Bite me

[hanp]

AQJ10x Qx Qxx QJx

 

 

1D - (1NT*) - Dbl - (2C)

3D - (p) - ??

 

1NT showed 5+ clubs and a 4-card major, my double was penalty.

 

What do you bid over 3D? By the way, do you think 3D is forcing?

[Free]

3♠, 3NT and 4♦ are all possible I guess. In MP I'd probably just bid 3NT, in imps 3♠ I guess.

 

I consider 3♦ forcing, no need to go preemptive after a penalty Dbl.

[hanp]

Scoring was IMPs, thanks. I don't remember the vulnerability.

[Ant590]

I don't like 3NT; it's between 3♠ and 4♦ for me. I think I would bid 4♦.

 

I think that to some extent it depends what partner's double of 2♣ would have been --- I can see conflicting meta rules why it may be takeout (they're in a fit auction), and penalty (we made a strength showing double the last round).

[Codo]

Forcing and 3 ♠ now. I think this is natural, but if partner has other ideas, this would be fine too.

 

3 NT would be an underbid. I would bid that with minimum.

[Fluffy]

3♠ for em too, seminat, IMO we are in GF auction now.

[Simplicity]

I think what 3♦ shows depends a bit on your system. In most of my partnerships I'd be in a force over 2♣, so partners 3♦ would be NF showing a long strong suit.

 

When i first looked i thought we just had to bid 3♠, but i dont think pard is ever bidding 3N so we may just get endplayed to some bad 4♠ and 5♦ contracts.

 

Think I'd bid 3N tho i'm prepared to be lol-ed.

[gwnn]

forcing. I wonder if 4D over my 3S is forcing but I won't pass it anyway so all is fine at the moment.

[hanp]

If you bid 3S (not my choice at the table) then partner probably bids 4C.

[Free]

If you bid 3S (not my choice at the table) then partner probably bids 4C.

4♦, it's getting a bit slippery...

[pooltuna]

If you bid 3S (not my choice at the table) then partner probably bids 4C.

4♦, it's getting a bit slippery...

put me in the 3♠ crowd and here

[Phil]

3♠ + 4♦ looks obvious. I'm curious what you chose.

[gszeszycki]

AQJ10x Qx Qxx QJx

 

 

1D - (1NT*) - Dbl - (2C)

3D - (p) - ??

 

1NT showed 5+ clubs and a 4-card major, my double was penalty.

 

What do you bid over 3D? By the way, do you think 3D is forcing?

 

failure to bid 2s right away has put us into a much greater guessing position. P 3d bid which probably shows long dia and minimal type hand has at least assured us somewhat that we didnt miss an ice cold spade game/slam (unless p comes up with stiff K (yes the spades we didnt bid are that good).

 

a 3h or 3s bid now seems to show that major and clubs stopped and worry about other major (if our penalty x was not based on club stuff it was probably wrong). This means arriving in 4s seems difficult at best. I feel at this point a jump to 4s would be splinter in support of dia.

 

3N seems a ton easier to make than 5d at this point so that's where i go. The fact the opps have at most 4 heart runners off the top is a form of stopper to me.

[gnasher]

Could I have bid a forcing 2♠ on the previous round? This auction is similar to 1♦ (2♣), so it seems sensible to play new suits as forcing (though if I had time to discuss it I'd play transfers from 2♣ upwards).

 

Anyway, now you've got the sort of problem that negative free bidders pretend don't exist. 3♠, 3NT and 4♦ could all be right. 3♠ might endplay partner into raising on a doubleton, and we might well have too many losers in 5♦, so I'd bid 3NT.

[ArtK78]

2♠ forcing on the previous round would have made life much easier.

 

However, having doubled, we have to do something intelligent. 3♠ seems to be the way to go. 3NT could be very wrong. While it is unlikely that the opps can run 5 hearts against us, it is not unlikely that they can run 5 rounded-suit tricks against us. If 3NT is right, partner MAY be able to bid it over 3♠. And partner is unlikely to pull 3NT when it is wrong given our double on the preceding round.

 

After my 3♠ bid, I will continue with 4♦ over partner's 4♣ bid.

[hanp]

I was hoping that some would comment on the methods. The auction is similar in the sense that the overcaller has clubs, but it is different in the sense that the bid is 1NT, not 2C. I am not convinced that 2M forcing is better, and I'm also not convinced that we'd want to give up on a penalty when we hold this hand.

 

I like transfers, but this could be an alternative:

 

Double = 4+ spades, "strong" if 5+.

2C = 4+ hearts, "strong" if 5+.

