cnszsun Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 [hv=d=s&n=saqjxhkqdkqxcqxxx&s=skxxhaj109xxdaxxcx]133|200|1H-2C2H-2S2NT-4NT6NT[/hv] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 N should rebid 3H instead of eating up all that space with the quantitative 4N. S shouldn't accept, remember partner shouldn't have much help in hearts. But of course 4N isn't exactly a good contract either. I would not call it a contract at all actually. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Depends a lot on the meaning of 2♣, but without alerts I'd definitely say 2♣ is wrong. You can just respond 1♠. Bidding like this suggests 5+♣ and 4♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Agree, 1♠ is much better. Why go to this trouble to introduce such a crappy club suit? How about 1H-1S2H-3D3S-4H With all working cards and a pushy sequence from partner, south can try keycard now and reach 6H. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 disagree, I really like 2♣. it establishes a GF immediately so we don't need to look for forcing bids later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 if you wanna start with 2♣ you've got to rebid 2NT, then when partner bids 3♥ you can cuebid. starting with 1♠ might get you stablishing a fake spade fit before using blackwood, wich is not a bad thing since ♠K is a keycard anyway and ♥KQ are already allocated. But how to find the ♣ control I have no idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cphastrup Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 disagree, I really like 2♣. it establishes a GF immediately so we don't need to look for forcing bids later.Don't need forcing bids later: 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥ - 6♥ :) But... if you want forcing bids they're not hard to find. After 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥, then 3♦, 3♣, 4 NT and 4♦(available if you cuebid 2nd round controls) are forcing. Bidding 2♣ on that may have established a GF, but it's also established a mess. By bidding 1♠ you get more room for exploring strain and level. If partner rebids 1NT, it's more likely you belong in NT (and you can still force by using XY-NT or the like...) If partner rebids 2♥, you've found a fit at the 2-level. And another bonus: You don't need to lie about ♣/♠ length and strength like you do when bidding 2♣ and rebidding ♠... In my partnership it might have gone like the first sequence of my post - not the craziest of punts. An alternative: 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥ - 4♦ (denies ♣-control) - 4♥ - 4♠ - 4NT etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Depends a lot on the meaning of 2♣, but without alerts I'd definitely say 2♣ is wrong. You can just respond 1♠. Bidding like this suggests 5+♣ and 4♠.The other positives for 1♠;a.) partner gets a better valuation on the ♠K if he has it and tends to devalue a singleton ♠ as probable wastage b.) if 2♥ over 2♣ is ambiguous it is less so over 1♠ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 disagree, I really like 2♣. it establishes a GF immediately so we don't need to look for forcing bids later.Don't need forcing bids later: 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥ - 6♥ ;) But... if you want forcing bids they're not hard to find. After 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥, then 3♦, 3♣, 4 NT and 4♦(available if you cuebid 2nd round controls) are forcing. Bidding 2♣ on that may have established a GF, but it's also established a mess. By bidding 1♠ you get more room for exploring strain and level. If partner rebids 1NT, it's more likely you belong in NT (and you can still force by using XY-NT or the like...) If partner rebids 2♥, you've found a fit at the 2-level. And another bonus: You don't need to lie about ♣/♠ length and strength like you do when bidding 2♣ and rebidding ♠... In my partnership it might have gone like the first sequence of my post - not the craziest of punts. An alternative: 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥ - 4♦ (denies ♣-control) - 4♥ - 4♠ - 4NT etc. Both approaches have nice advantages and nice disadvantages. I wasn't looking to change anyone's mind, I just mentioned one of the nice advantages of the approach preferred by me. I guess if I say that I am not alone in the forums who play it this way I sound elitist or something like that. This issue is complicated and I am not interested in changing anyone's mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ONEferBRID Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 [hv=d=s&n=saqjxhkqdkqxcqxxx&s=skxxhaj109xxdaxxcx]133|200|1H-2C2H-2S2NT-4NT6NT[/hv]What is with the 2S rebid ?I'm assuing 2C! was a 2/1 GF ( as putrid of a suit that it is ).Opener has denied 4s with the 2H rebid.. AND has shown 6+h ( with only 5 cards, Opener would have had a 3C or 3D or 2NT rebid -- even if one of the unbid suits were unstopped [ as Phillip Alder would say: " that's what partners are for " ] ). 1H - 2C!2H - 3H ( now you have agreed trumps at a low level and no worry about a passout)3S - 4D ( going past 3NT w/cue, yet denying a Cl Ctrl in his 2/1 suit; thus, have strength )4NT - 5S ( 2 + hQ )6H Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 [hv=d=s&n=saqjxhkqdkqxcqxxx&s=skxxhaj109xxdaxxcx]133|200|1H-2C2H-2S2NT-4NT6NT[/hv] 2c is fine and makes the hand easy. if 2h promises 6 (it does for me) then 3h now...if not then 2nt now...not 2s. ------------- btw note 1s did not save any room ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanp Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Agree with mike777, 2C is good, 2S is bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
