Assign blame

[mohitz]

♠KT98xx ♥KQ98x ♦x ♣A

 

♠x ♥Axxx ♦JTxx ♣T9xx

 

(p) - 1♠ - (p) - 1N

(p) - 2♥ all pass

 

2♥ made 11 tricks.

[ArtK78]

North (the 6-5 hand) underbid his cards significantly. South much less so (if at all).

 

While North "only has a 12 count," it is a 4-loser 12 count that will produce a game opposite almost any fit. If partner has a hand with 4 hearts and a zero count game may have play. And, clearly, partner has more than a zero count. So you don't want to risk partner passing 2♥.

 

I have a lot of sympathy for South. He has found a fit of at least 8 cards instead of the 5-1 or 6-1 spade fit that he knew about from North's opening bid. Why should he move on? He has one working card - the ♥A - and a singleton in partner's suit - clearly a feature of dubious value. Opposite most normal minimum to medium opening hands with 5+ spades and 4+ hearts 2♥ could easily be the limit of the hand.

 

Blame to North. If I had to break it down by percentages, I am tempted to say 100% to North. But I will be kind and say 90/10.

[mikeh]

I'd say no real blame at all.

 

If one were playing a big club or other limited opening structure, we'd clearly want to jumpshift as North, but we aren't. And to bid 3♥ is a huge, huge overbid...yes..it works fine when partner has a fit for one of our suits and won't bid over 2♥ and won't go nuts over a jumpshift...but it works terribly on many other hands.

 

And S doesn't have a raise.

 

Sometimes you can't get there from here, and this looks like one of those cases.

[Jlall]

No blame this is normal. Blame your system.

[gnasher]

Game is hardly cold anyway. Try playing it after two rounds of diamonds.

[kenrexford]

FWIW, this is a reason why some of us play an artificial 2NT rebid:

 

1♠-P-1NT-P-?

 

2NT = GF, artificial. Responder usually bids 3♣ to find out what Opener has. Opener bids what he has, or 3NT/4♣ with clubs.

 

3-bid new suit = 5-5 with a 5-loser hand, not HCP strength but playing strength

 

3♠ = NF but extras

[gwnn]

yep finally a good hand for gazzilli :rolleyes:

 

edit: oh OK now I actually read ken's post. well it's still a good hand for gazzilli but there are other alternatives

 

and it's a little annoying that this hand is still an advertisement to strong club even though it doesn't involve a 16ish count with some key distribution

Edited June 3, 2010 by gwnn

[pooltuna]

I'd say no real blame at all.

 

If one were playing a big club or other limited opening structure, we'd clearly want to jumpshift as North, but we aren't. And to bid 3♥ is a huge, huge overbid...yes..it works fine when partner has a fit for one of our suits and won't bid over 2♥ and won't go nuts over a jumpshift...but it works terribly on many other hands.

 

And S doesn't have a raise.

 

Sometimes you can't get there from here, and this looks like one of those cases.

This my take on it as well

[Fluffy]

I have a good system here: 1♠-1NT-4♥ = 6 spades + 5/6 hearts

5-6 bid 4♦.

[the hog]

I have a good system here: 1♠-1NT-4♥ = 6 spades + 5/6 hearts

5-6 bid 4♦.

This would be a monstrous overbid. No blame on this hand.

[Free]

I have a good system here: 1♠-1NT-4♥ = 6 spades + 5/6 hearts

5-6 bid 4♦.

You call this a good system? :P

 

No real blame, only the methods imo.

[Vampyr]

I think that all of the above remarks make sense, but I must admit that at the table, I would raise with the South hand.

[whereagles]

agree with the vampire. It can hardly cost to raise and it can be a winner if pard is in the top end for is 2♥ (especially at imps).

 

Keep in mind pard's 2♥ can be quite a conservative bid, since 1NT is often done with loads of cards in the minors.

[hanp]

The blamers are crazy. North has a clear 2H bid and south has a clear pass. "It can hardly cost to raise" shows complete ignorance of the rules of bridge.

