Please suggest an auction

[Siegmund]

There is room for debate about the gap between "two solutions" and "two good solutions." :D It's the closest I've heard to a reason for why so many people like these maniacal 3- and 4-point responses to 1-bids. The only thing super-light responding has ever gotten me is down in 2NT.

 

I think it's part of the appeal of the Polish club family for me. The 11-18 1-bids are "just like standard bids, with the problem strong hands removed." (Though especially with the strong 2-suiters the problem just comes back to haunt us a couple rounds later in the auction.)

[Cyberyeti]

There is room for debate about the gap between "two solutions" and "two good solutions." :D It's the closest I've heard to a reason for why so many people like these maniacal 3- and 4-point responses to 1-bids. The only thing super-light responding has ever gotten me is down in 2NT.

This is the point of what I play, you don't go down in 2N on bal 18 opposite 4 because we use 1x-1y-2N as an artificial unbalanced GF, so there is no gap between our 1N rebid (we play a weak no trump) and 2N opener. Hence we're playing in 1N.

 

It does mean that we will occasionally play in 2N with 15 opposite 7, but that stands a much better chance than 18 opposite 4.

[whereagles]

1♦ 1♠

2♥ 2NT (meant as artificial weak, but I'm ok with it natural as well

3♦ pass

Surely 3♦ here is non-forcing opposite normal responding values? That is, it's what you'd bid with a 4-6 16-count. With his actual hand, opener would raise 2NT to 3NT.

lol right. Silly me. 3NT is obvious, of course.

 

I normally wouldn't respond to 1♦ though... There's a bit of a difference between responding with, say, 5 cards to the ace and the actual quackish hand.

[Fluffy]

I play that after

 

1♦-1♠

2♥-2NT (2NT = weak)

 

only 3♣ accepts a partscore, the rest are stronger.

 

I don't focus too much on partscores I guess :lol:

 

 

About passing a reverse... I have seen my opponents doing it 3 times in my life, and I always collected a bottom, 3 hands is not enough to judge, but m impression is that it is at least playable.

[zen]

I agree with Jdonn

 

1D-1S

2H-2NT*leb

3NT

 

Opener is a max and the hands are misfits. I have seen much worse contracts then this one, and its tough for Opener to stop on a dime in a suit on the three level with the opening hand.

 

If responder passes 1D they could catch partner with:

 

AKQ5

5

AKJ1076

K6

 

And miss a perfectly good game

 

Or

 

AK74

Q8

J1054

A54

 

Where spades is a much better contract, and makes it more difficult for the opponents to get to their heart contract then initially passing.

[kenrexford]

If normal stuff:

 

Open 1♦-allpass

 

or

 

Open 2♣-2♥(neg)-2NT

 

Sometimes you get stuck. I'm not worrying that much about a stiff spade when stuck with terrible alternatives.

 

With two-way strong opening structure:

 

Opener: 2♣ (strong forcing opening, 0-3 spades unless maxi-balanced 24+)

Responder: 2♦ (waiting)

Opener: 2♠ (four hearts and a longer minor OR 1-4-4-4)

Responder: 2NT (no heart fit)

Opener: 3♦ (four hearts, longer diamonds, not three spades)

Responder: judgment

Opener: possible judgment call

 

or

 

Opener: 2♣ (same)

Responder: 2♥ (double negative)

Opener: 3♦ (diamonds, 0-3 spades)

Responder: 3♠ (0-3 hearts, punt)

Opener: judgment