How to continue?

[hanp]

If you start a thread about it here, you will see that some people DO NOT PLAY STAYMAN!!!!

[aguahombre]

Ok Han. Show me the definitive book in which it is written that it is 3 card support. Pls quote the title and page number.

Sorry if only Han should have answered, but try Hardy orange, page 43, example 34A.

[bucky]

2S showed 3 card support.

I'm tempted to just say 4S immediately over 2S.

I actually thought about this at the table. However, the club fit is too much to hide. We may belong to clubs after all.

I think 3♣ is fine. You are making a descriptive bid that shouldn't be taken as showing extra. But partner's failure to bid 3♠ in earlier round is also significant (the way I play, 3♠ instead of 2♠ shows slam oriented hand with good spade support). With your weak spades/clubs and lack of control in general, a 4♠ bid is now called for, or 3NT.

[bucky]

I think it's pretty clear to bid 3NT. In the context of our shape we have a hand where that could easily be the best contract. I only play serious or non-serious 3NT here if opener bids 3♠, not over any lower bid.

 

Give partner Qxx AKJx xx QJxx or something...

Not that there is anything wrong with 3NT bid from opener now, but in your example hand, why wouldn't partner bid 3NT instead of 3♥?

[jdonn]

I think it's pretty clear to bid 3NT. In the context of our shape we have a hand where that could easily be the best contract. I only play serious or non-serious 3NT here if opener bids 3♠, not over any lower bid.

 

Give partner Qxx AKJx xx QJxx or something...

Not that there is anything wrong with 3NT bid from opener now, but in your example hand, why wouldn't partner bid 3NT instead of 3♥?

To describe his hand like we are doing and help us find the best contract. I admit 3NT would be a fair bid but change his hand to 3415 and I'm quite sure he should bid 3♥. Why bid 3NT and find us perhaps with Jxxx of diamonds? Even on my example I prefer 3♥. Not only might we want to rightside in diamonds, but if it becomes a slam auction we can both bid more accurately if we know where partner's values are.

[hanp]

Ok Han. Show me the definitive book in which it is written that it is 3 card support. Pls quote the title and page number.

Sorry if only Han should have answered, but try Hardy orange, page 43, example 34A.

In my opinion Hardy is not the definite book on anything. I don't think that there is a definitely book on bidding anyway.

[aguahombre]

Yeh, well his question was to you anyway, and you agree 3 spades have been shown. I should have let you answer.

[the hog]

Ok Han. Show me the definitive book in which it is written that it is 3 card support. Pls quote the title and page number.

Sorry if only Han should have answered, but try Hardy orange, page 43, example 34A.

In my opinion Hardy is not the definite book on anything. I don't think that there is a definitely book on bidding anyway.

That was my point. There are so many flavours of 2/1 that you can't assume anything without prior discussion.

[flytoox]

I think it's pretty clear to bid 3NT. In the context of our shape we have a hand where that could easily be the best contract. I only play serious or non-serious 3NT here if opener bids 3♠, not over any lower bid.

 

Give partner Qxx AKJx xx QJxx or something...

One of my respected player also suggested 3N after 3H. Not that he thinks 3N is the right contract, but he thinks 3N describes the hand perfectly, 3C has already shown the 5143, now 3N has to shown singleton HQ or HK. This information will help pd to decide where to go.

[flytoox]

Ok Han. Show me the definitive book in which it is written that it is 3 card support. Pls quote the title and page number.

Sorry if only Han should have answered, but try Hardy orange, page 43, example 34A.

In my opinion Hardy is not the definite book on anything. I don't think that there is a definitely book on bidding anyway.

That was my point. There are so many flavours of 2/1 that you can't assume anything without prior discussion.

Everything has exception. But please dont forget the default agreement. I also said in our partnership, 2S always promises 3 card support.

 

If you want to discuss the merits of 2 cards support after 2/1, that is fine. But I think it would be more appropriate to discuss it in a new thread.

[the hog]

"But please dont forget the default agreement."

 

According to whom? Can you please cite references which say this is the default agreement?

