How do I explain this properly?

[kenrexford]

♠xx ♥Jx ♦QJ10xxxx ♣Qx

 

Your partner opens 1♥, and you respond 1NT (SAYC, so non-forcing). Assume that this is OK.

 

Partner now jumps to 3♣, GF, no funny business, so partner ostensibly has a heart-club two-suiter. MAYBE he has solid hearts and a made-up club suit, but the question later will make that possibility vanish, so who cares except in theory?

 

Anyway, the entire auction ends up being:

 

1♥-P-1NT-P-

3♣-P-3♦-P-

3NT-P-P-P

 

3NT went down two when 4♥ makes. I assume that everyone here would end up in 4♥ by some route. But, how would you explain to Responder that 3♦...Pass is not right with this hand?

 

Or, am I insane, such that 3♦...Pass is in fact what you would do?

[jjbrr]

3♦...Pass for me

[Fluffy]

my first instinct is to bid 4♥ directly, but why bury the diamonds? you can bid 3♦ first.

 

Then partner bids 3NT, and now I have to be pretty sure of wht 4♥ shows to bid it.

 

2 suiters as your source of tricks for 3NT are very bad, you need to stablish both suits in time to get to 9 tricks, and this happens not often enough, I'd put my money in 4♥ if I could.

[phil_20686]

Or, am I insane, such that 3♦...Pass is in fact what you would do?

Surely, the point is whether your Jx of hearts is a more important feature than your diamonds?

 

With one partner i play that this auction promises 5-5, then i would never bid diamonds i would just show the Jx of hearts - i bid differently with any hand that has 3 hearts so he knows i have at most two anyways. Trying to find the 5-5-3-0 perfect pposite you is a good way to lose imps on normal bds. If partner bids 3s showing spade values i will offer 3n, if he bids 3n (showing diamond values, i will bid 4d as a choice of games.

 

With my other partners i have a bigger problem, but i probably just bid 3d then 4h. 4M is always to play in these sequences. How would you explain it? Partner rates to be highly distributional, distributional hands play much better in suits than in NT, as you can ruff to set up long side suits. Hx is good support for a good 5 card suit.

[jjbrr]

2 suiters as your source of tricks for 3NT are very bad, you need to stablish both suits in time to get to 9 tricks, and this happens not often enough, I'd put my money in 4♥ if I could.

But you have Jx and Qx lol. Those are pretty darn good.

 

9 tricks are easier to establish than 10, especially opposite a partner who can't bid 3♥ knowing you can bid 3♠ as a NT probe.

[gwnn]

You are insane but you bid this hand right.

[ONEferBRID]

I don't know if this helps.

 

I pulled the following off of a recent SJS thread. It is a concept from Pitbulls ( circa 2005 )-- I haven't studied it.

 

 

http://www.pitbulls.shawbiz.ca/Coaches%20C...ump%20Shift.htm

 

It essentially says:

1M - 1NT

3C! ( should always relay to 3D )

 

Opener's next bid further describes his hand ( could be a strong M/Cl 2 suiter or just long M, slammish ), whereas if Responder "breaks" the relay, s/he has serious intentions about slam in partner's suit ( the major ).

[whereagles]

How 'bout 5♦ over 3♣?

[Pict]

I don't like 3♦. My hand is so bad that the opportunity to just agree partner's suit feels good. Sure I have an 'alternative' but no desire to introduce this hand into my bidding system.

[Fluffy]

2 suiters as your source of tricks for 3NT are very bad, you need to stablish both suits in time to get to 9 tricks, and this happens not often enough, I'd put my money in 4♥ if I could.

But you have Jx and Qx lol. Those are pretty darn good.

 

9 tricks are easier to establish than 10, especially opposite a partner who can't bid 3♥ knowing you can bid 3♠ as a NT probe.

spade ruff in dummy can be the key, or the entry needed for club finese....

 

having honnors in partner's suit is something that points towards suit contract IMO, since suits then ain't frozen and many tricks can be run by the one who runs faster, and they have the lead.

[kenrexford]

Isn't the concern less...

 

9 tricks are easier than 10

 

...and more...

 

4 tricks are harder than 5

 

...if you follow my meaning.

[Fluffy]

enough said, who is running the simualtion? ;)

[mcphee]

It would be nice to have 3D as way to see what hand partner holds, single suited or 2 suited. Without any agreement I would bid 3H. I doubt we would find D as a strain and offer no attempt. Besides this is not so bad for H looking at the Q of C.

[ONEferBRID]

I have looked at ( studied) the 1M - 1NT, 3m-jump auctions for quite awhile now.

 

Posts concerning them occur frequently.

 

I agree with Justin's ( Jlal ) statment in a recent thread:

... imo by far in bridge the least understood concept is how to bid over a jumpshift

.