2D = raise.

2H, 2S = NF.

 

Double with 4-4 in the majors. Pass followed by a double of clubs could be played as penalty.

 

This scheme has several strong points. First, it is similar to what I play over 1D - (2C) so easier in terms of memory. Second, when you have a negative double, you immediately show which 4-card major you have. Third, you still have the "negative freebids".

 

Thoughts?

[mycroft]

Well, I would assume that this auction was similar to 1D-X-XX, but you know that doubler has clubs. The problem is that the NTer will not have a takeout double shape - 4315 or 4405 will double rather than 1NT. So if you're going to use a penalty double, it should be "stuff, willing to hit at least two of the three suits", and 3D after 1D-X-XX-2C is...?

 

Yeah, if it's strong, then overcaller is probably 1426 or 2416 or something. 3NT is ugly if partner doesn't have a club stopper - they bang out clubs until you take yours, then use partner's heart card to get in to run the rest. 9 tricks if diamonds run and the SK is in the pocket (which I will admit is pretty likely), -3 if that doesn't happen. If it's "partner, I have an oversize 3D preempt, and have little defence"

then you might just want to play there.

 

On the other hand, partner's never going to play you for 5 spades to 100 honours. Oh and what were you going to do after the expected 1D-1NT-X-2C; P-P? Is QJx enough to double on? Yeah, they could be playing the 5-2, but even then the suit splits. They could be playing the 6-3, too. They're never playing 1NT. So I think I've talked myself into not trying for penalty and putting in a forcing 2S immediately.

[hanp]

So you would actually bid 2S undiscussed? Seems pretty risky to me.

 

Or have you discussed this auction and play that 2S is forcing? If so, could you explain your methods?

[rogerclee]

This seems like a reasonable method to me over 1m (1N), with 1N showing the other minor and a 4 card major.

 

pass = weak or a minimum negative double

X = cards, usually no 5 card major

2m = minimum minor raise

2om = hearts, constructive or better

2H = spades, constructive or better

2S = inv+ minor raise

2N = mixed raise

3m = preemptive

3om/H/S = splinter

 

If you are willing to give up your simple minor raise to show a hand with either major, I think that would be quite reasonable.

[MFA]

I like rogerclee's suggestion. Only adjustment I would make is to play any 3x as preemptive.

 

'Nobody' around here plays this "Polish 1NT" anymore, as it is being called here. So my partner and I don't really have a defense to it. We would have to fall back on normal (for us) principles when only one suit is known: D takeout, new suit forcing, their suit = good raise, etc.

 

I would therefore have bid 2♠ in comfort as 10+ with 5+ spades.

 

I will suggest rogerclee's defense next time someone plays this convention against us.

[cloa513]

One question is if 3D is forcing, why did partner spurn 3C which surely must be forcing. I'd say 3D is not forcing but strongly invitational say ♣xx ♦AKJxxxxx ♥xx ♠Kx so you can't bid a natural major it must be cover asking or showing depending on your methods.

[mycroft]

True, Han, that might (in argument with 1D-X-2S (let's assume that for some reason I can't bid 1S)) be non-forcing (OTOH, the reason people play 2-bids nonforcing after 1x-X is that they're worried it's going to go AP. 1D-1NT there isn't the -500 worry, so less reason to have it NF). It would help to know the range of the Raptor...

 

If 2S isn't forcing, then 2C;2S certainly is. It can't put us in any more trouble than double, and can be used for "balance of power" hands that don't feel comfortable doubling two of the opponent's "three suits".

 

Roger - that's cute - I like it. Have you thought of how that changes when the opening is 1M (and now 1NT shows 4=oM and a longer (unknown) minor)? (not challenging, or asking you to do the work for me; just wondering).

[rogerclee]

Have you thought of how that changes when the opening is 1M (and now 1NT shows 4=oM and a longer (unknown) minor)? (not challenging, or asking you to do the work for me; just wondering).

It seems to me like this is a bit simpler because you don't have to worry as much about "other major" type hands, either 4 or 5+.

 

As in most areas of bridge, "natural" is mostly fine, with "transfers" being a slight improvement.

[mycroft]

In that way it is a bit simpler; in the way that you don't have a cuebid under 2 of your suit, it's harder. I think transfers would work well here, as well - given that you have transfer-to-M and bid M to show raises, do you need 2NT for that as well?

[aguahombre]

I was hoping that some would comment on the methods.

I was hoping you would (as you did, later) ask for comments on the methods. Not because I have any, but because I wanted to see some.

 

The posters, before that, did well to stay on the given conditions.