[flytoox]

"But please dont forget the default agreement."

 

According to whom? Can you please cite references which say this is the default agreement?

You didnt see this:"I also said in our partnership, 2S always promises 3 card support."?

 

Enough for me.

[aguahombre]

enough here, too. a previous thread and one text of many are not enough. Lord knows what he considers worthy of acknowledging.

[peachy]

Ok Han. Show me the definitive book in which it is written that it is 3 card support. Pls quote the title and page number.

Sorry if only Han should have answered, but try Hardy orange, page 43, example 34A.

In my opinion Hardy is not the definite book on anything. I don't think that there is a definitely book on bidding anyway.

If we have to quote Hardy, forget the yellow book and use the green book instead. But on this question, both of them say 2S promises 3-card support.

 

Agree with hanp that there really is no need to find a book that says that. It is common bridge logic IMO.

[mike777]

Playing 2/1 with a reliable partner, sitting south you hold

S: A8765

H: Q

D: KQJ9

C: T76

 

Auction proceeds as follows(Opponents are silent):

 

N    S

-      1S

2C    2D

2S    3C

3H    ??

 

What do you bid now?

 

In particular, what is the difference between 3S and 4S? Does 3S encourage pd to make slam try and 4S shows a min. hand?

 

Furtheremore,  what is the difference between 3S (If that is a waiting bid) and a cuebid of, say 4D, minor?

 

Any thoughts on these follow-ups are welcome.

MUST I OPEN 1S

 

 

 

--------------

 

 

IF IS -CRAP AND I MUST OPEN OK

 

---------------

 

3S NOW EASY IF I CAN 4S.....IF WE PLAY THAT ...I HAVE CRAP

[the hog]

"But please dont  forget the default agreement."

 

According to whom? Can you please cite references which say this is the default agreement?

You didnt see this:"I also said in our partnership, 2S always promises 3 card support."?

 

Enough for me.

Yes you did say this in a later post. However i was not commenting on your statement but rather Sigmund's and the later cposts that 2S shows 3 by default.

Had Sigmund said that "for him" 2S always shows 3, that would be a different story.

 

Quote Agua: "enough here, too. a previous thread and one text of many are not enough. Lord knows what he considers worthy of acknowledging."

I assume you read in the other thread that quite a few do not play that it necessarily promises 3?

 

Quote peachy: "Agree with hanp that there really is no need to find a book that says that. It is common bridge logic IMO." Why? Please explain! For me it is logical that it is a waiting bid, asking opener to describe his hand further. A hand where responder does not want to bid 2NT, perhaps because the hand is unbalanced and/or lacks a stopper in the 4th suit.

 

Anyway, you can bid anyway you like - I don't give a fig. I just have to laugh when people say "the default is 3 because that is the way I play." As I have already said, there are many flavours of 2/1.

[ONEferBRID]

Ok Han. Show me the definitive book in which it is written that it is 3 card support. Pls quote the title and page number.

Sorry if only Han should have answered, but try Hardy orange, page 43, example 34A.

Also, in Hardy's old yellow paperback, page 98.

 

" A 2/1 response does not deny that Responder has 3 card support for Opener's major. "....

"When Opener's rebid is in a suit at the 2-level that is lower ranking than his original suit, Responder has the opportunity to to show his 3 card fit at the 2-level."

[the hog]

Ok Han. Show me the definitive book in which it is written that it is 3 card support. Pls quote the title and page number.

Sorry if only Han should have answered, but try Hardy orange, page 43, example 34A.

Also, in Hardy's old yellow paperback, page 98.

 

" A 2/1 response does not deny that Responder has 3 card support for Opener's major. "....

"When Opener's rebid is in a suit at the 2-level that is lower ranking than his original suit, Responder has the opportunity to to show his 3 card fit at the 2-level."

OneFer, I don't disagree with any of this. What I am commenting on is the comment that 3 card support is a standard/default agreement if responder now bids 2M. I don't see that your Hardy quote states that resp MUST have 3M to bid 2 of opener's Major.