dble or a neg dble. Bottom line, it's losing bridge.

[NickRW]

No great preference one way or the other for me in general with these - I think the lack of red stops, the fact that we are quite well blessed with aces and kings, and the small doubleton heart tends to suggest that 2♠ is the better call in this case though. NT might well be better played from the other side if it is right.

 

Nick

[goodwintr]

Everyone seems to be worried about getting to the right game from the right side, and that is surely a consideration. But, either 1NT or 2S might very well end the bidding, without further opportunity for exploration -- so it is also a consideration to decide right now, on the limited information available, which of those two contracts you think will be better. Because responder might well have five spades and a hand that doesn't bid over 1C-1S; 1NT, and because a 4-3 fit might be very playable when responder doesn't have five spades, I think I'd bet on spades. As others have pointed out, that decision doesn't have to be final if responder in fact does bid again.

[gnasher]

Do the NT re-bidders honestly think it is unreasonable for partners to bid 3N holding 5S, full opening values and KJX in H?

Yes, of course it's unreasonable. If your style is that an immediate spade raise promises four-card support, it would be silly for partner not to check back for a 5-3 fit. It would be equivalent to hearing your partner open 1NT and bidding Stayman instead of transferring.

[jdonn]

I should mention, and this is just another random guess by me, that most people who bid 1NT are from places where people just don't raise on three card support, and thus they probably lack experience in that area. America I know, and I bet many other places, have historically had many people who play both styles. I have years of experience rebidding 1NT on these hands and years more rebidding 2♠. I am confident in saying a style that rebids 2♠ simply works better.