 

For the given auction:

1H - 1NT

3C - ??

 

... my latest structure for Responder's rebid are:

4H-jump = direct bid shows a 3 card limit raise.

3D = stop(s) in ♦ but not the other unbid (♠)and no interest in Opener's suits

3S = stop(s) in ♠ but not the other unbid (♦),

3H!= a relay to 3S, then Responder has 3 delayed options ( a, b, c ) :

    a) 4D = long Diam, no outside entries, where the only trick taking power is as the trump suit ( this could be passed );

    b ) 3NT = stop(s) in both ♦ and ♠, again with no interest in either of Opener's suits;

    c) 4H = weak with a little as 2 card ♥ support.

The remaining direct bids are RKC-showing with 4+card support for ♣:

  3NT!= 0 or 3

    4C!= 1

    4D!= 2 - ♣Q

    4S!= 2 + ♣Q

[peachy]

I am bidding 3H instead of 3D.

System is SAYC and 1NT was not forcing so 3H just shows doubleton because all hands with heart support would have raised hearts. Had the system been 2/1 and 1NT was forcing, I still bid 3H.

[Fluffy]

I have looked at ( studied) the 1M - 1NT, 3m-jump auctions for quite awhile now.

 

Posts concerning them occur frequently.

 

I agree with Justin's ( Jlal ) statment in a recent thread:

... imo by far in bridge the least understood concept is how to bid over a jumpshift

.

 

For the given auction:

1H - 1NT

3C - ??

 

... my latest structure for Responder's rebid are:

4H-jump = direct bid shows a 3 card limit raise.

3D = stop(s) in ♦ but not the other unbid (♠)and no interest in Opener's suits

3S = stop(s) in ♠ but not the other unbid (♦),

3H!= a relay to 3S, then Responder has 3 delayed options ( a, b, c ) :

    a) 4D = long Diam, no outside entries, where the only trick taking power is as the trump suit ( this could be passed );

    b ) 3NT = stop(s) in both ♦ and ♠, again with no interest in either of Opener's suits;

    c) 4H = weak with a little as 2 card ♥ support.

The remaining direct bids are RKC-showing with 4+card support for ♣:

  3NT!= 0 or 3

    4C!= 1

    4D!= 2 - ♣Q

    4S!= 2 + ♣Q

1 agreement is almost always better than none, but moving this sequence to 1♥-1NT-3♦ and 1♠-1NT-3♣ seems complicated, if you ahve to take each one separatelly it will be a nightmare.

[ONEferBRID]

.....but moving this sequence to 1♥-1NT-3♦ and 1♠-1NT-3♣ seems complicated, if you ahve to take each one separatelly it will be a nightmare.

You are right Fluffy... each jump-shift sequence has to be analyzed separately for agreements.

[hanp]

Not bidding 3D with this hand seems idiotic.

[pirate22]

as the responder to 1ht i go along with 1n/t in case pard is 18/19 initially,but when i hear 3cl....................agree my Q cl is a good working card, i would now seriously

consider not bidding the D suit,because i do not want hear partner bid 3 n/t,and i do not want to then bid 4 hts (Misleading also) ..............so over 3cl i bid 3hts.

afterall pard may be 6/5.

regards

[kenrexford]

Tough to explain this properly if there are so many divergent views, I guess.

 

I thought this was extremely easy, myself. I see two routes to 4♥ that both seem plausible.

 

I could bid 3♦, hoping for a raise. It's possible. If so, then 5♦ is our contract. If no, I bid 4♥ no magtter what Opener does. That's a plausible course.

 

Or, I just bid 3♥ like a sane person.

 

3♦ first, and then passing 3NT, seems odd, regardless of what 3NT shows.

 

That said, I suppose I find this sequence somewhat an unknown, I guess. I mean, how does everyone distinguish 3NT from 3♠, and either from 3♥?

 

Is 3NT showing serious interest in 3NT and serious spade control, 3♠ then punt, or

 

Does 3♠ exist as a "bid where you live" bid and 3NT as the "punt" option?

 

Or, does 3♥ "punt," 3NT show serious interest in 3NT, and 3♠ a pattern bid,

 

Or is 3♠ an implied diamond "raise" and waiting, 3♥ generally waiting, and 3NT stating contract,

 

Or some other alignment?

[cherdanno]

The OP is easy to answers. Yes Ken is insane.

However, proving this by bidding 3♦ and passing 3N with the given hand seems a little too easy, even for that...

[Fluffy]

3♦-3♠ shows the spade ace and nothing else, not willing to receive the lead. and obviously not willing to play 3NT opposite doubleton or singleton since the ace is useful playing a suit contract as well.