rebid?

[jillybean]

Playing 2/1

 

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sajhkt86542dacak4]133|100|Scoring: MP

1♥:1N*[/hv]

 

What is your bid now?

Does anyone not open 1♥?

[lmilne]

Standard system, you have to bid 3♣. I open 1♥, don't expect many will open anything else and don't think there is much (or any) merit to doing so.

 

Good poster hand for 1M-1NT-2NT art GF, which is what I would bid in my usual partnerships.

[pooltuna]

Playing 2/1

 

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sajhkt86542dacak4]133|100|Scoring: MP

1♥:1N*[/hv]

 

What is your bid now?

Does anyone not open 1♥?

Well I know 2/1 is weird but I would think the standard bid should still apply and IMO that is 4♥

[ONEferBRID]

1H - 1NT!

3C!* - 3D! ( relays to 3H! for Responder to show various holdings )

3S! ( declines the relay, thus showing long Ht suit and no 2-suiter )

.... to be continued

_______________________________________________________________

*3C! = GF, either (a) genuine strong 2-suiter or (b ) long Hts and no 2-suiter

[peachy]

I am sure all will open 1H. Rebid a GF 3C. The hearts are inadequate for a 4H rebid. No other rebid choices even come to mind.

[the hog]

4H for me. If you are playing adjective Bridge of course, you can bid "3 non existent clubs".

 

Good hand for Gazilli or similar gadgets.

[mike777]

Playing 2/1

 

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sajhkt86542dacak4]133|100|Scoring: MP

1♥:1N*[/hv]

 

What is your bid now?

Does anyone not open 1♥?

ugly....I understand those that open 1h and rebid 4h or 3c...

 

I choose to open 2c......ugly.....

 

I fully grant I open 2c a bit more than most so.....ugly....

[jdonn]

It's stubborn and nonthinking to bid 4♥ because of an inherent dislike of jump shifting into 3 card suits. 3♣ will work much better and it's obvious. One of the many reasons? We can easily belong in clubs!

[the hog]

It's stubborn and nonthinking to bid 4♥ because of an inherent dislike of jump shifting into 3 card suits. 3♣ will work much better and it's obvious. One of the many reasons? We can easily belong in clubs!

It's stubborn and nonthinking to bid 3♣ because of an inherent dislike of 4♥ and because you think it's obvious. I have already stated that Gazilla or another gadget is superior. Lacking these methods, I would expect 3C to show 4+C.

[jdonn]

It's stubborn and nonthinking to bid 4♥ because of an inherent dislike of jump shifting into 3 card suits. 3♣ will work much better and it's obvious. One of the many reasons? We can easily belong in clubs!

It's stubborn and nonthinking to bid 3♣ because of an inherent dislike of 4♥ and because you think it's obvious. I have already stated that Gazilla or another gadget is superior. Lacking these methods, I would expect 3C to show 4+C.

I don't have an inherent dislike for bidding 4♥ on 7 card suits so I'm not sure what you are talking about other than an attempt to be clever. I do have an inherent dislike for insisting on playing in terrible 7 card suits, but that could hardly be called stubborn and nonthinking.

 

And yes of course a number of gadgets work very well for hands like this. We have all been over this a number of times and I agree. Mine would involve a 3♣ bid anyway (with a different meaning). Probably more common are others involving 2♣ or 2NT rebids.

[Codo]

The Americans are so used to jump to 3 card minors that they think it is natural and no gadget. ;) Given their methods, I would do the same.

 

Around here we would open this hand as a semiforcing with hearts and have not many problems later.

[P_Marlowe]

4H, and 1H is fine.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[whereagles]

4♥ for me too. You miss slam if pard has the invitational heart raise, but looking at our hand, that rates to be improbable.

 

More probable is that pard has a singleton heart and 4 is in jeopardy LOL

[hanp]

I think you have to make a forcing bid with this, slam is too likely to bid 4H. Here it is quite common to play 2C as forcing which seems like a good idea. If partner shows less than an 8-count you can bid 4H next.