[whereagles]

It's not like you to be so... ahem... assertive. :ph34r:

 

Anyway, I gave a reason for raising other than "it can hardly cost", which I find very valid (if not consensual).

[ggwhiz]

The blamers are crazy. North has a clear 2H bid and south has a clear pass. "It can hardly cost to raise" shows complete ignorance of the rules of bridge.

 

Too strong imho.

 

I wouldn't mind a pard who raised with the south hand at imps and passed at matchpoints.

 

Definitely no blame in sight either way since my pards are 6-5 in the minors when I open that north hand.

[ArtK78]

I am clearly in the minority on this issue (a minority of one?).

 

Still, it takes very little to produce a game opposite the North hand (or at least give game reasonable play). Even opposite Qx Jxx xxxx xxxx game has play. Opposite the actual hand game is a virtual certainly, but most posters agree with the pass of the 2♥ rebid (even I agree with the pass of the 2♥ rebid).

 

If a reasonable action leads to an absurd result, perhaps one should examine the other actions that led to that point.

 

I don't believe that the 6-5 hand needs magic cards from partner to produce a game. So I think the jump rebid in hearts is warranted.

 

By the way, in the system that I play, a 3♥ rebid on this auction is not forcing. It shows an invitational 5-5 or better. 3♣ is an artificial forcing call. So it is much easier for me to rebid 3♥ on these cards than for someone whose 3♥ call is stronger.

[Jlall]

You cannot jumpshift on the north hand. What do you do with a 6-5 18 count? How do you differentiate the 2? It is not possible in standard bidding.

 

Yes obv if you play a special system (ie strong club) where jump shifting shows 5-5 NF with good playing strength you can do it, but in standard bidding this hand type will always be a problem.

 

This hand is just a symptom of the real problem, having a 2H bid that is such a wide range of hands (11-18, could be 5-4, 5-5, 6-5 (with a lower HCP max)). That range is too wide, and no matter what you do to try and work around it something will go wrong.

 

If you jumpshift with this you will get too high on misfits, and you will not have any way to show a stronger hand when you actually have it (unless you drive to the 5 level which obviously has problems). If you raise with a 5 count you will find some games but find yourself in numerous bad games since partner won't know you have 5 as you have to invite with 9. If you just jump to game with 9 you will get too high sometimes. Etc etc. The point is the range is too wide, and that will cause problems.

 

Of course when you post 2 hands we can easily tell you how to get to game (jumpshift or raise), but you have to think about the net affect of these actions on your entire system and your entire range of hands, not just on one hand.

[aguahombre]

I'd say no real blame at all.

 

If one were playing a big club or other limited opening structure, we'd clearly want to jumpshift as North, but we aren't.

Sometimes you can't get there from here, and this looks like one of those cases.

Or, to paraphrase you on the other tread:

 

Seeing this hand, I will put ********** Club system on our card; or not :)

 

Actually, between MikeH and Justin, everything is covered.

[ArtK78]

Many years ago just after the conclusion of a regional I got into a discussion with a few other players about handling responses to forcing 1NT. It seems that not a great deal of thought had been given to this very common response. Most players consider a jump shift (1♠ - 1NT - 3♥, for example) to be natural and game forcing, and this leaves the 2 level rebid to cover a very wide range of hands. That is the source of the problem in the OP above.

 

Since then, there was an article in The Bridge World dealing with this situation in a manner that seems to solve many of the problems. The article was a number of years ago, and I don't have a reference to it on hand. But the author proposed the following rebids after a forcing 1NT response:

 

1♥ - 1NT - :

 

2♣, 2♦ and 2♥ are the same as always, except as limited by the bids that follow.

 

3♣ or 3♦ - 5-5 or better in Hearts and the bid minor, invitational to game values, not forcing.

