Hairy_Scot Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 [hv=d=w&v=b&s=sk64hdkq9762cakj3]133|100|Scoring: IMPBidding :- 1♦ pass 1♥ pass??[/hv] What is your rebid and why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 [hv=d=w&v=b&s=sk64hdkq9762cakj3]133|100|Scoring: IMPBidding :- 1♦ pass 1♥ pass??[/hv] What is your rebid and why? 2c no problem yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 2C. because this hand is a 3D rebid with 4 clubs. That might not make sense, but 2D would be a gross underbid now, and 3D might lose a club fit...if you later bid 3D partner will expect a hand too good to bid 2D on the second round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 2C because I have 4 of them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 2♣ because when you have little fit for pard's suit, it's better to show as much as possible of your own hand. 2♣ shows a 5-4 (9 cards) and 2♦ shows 6 diamonds (6 cards). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 2♣. The only other bids that are possible with a hand with this strength (16-17 points) are 1♠, 3♦ and 3♥. 3♦ takes away more bidding space while not describing the hand very well. 2♣ followed by 3♦ in the next round describes the hand well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 2♣ is there any alternative? :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_h Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 2♣, because I fail to see any other remotely close of an alternative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 2C. The first question to answer is, do you want to force to game with openershand? My answer to this question is no. Now you need to answer 2C or 3D, 2C has the adv. that it showes 5-4, but a wider HCP (12-17) range, but 50% of your HCP are in your 2nd suit3D has the adv. that it showes a tighter HCP range I would go with 2C, and if I get another chance follow up with 3D. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 [hv=d=w&v=b&s=sk64hdkq9762cakj3]133|100|Scoring: IMPBidding :- 1♦ pass 1♥ pass??[/hv] What is your rebid and why? I am systemically screwed by this hand so have to choose between 3♦ and 3♣ I would probably elect 3♦ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 Dealer: West Vul: Both Scoring: IMP ♠ K64 ♥ [space] ♦ KQ9762 ♣ AKJ3 Bidding :- 1♦ pass 1♥ pass?? What is your rebid and why? I am systemically screwed by this hand so have to choose between 3♦ and 3♣ I would probably elect 3♦ I understand you use 2C as a gadget, but can't this hand be incorporated into it as a possibility? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggwhiz Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 I'm in for 2c. If responder bids 2h, I can pattern out with 2s with my current pard (about a jack short) OR bid 3d if I'm not feeling it. Just missed the 2c = gadget. I've had a lot of good luck bidding 1s over 1h, typically with a 3-1-5-4 hand and some extras. Does anyone remember that Meckwell invented support doubles because they were getting to too many 3-3 fits? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 If I was playing a Walsh approach, where a 1♠ rebid showed (3)4 spades but 5+ diamonds, and if 2♣ could be a canape bid and hence passable, then I might bid 1♠, maybe. Otherwise, 2♣ seems obvious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanp Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 2C, no problem yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 <!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> West </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> Both </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </span> </th> <td> K64 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> KQ9762 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> AKJ3 </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> Bidding :- 1♦ pass 1♥ pass?? </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end --> What is your rebid and why? I am systemically screwed by this hand so have to choose between 3♦ and 3♣ I would probably elect 3♦ I understand you use 2C as a gadget, but can't this hand be incorporated into it as a possibility? The problem I have is I use 1♦ ...2♣ rebid with all minimal xy45 and xy54 hands Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 So why can't you bid 2♣ anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggwhiz Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 The problem I have is I use 1♦ ...2♣ rebid with all minimal xy45 and xy54 hands Looks like you gotta change that agreement or re-bid 1 spade. The latter approach can be a lot of fun! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 So why can't you bid 2♣ anyway?mainly because I don't like getting passed in 2♣ when partner holds[hv=s=sqtxhkjtxdjxxcqxx]133|100|[/hv] B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanp Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 I don't know if you are trolling or not. So your 2C rebid can also be a minimal hand with 4 diamonds and 5 clubs. Then why would partner pass with that hand? An example with 2 diamonds and 3 clubs might be more convincing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 You play some weird methods, Pooltuna. In standard methods, 2♣ shows some 11-17 points with at least 4-4 in the minors. With your example hand, p bids 2[cI]. OK, make one of the diamonds a spade and he will have to take a view. Still, he is not expected to pass with 9 points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 So why can't you bid 2♣ anyway?mainly because I don't like getting passed in 2♣ when partner holds[hv=s=sqtxhkjtxdjxxcqxx]133|100|[/hv] B) In "normal" methods, the 2♣ rebid can be, among other shapes, 6-4 or 5-5. It's possible for responder to choose the wrong suit when he is 2-3. Somehow we all seem to survive. I'm sure you would too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 <!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> West </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> Both </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </span> </th> <td> K64 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> KQ9762 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> AKJ3 </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> Bidding :- 1♦ pass 1♥ pass?? </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end --> What is your rebid and why? I am systemically screwed by this hand so have to choose between 3♦ and 3♣ I would probably elect 3♦ I understand you use 2C as a gadget, but can't this hand be incorporated into it as a possibility? The problem I have is I use 1♦ ...2♣ rebid with all minimal xy45 and xy54 hands Well, there's an argument for a 1♠ rebid. Discussed as possibly a 3-card suit when 5+ diamonds, 4+ clubs, and wrong for 2♣. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frentoy Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 Why not: 1C - 1H - 2D? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.