3 over 1

[mike777]

I got to play against

Barry he did play a very aggressive style B)

I bet he still does, wherever his current game is :)

 

I lived in Studio city...his death is unsolved...

 

see here for a bit more:

 

http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/crane.htm

 

 

http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/brg_men2.htm#storis

[peachy]

3♦ is far from old-fashioned.  In old-fashioned Standard bidding, where 2♥ was not a game force, 3♦ was a "high reverse" and was forcing to game.  It showed a hand of about 16 HCP or equivalent playing strength.

 

2♠ on this hand is actually the modern approach.

What did you do in the old days with this hand then?

I the really old days it was a 2♠. When Hardy's book came it became fashionable to bid 3♦. But now 2♠ is standard I believe.

 

I generally prefer not to play the 2♠ catch-all but I would like to make an exception for this specific situation where the fourth suit is at the 4-level. This would make it impossible to sort out both strain and level in some situation. Say responder bids 3♠ over 3♦. IMHO this can't promise 3-card support since it is the only waiting bid available for a hand with no clear direction and 3NT as a possible strain - 3♥ should show 6. So after 3♠ we still need to sort out strain. I am afraid we can't do that while at the same time sorting out the strength of at least one of the two hands.

Why is Hardy getting the blame again... :)

Hardy style is not to bid 3D unless values are sound 14+, or, the shape is 5-5 AND it is for some reason the best description to bid 3m.

Direct quote from the Hardy's Green Book [published in 2000]:

"Opener will tend not to use so much bidding space unless it is necessary in order to best describe the hand."

[gszeszycki]

left entirely out of this discussion (I don't know why) is the difference between

IMPS and MP. The minor suits are virtually assigned to oblivion below slam level

at MP and with any weakish distributional hand 3n is a way more desirable

contract than 5 of a minor. This position makes bidding 2s catch all with the weakish 2 suiter) very desirable at MP because it allows opener to show stronger (and therefore more likely to be slam worthy) hands immediately.

 

This position makes much less sense at IMPS where getting to the BEST SPOT (IE minor suits are back in the ballgame) is a ton more important than getting to 3n. Playing IMPS I would bid 3d with the weaker distributional hand (if p then bids 3n so be it) with the stronger 2 suiter I would bid 2s catch all 4d over 3n (realizing that 4n is then a sign off and a cue bid shows slam desire)

 

There are numerous problems created in 2/1 bidding when forcing responder to

rebid 2n with all manner of hand. Save the 2n rebids for hands that have extra

strength and/or no clear direction. Rebid 3n with most balanced or semi balanced

minimums.

[junyi_zhu]

You hold:

 

♠AT9xx

♥8

♦AQ87x

♣J9

 

1♠-2♥

???

 

Is 3♦ normal and wtp? Is 2♠ (catch-all) better?

This is a 2S bid. In my system, 2S shows minimum, 2NT shows 6 spade and 3 levels show extra.