 

There are others who play 2S or 2NT as an artificial force. I think that's inferior to using 2C, because there is so much room after 2C, but if you can show a gameforcing singlesuiter then it is better than nothing. Lacking any gadget I think 3C is clear.

[mohitz]

3C looks clear. I prefer Gazzilli to solve problems like these.

[Phil]

I'm not exactly sure what Gazzilli does to solve this hand. Unless there is a way to later show a bad suit, with a GF, it doesn't appear to gain much, although I do not know some of the high-level continuations. Also, how does Gazzilli help bring clubs into the picture?

 

As Han says, 2♠ or 2N as a multi-way GF is a nice tool to have. In some of the structures I have seen, it allows pard to show a side 6 bagger.

 

Otherwise, agree with 3♣, although with a weak partner I would bid an agricultural 4♥.

[aguahombre]

3C is fine. I don't lament lack of gadgets which probably won't describe this honor distribution anyway. I have finally come across a hand --this one -- where opening 1H with 19 and then rebidding 4H with 7 of them doesn't feel right. That would be the "size and shape" rebid, but sheeesh.

[hanp]

I'm not exactly sure what Gazzilli does to solve this hand.

How about, if partner shows 8+ points you show a strong single suiter in hearts and see what happens, if partner shows less you bid game.

 

As Han says, 2♠ or 2N as a multi-way GF is a nice tool to have.

 

If I said that it wasn't on purpose.

[mikeh]

Let me add my voice to those who, in essence, say 3♣, wtp?

 

Obviously 3♣ is not perfect, but we have a flawed hand, so nothing is going to be perfect.

 

As for advocatiing gadgets, why do so many people think that someone posting in the SAYC and 2/1 forum is looking for a gadget to solve the problem? They are looking for advice on a judgment call: in the confines of having no gadgets, what call is best?

 

I often add my thoughts on gadgets, and I have one here, as do many players, but why not simply answer the posted question, providing description of gadgetry as additional information for those interested, rather than as 'the solution'?

 

We bid 3♣, establishing the gf, and retreat to hearts if possible (ie NOT over 5♣!). If partner insists on clubs, he will have 5+ and 0-1 heart so clubs will usually be preferable. And, on those hands on which we have slam, we have room to explore for it.

[Jlall]

There are others who play 2S or 2NT as an artificial force. I think that's inferior to using 2C, because there is so much room after 2C, but if you can show a gameforcing singlesuiter then it is better than nothing. Lacking any gadget I think 3C is clear.

Obviously it's inferior when you have a very strong GF hand to bid anything other than the first step. That doesn't mean the first step should necessarily be dedicated to this in every auction, it hurts your bidding the times you have non strong/GF hands.

 

I think there's plenty of room to sort everything out if you use your 2S/2N/3C+ bids effectively. This auction is so much easier than say 1H p 1S or 1S p 1N because of 2S.

 

Slam is also quite infrequent after 1H p 1N, so I would be happy to not play gazilli in this specific auction.

[ONEferBRID]

 

....why do so many people think that someone .....is looking for a gadget to solve the problem?

How ofter per month do we see a post on a sequence:

1M - 1NT!

3m - ??

 

And to quote Justin again regarding these sequences:

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

 

Since the GF jump-shift takes up a fair amount of room in these cases, I've resorted to gadgetry as a solution... albeit, it is not mainstream.

 

Just ignore the gadget posts if they bother you.

[junyi_zhu]

Let me add my voice to those who, in essence, say 3♣, wtp?

 

Obviously 3♣ is not perfect, but we have a flawed hand, so nothing is going to be perfect.

 

As for advocatiing gadgets, why do so many people think that someone posting in the SAYC and 2/1 forum is looking for a gadget to solve the problem? They are looking for advice on a judgment call: in the confines of having no gadgets, what call is best?

 

I often add my thoughts on gadgets, and I have one here, as do many players, but why not simply answer the posted question, providing description of gadgetry as additional information for those interested, rather than as 'the solution'?

