I thought it was obvious!

[Little Kid]

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=s87642ht76dt3ca93]133|100|Scoring: IMP

(Pass)-1♥-(1♠)-?[/hv]

[jdonn]

It is obvious. Raise!

[mikeh]

I disagree...it ain't obvious, at least not to me.

 

I pass.

 

LHO almost certainly isn't raising spades, and if partner can't reopen, I'm probably very happy. If he does reopen, I can bid hearts.

 

As for an immediate raise...this is not a hand on which I would like to hear partner jump to game or make a gametry....my spades are so bad that I can't stop the tap if there is one.

[jdonn]

Why don't you want partner to bid game? I would expect it to make, and in many cases a game we would miss if I pass and he reopens and I simply go to hearts.

[Phil]

Agree - partner is almost certainly reopening and we can comfortably bid 2♥.

 

And if partner sits with Hxx of spades? I'm happy.

[gwnn]

I have an ace and 3 card support

 

and xxxxx in RHO's suit

 

weeeeeeeeee

 

raising feels good!!

♥

[bluecalm]

2♥.

Most people I know don't like this style and I would have to pass playing with them. I think raising with such hands is winning strategy though.

[kfay]

:)

[Siegmund]

I learn towards pass, with 10 losers and the knowledge the spade ruffs are hitting the long hand, but I certainly wouldn't call raising obviously wrong.

[Fluffy]

wrong vulnerability, but I prefer to bid 3♥ than 2♥ with this crap hand, partner will know where we live better. With this vulnerability pass.

[nige1]

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=s87642ht76dt3ca93]133|100|Scoring: IMP

(Pass)-1♥-(1♠)-?[/hv]

IMO 2♥ = 10, _P = 7, 2♣ = 4, 2♦ = 2.

In Partnershp Bidding at Bridge, Robson and Segal advise you to try to pre-empt opponents when you have length in their bid suit but they are likely to have a fit in another suit.

[rogerclee]

2H, a mild overbid to possibly give LHO a problem or shut out their minor.

[655321]

I am a raiser.

 

Good things could happen (we make game or shut out the opponents) or bad things could happen (we get too high) but I don't think we should be overthinking this sort of hand, just raise because we have support and some values.

[jjbrr]

2♥

[CSGibson]

2♥. I have no wastage opposite partner's expected shortness, the ace is a good card, and I have some distribution even. This is not a problem to me.

[OleBerg]

Obvious 2♥.

[andy_h]

I was good enough to raise to 2♥ had RHO passed so nothing has changed that. An Ace is better than a KJ or QQ, and I don't even have a 4333 so I have nothing to be ashamed about.

[dake50]

Agree nigel.

Don't just analyze our hand -quite weak raise, but include opponents finding minor fit!

Essentially two ways to win: H-fit found + their minor missed.

Loose only if overbid 4H. Or rarely we set 5m now not found.

[aguahombre]

Both sides of the debate give good reasoning. "Obvious" in the title, and "obvious" in anyone's contribution seems inappropriate. It is a damn good question, worthy of this forum.

 

I agree with all the arguments (except for 3H). "Obviously", whichever I choose will work out badly.

[Little Kid]

I thought an ace and support made 2♥ automatic but maybe it is not as clear as I expected.

[aguahombre]

And lots of folks agree with you. My partner does, which makes me prejudiced toward JD, etc. Maybe the dividing line would be no doubleton, one less spade.

[mikeh]

Agree nigel.

Don't just analyze our hand -quite weak raise, but include opponents finding minor fit!

Essentially two ways to win: H-fit found + their minor missed. 

Loose only if overbid 4H. Or rarely we set 5m now not found.

I take it your partner either bids 4♥ or passes? He never makes a gametry or over-competes and finds himself too high in 3♥? You are a lucky player.

 

BTW, I suspect that many 2/1 players would bid 1N here, in an uncontested auction, intending to bid 2♥ over 2 minor. This is especially true for those who play constructive or semi-constructive raises, so for those players to argue that we had an obvious 1H  2H raise without the interference is nonsense.

 

That, imo, makes pass here certainly a call to be considered, and, imo, the best call.

[Winstonm]

I like both sides of the debate - the preemptive effect of 2H to shut out their minor fit is a new concept to me and a good concept - but at the same time if partner is not on the same page with me on 2H we may easily get lost.

 

I don't think this is the time for Alice in Wonderland bidding agreements (it means what I want it to mean when I bid it and nothing else!)

[CSGibson]

Agree nigel.

Don't just analyze our hand -quite weak raise, but include opponents finding minor fit!

Essentially two ways to win: H-fit found + their minor missed. 

Loose only if overbid 4H. Or rarely we set 5m now not found.

I take it your partner either bids 4♥ or passes? He never makes a gametry or over-competes and finds himself too high in 3♥? You are a lucky player.

 

BTW, I suspect that many 2/1 players would bid 1N here, in an uncontested auction, intending to bid 2♥ over 2 minor. This is especially true for those who play constructive or semi-constructive raises, so for those players to argue that we had an obvious 1H  2H raise without the interference is nonsense.

 

That, imo, makes pass here certainly a call to be considered, and, imo, the best call.

Why is that true? The 1♠ call makes our hand better, IMO, than an uncontested sequence.

 

Partner will not be overruffed in spades, and both the Ace and the shortness in our hand are likely to be more valuable as a result of the bid. The bid also means that we are more likely to be in a competitive bidding situation, where it is important to establish a fit fast, in addition to the preemptive value of a 2♥ bid.

 

Finally, partner knows that we are more likely to stretch to compete after an overcall, and will give some degree of leeway in a situation where we no longer have constructive raise agreements.

 

I respect that pass might work out better in some circumstances, especially at this vulnerability, but I think 2♥ has a lot going for it also.

[aguahombre]

now, that reasoning blows my decision. I was going to just count the WTP's and the OBv's, and if they were in the majority --go the other way.