 

2♠ - forcing and artificial, one of several types of strong hands. Responder puppets with 2NT and opener defines his hand as follows:

 

3♣ - Hearts and Clubs, 5-4 or better, game forcing.

3♦ - Hearts and Diamonds, 5-4 or better, game forcing.

3♥ - 4-5 in Spades and Hearts, invitational to game values, not forcing.

3♠ - 5-6 in Spades and Hearts, game forcing.

3NT - 4-5 in Spades and Hearts, game forcing values but not forcing.

4♥ - game forcing one suiter (stronger than direct 4♥).

 

If the bidding starts 1♠ - 1NT, there is less room available, so we lose one of the 5-5 hands by making the 3♣ rebid the strong forcing artificial call. Thus:

 

1♠ - 1NT:

 

2♣, 2♦, 2♥ and 2♠ are the same as always, except as limited by the bids that follow.

 

3♦ and 3♥ - 5-5 or better in Spades and the bid suit, invitational to game values, not forcing.

 

3♣ - artificial and forcing, one of several strong hands. Over responder's puppet to 3♦, opener bids 3♥ with a game forcing hand with Spades and Hearts, 3♠ with a game forcing hand with Spades and Clubs, and 3NT with a game forcing hand with Spades and Diamonds on which he is willing to be passed out in 3NT. If not, he bids something higher. However, a 4♠ rebid after the 3♣ bid is a strong one-suiter which is stronger than a direct 4♠ rebid.

 

These methods may not be the best treatment available after a forcing 1NT response, but they are better than whatever passes for Standard. Using these methods, I would rebid 3♥ on the hand given in the OP. Game would be reached.

[gwnn]

I don't understand why people invent artificial 2S 2NT and 3C bids and not adopt one of the many good variations of artificial 2C rebids. Surely that is the most natural way of going around things, putting many hands in lower bids and making higher bids as clear as possible.

[ArtK78]

I don't understand why people invent artificial 2S 2NT and 3C bids and not adopt one of the many good variations of artificial 2C rebids. Surely that is the most natural way of going around things, putting many hands in lower bids and making higher bids as clear as possible.

Perhaps it is because it may be necessary to use the 2♣ bid for weaker hands to allow yourself to get out at a lower level, but with stronger hands you can afford to use higher artificial forcing calls.

[junyi_zhu]

You cannot jumpshift on the north hand. What do you do with a 6-5 18 count? How do you differentiate the 2? It is not possible in standard bidding.

 

Yes obv if you play a special system (ie strong club) where jump shifting shows 5-5 NF with good playing strength you can do it, but in standard bidding this hand type will always be a problem.

 

This hand is just a symptom of the real problem, having a 2H bid that is such a wide range of hands (11-18, could be 5-4, 5-5, 6-5 (with a lower HCP max)). That range is too wide, and no matter what you do to try and work around it something will go wrong.

 

If you jumpshift with this you will get too high on misfits, and you will not have any way to show a stronger hand when you actually have it (unless you drive to the 5 level which obviously has problems). If you raise with a 5 count you will find some games but find yourself in numerous bad games since partner won't know you have 5 as you have to invite with 9. If you just jump to game with 9 you will get too high sometimes. Etc etc. The point is the range is too wide, and that will cause problems.

 

Of course when you post 2 hands we can easily tell you how to get to game (jumpshift or raise), but you have to think about the net affect of these actions on your entire system and your entire range of hands, not just on one hand.

This problem can be solved by transfers over 1M 1N.

So 1S 1N 2D shows hearts. responder can bid 2H to show 3 or more( and no extra), then opener can bid 3H to invite and responder can probably bid 4H to accept the invitation. Of course, there are other problems playing transfers, the major problem is how to show clubs, 2S can show clubs with some extra. Then S+C without extra is a headache. Still, the transfer structure is nice in many areas.

[ggwhiz]

Best quote from a bidding contest in the CBF magazine from Allan Graves, similar to the 2♥ re-bid in this auction.

 

"I don't mind a poor result to maintain overall system integrity."