straube Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Agree with mike777, 2C is good, 2S is bad. I agree. Establish the GF first. Imo, one shouldn't respond 1S with a GF hand unless holding 5 spades. It's difficult to establish a GF after introducing a 4-cd spade suit, it's difficult coping with competition after doing so, and it gets really messy if opener decides to raise spades with 3. I also think opener with a 4/6 hand should rebid 2S and then rebid hearts later. This means that 1H-2C, 2H-2S is 4S/5C. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keylime Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 1♠ for me, and it's clear of mind. Allow pard to have 4-5-x-x or 4-6-x-x to support you, and now you can reeval your hand. I disagree with 2♣ to set the GF, because you know it's your hand already; the opps are likely to stay out. Additionally, if pard finds a jump bid, the KQ of trumps, is prime cards for a slam try. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 note how the hand can get a bit messy if you start:1h=1s2h=?or1h=1s2s(can be 3)=? you have not saved any space to explore for slam compared to 1h=2c=2h=3h(slam try) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted October 15, 2010 Report Share Posted October 15, 2010 Depends a lot on the meaning of 2♣, but without alerts I'd definitely say 2♣ is wrong. You can just respond 1♠. Bidding like this suggests 5+♣ and 4♠. Agree. I would certainly bid 1S and it is pretty obvious. There is a school of thought on this site that bids 2C "to establish the game force", (as if you couldn't do it buy other means), and there have been a number of posts on this. For me, the bidding shows 5C and 4S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted October 15, 2010 Report Share Posted October 15, 2010 Steve Robinson said in the vugraph of the Rosenblum final yesterday that responder should not bid 1♠ over 1♥ with four spades in a balanced GF. So it appears this view is not limited to those on the forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted October 15, 2010 Report Share Posted October 15, 2010 I play 2♣ as a GF relay as well, and opener will immediately show if he has 4♠ or not. Then we can relay out the entire hand, which gives us an easier auction and better judgement from the balanced responder. HOWEVER, OP didn't say 2♣ was GF nor artificial or possibly short... :angry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted October 15, 2010 Report Share Posted October 15, 2010 If you play 2C as a relay, then that is a different story altogether. Steve Robinson also opens 1S onxxxxxAxAKQJxxvoid According to his book, not to bid a 5 card major is to deny one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted October 15, 2010 Report Share Posted October 15, 2010 Poison the well :angry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanp Posted October 15, 2010 Report Share Posted October 15, 2010 Additionally, if pard finds a jump bid, the KQ of trumps, is prime cards for a slam try. Also, should partner jump rebid, your 19 HCP, might be good for slam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bucky Posted October 15, 2010 Report Share Posted October 15, 2010 Opener has denied 4s with the 2H rebid.. AND has shown 6+h ( with only 5 cards, Opener would have had a 3C or 3D or 2NT rebid -- even if one of the unbid suits were unstopped [ as Phillip Alder would say: " that's what partners are for " ] ). It is fairly common to play that after 2/1, 2M rebid doesn't promise 6+ cards, and that 1♥-2♣-2♠ shows extra (which means 1♥-2♣-2♥ doesn't deny 4 spades either). Of course that is not the only way of playing 2/1, but I think you will find plenty of players (and majority of experts) who DON'T play the way you described. That being said, I do agree that 2♠ is not a good bid. Once you decide to start the auction with 2♣ (which has merits and problems), you should give up finding 4-4 spade fit after partner rebids 2♥. The 2♠ bid implies a much better club suit. I think a simple 2NT is best here. If partner raises to 3NT, you can bid quant 4NT. If partner rebids 3♥ (as he should for this hand), you can start cuebidding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.