 

We bid 3♣, establishing the gf, and retreat to hearts if possible (ie NOT over 5♣!). If partner insists on clubs, he will have 5+ and 0-1 heart so clubs will usually be preferable. And, on those hands on which we have slam, we have room to explore for it.

1 If one really wants to lie, it seems to me that 2S is a smaller lie because most likely, you won't play in any spades contracts.

 

2 It is important to have a bid to show a gf one suiter.

 

3 even if you have a bid to show gf one suiter, it's still unclear to me whether you want to play in NT or H if partner bids 3NT, if partner has one hearts, you probably don't mind playing 4M, otherwise, 3NT might be high already.

 

4 It seems to me that those who claim "3C, wtp" never have any problems when partner holds 4 clubs. For example, suppose you bid 3C and partner bids 4C, do you expect partner to pass 4H with a stiff H and 4 clubs?

 

5 Although I live in US, I never liked the "standard" lie of 3C. To me, 4H is a closer description for this hand if I have no gadgets, because 4H is usually where you should play facing a stiff H, facing a void H, you are unlucky.

 

6 if you really like some gadgets, it's a simple treatment to bid 2S to show either spades gf or H gf one suiter, 2NT as a relay to ask you to clarify your hand type and later you can design step responses. With spades, 16-18 HCP, you can either open 1NT or rebid 2NT after partner's 1NT to show your range.

[mikeh]

4 It seems to me that those who claim "3C, wtp" never have any problems when partner holds 4 clubs. For example, suppose you bid 3C and partner bids 4C, do you expect partner to pass 4H with a stiff H and 4 clubs?

 

yes....and, frankly, I am amazed that any experienced player would even ask this question. I'd expect partner to pass it with a stiff and FIVE clubs, unless he had slam interest.

 

Hands rarely match the prototypical examples one finds in texts, but a typical fake js then 4♥ suit looks like AKQJxx, and my experience playing these opposite a stiff has been far more enjoyable than having partner run to 5♣ with AKx opposite Qxxx. of course, your judgment and experience may differ B)

 

And on the hand in question, let me (please) play 4♥ opposite a stiff rather than 5♣ opposite, say, Jxxx.

[the hog]

4 It seems to me that those who claim "3C, wtp" never have any problems when partner holds 4 clubs. For example, suppose you bid 3C and partner bids 4C, do you expect partner to pass 4H with a stiff H and 4 clubs?

 

yes....and, frankly, I am amazed that any experienced player would even ask this question. I'd expect partner to pass it with a stiff and FIVE clubs, unless he had slam interest.

 

Hands rarely match the prototypical examples one finds in texts, but a typical fake js then 4♥ suit looks like AKQJxx, and my experience playing these opposite a stiff has been far more enjoyable than having partner run to 5♣ with AKx opposite Qxxx. of course, your judgment and experience may differ B)

 

And on the hand in question, let me (please) play 4♥ opposite a stiff rather than 5♣ opposite, say, Jxxx.

As you can't bid 4H over 5C, I assume that a 5C bid is banned in any of your partnerships?

[mikeh]

As you can't bid 4H over 5C, I assume that a 5C bid is banned in any of your partnerships?

What is there about any post of mine that warrants that assumption? Or do you seriously think that there are hands on which one jumps from 3♣ to 5♣ on 4 card support for a suit known to be possibly 3 cards long? The jumpshift into a 3 card club suit has been part of standard bidding for decades (I am not speaking of strong club methods or Acol 2 bid methods).

 

As it happens, I play a gadget that allows responder to enquire a to my hand via an artificial 3♦ relay, but even in those partnerships in which the gadget is absent, it strikes me as absurd to jump to 5♣ on 4 cards.

 

Of course, the fact that one does not jump to 5♣ on 4 card support would not, to a rational person, suggest that there are no hands on which one can make that call. It may be strange to you, but I have seen hands respond 1N to 1♥ with more than 4 cards in clubs.