Roshomon

[Jlall]

If we played kickback we would have room to show our SK! Haha jk.

 

I would bid 7 now. I don't even think we've shown 5134 yet, with no heart stopper and 5224 over 3H we can bid 4D. We also have good spades and the CJ to fall back on. Partner bid keycard without even bidding 4H so I think he has a good hand.

[quiddity]

Couldn't we have significant extras here? It seems like we could have a 20 point hand and partner has to cater for that and let us know that we're not off a keycard.

[whereagles]

after

 

1♠ 2♦

3♣ 3♥

4♦ 4NT

5♠ 5NT

 

it's a bit of a guess... We need pard to have the spade queen for it to be a good grand.

 

What the heck, I'll bid 7 anyway. If he doesn't have ♠Q, maybe I can set them up or maybe pard has 6 diamonds or whatnot.

[jdonn]

I like 7. I want both the spade king and 1-3 red suits, having a similar hand but with only one of those things wouldn't be good enough.

 

It seems like a better use for 6♣ here would be a last train thing "interest in 7 but I'm not sure". Of course if you are going to do that you might as well just play kickback anyway haha.

[Jlall]

Couldn't we have significant extras here? It seems like we could have a 20 point hand and partner has to cater for that and let us know that we're not off a keycard.

Yes but we also never showed this much, and partner bid keycard which shows a good hand opposite our potential worst hand which shows extras. It's not like he can just have some 13 count.

[junyi_zhu]

You see, you are slowly coming round to the conclusion that lower-level rebids after a 2/1 should be artificial... just a step further and you'll see that it's optimal to play 1S - 2D - 2H as the artificial catch-all as the lowest rebid... nearly there...

Obv you should just play step 1 as the catchall in 2/1 auctions, that's a no brainer. Doesn't take a genius to come to that conclusion.

 

In fact I think jdonn and I used to play that many years ago. I've never played it in a serious partnership though.

 

Since nobody will play it with me I stick to trying to improve upon "natural" while keeping it as unartificial as possible.

This is the easiest way to handle 2/1. I taught a few of my students this way as well. Actually I got this idea that the level +1 shows minimum by opener about 6 years ago.

In this context, 3C to show 4 isn't very bad either, cause we use 2NT to show 6S( or 2S to show 6H extra). So 3C must show 5-4 or 5-5, which is certainly playable. One problem of 3C shows 5 is that it's not easy for responder to raise to 4C if it doesn't show extra. Often, with 5-3 or 5-4 clubs, no extra, 3NT can still play well.

[Antoine Fourrière]

I would rebid 3♣ because that does not seem completely wrong, only possible bad judgment (which often means insufficient codification).

This being said, if 1N should be strong and a 2♥ opening should cover the minimum 5332 with five spades and perhaps a few unpleasant and uncommon hand types, you might decide that 2N by opener over 1♠ 2♦ shows clubs, which would allow responder to merely complete the transfer when he doesn't feel like saying anything more useful. Another idea would be to use a multi and open 2♠ to show a minimum opening with six spades and rebid 2♠ to show a hand which lacks definition, but at least isn't a minimum with six spades. Maybe that's just me, but I don't understand why we're supposed to open 1♠ as often as 1♥.

[Fluffy]

I would bid 3♣.  If partner bids anything but 3NT, I will bid 4♦ and think I am well placed.  If partner bids 3NT...well, let's hope partner does not do that to me.

Very well. Partner bids 3♥, and you bid a "well-placed" 4♦. This was the sequence actually followed at the table, but I was not feeling quite as smug about it as I might have done. For example, might I not bid the same way with:

 

♠AKxxx ♥xx ♦Qx ♣AKxx?

not if you bid it this fast!

 

 

I agree with first post from Frances, 3♣ and then 4♦ if partner doesn't bid 3NT. If he does I think passing is right.

 

As a MP player, I avoid going past 3NT at all cost when it might still be the right spot, I'd never bid 4♦ with 2 cards.