new minor forcing question

[babalu1997]

Well I was in first seat and I had ugly hand:

 

[hv=pc=n&n=sa984hqj7d3caq752]133|100[/hv]

 

I opened 1 club, partner answered 1 diamond, I rebid 1nt.

 

My choice was 1nt or 2clubs, but the game was matchpoints

 

The partner rebids 2 clubs, which I passed. His hand surprised me.

 

It could not be new minor forcing, since it was not a new minor. My hand has no other bid.

 

We also had not agreed on inverted minor raises, but neither the 1 diamond nor the 2 club bid does his hand justice.

 

Below is his hand. ATB. thanks

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s3ha6daqj7ckjt863]133|100[/hv]

[Finch]

Well I was in first seat and I had ugly hand:

 

[hv=pc=n&n=sa984hqj7d3caq752]133|100[/hv]

 

I opened 1 club, partner answered 1 diamond, I rebid 1nt.

 

My choice was 1nt or 2clubs, but the game was matchpoints

 

The partner rebids 2 clubs, which I passed. His hand surprised me.

 

It could not be new minor forcing, since it was not a new minor. My hand has no other bid.

 

We also had not agreed on inverted minor raises, but neither the 1 diamond nor the 2 club bid does his hand justice.

 

Below is his hand. ATB. thanks

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s3ha6daqj7ckjt863]133|100[/hv]

 

You have a normal 1S rebid. This is far, far better than either 1NT or 2C, and that's where the biggest blame should lie.

 

I agree that 2C wasn't "new minor forcing". In the UK, at least, it's common to play specifically 2C as the forcing bid after opener's 1NT rebid. It seems clear that you and your partner hadn't discussed what responder's bids mean after a 1NT rebid, so the only blame to assign there is in not having discussed it.

[Fluffy]

I am no expert in NMF, but seems to me there is no new minor when you bid 1♣ and 1♦.

 

You obviously bid 1♠ with 4315 not sure what distracted you. Partner had to take a risk and find a forcing bid, he missguessed, but your mistake is an error.

[Gerardo]

I agree on the 1♠ rebid.

 

For these cases (GF support in a minor, partner rebids NT so no 4SF available), I bid NMF (obtensibly with 5 cards in my major, then support the opener's minor, GF, retract promise about 5th card in major.

 

in this case, I am stuck for a bid, though. But would have bid 2♣, 10+, the first round.

[Bbradley62]

I agree with the others that you have a crystal-clear 1♠ rebid. But, while your 1NT rebid could have landed you in the wrong strain, it is not what caused your side to stop in a part-score.

 

With your 1NT rebid, partner should expect you to have something like ♠Axx, ♥QJx, ♦xxx, ♣AQxx. His 2♣ bid is a signoff, possibly being (40)54 with <10HCP, depending on partnership agreements about bidding at the 1-level. If you don't have tools for finding out which 12-14HCP you actually hold, he needs to just blast somewhere, which will probably be game.

 

So, your split of the blame depends on form of scoring and other results. It's mostly your fault that you didn't get to slam, but it's his fault that you didn't get to game.

 

PS: It would never occur to me to describe that as an ugly hand.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

 

[hv=pc=n&n=sa984hqj7d3caq752]133|100[/hv]

 

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s3ha6daqj7ckjt863]133|100[/hv]

Splinters.... ya gotta luv 'em ! !

 

You ( North) ....... Partner

1C .................... 2C! ( GF, denies 4 Major )

3D! ( splinter) ..... 4S! ( splinter )

4NT ( RKC ) ....... 5C ( 0/3 )

??

..5D(next step= cQ-ask)

..5H(2nd step = K-ask ) >> 6C ( no outside K's )

[Bbradley62]

We also had not agreed on inverted minor raises

 

But would have bid 2♣, 10+, the first round.

You ( North) ....... Partner

1C .................... 2C! ( GF, denies 4 Major )

 

C'mon, guys... gotta stick to the conditions of contest... Well, unless you're saying that their system's lack of inverted minors deserves a (significant) share of the blame...

[TWO4BRIDGE]

C'mon, guys... gotta stick to the conditions of contest... Well, unless you're saying that their system's lack of inverted minors deserves a (significant) share of the blame...

yes, ATB to "lack of inverted minors" .

 

But why was the 1S rebid ( by Opener ) excluded from her choices ? That deserves another ATB.

 

1C - 1D ( not my choice, but 1D is bid "for a reason" and does not exclude a 4 card Major )

1S - 2H! ( 4th Suit GF ... I hope this is an option ! )

3C - 4C! ( Minorwood in a GF auction )

4NT* - 5D ( specific K-ask )

6C ( no outside K's )

__________________________________

* 4NT = 4th step, 2 + cQ

[Bbradley62]

yes, ATB to "lack of inverted minors" .

 

But why was the 1S rebid ( by Opener ) excluded from her choices ? That deserves another ATB.

So, what should South do when he's faced with: 1♣-1♦-1NT-??

[TWO4BRIDGE]

So, what should South do when he's faced with: 1♣-1♦-1NT-??

I think you would have to have a system like xy-1NT, but am not that familiar with it.

 

1C - 1D

1NT - ??

.........2C! = forces 2D for further description ( invite hands ) or sign-off by passing 2D

.........2D! = GF ( I think ... but not sure )

[babalu1997]

I am no expert in NMF, but seems to me there is no new minor when you bid 1♣ and 1♦.

 

You obviously bid 1♠ with 4315 not sure what distracted you. Partner had to take a risk and find a forcing bid, he missguessed, but your mistake is an error.

 

Well true, I tend to hide 4 card majors in favour of 1nt the reason being that if partner can go beyond 1nt he can reverse in spades.

 

I open 1 club with 4-4 clubs and diamonds, if the guy has 5 diamonds and 4 spades he can reverse.

 

I did not know, as Mrs. Frances said that 2 club is a continental forcing bid.

And to expect him to understand all my 1-on-1 peculiarities, is a bit of rabitussis.

 

 

 

SAYC arghh.

[blackshoe]

So, what should South do when he's faced with: 1♣-1♦-1NT-??

 

Play two way checkback.

[Zelandakh]

The 'blame' here lies in incorproating various bidding ideas that simply do not work together. Essentially the system gives no method for Responder to make a forcing club raise without a major. The actual Responder, presumably realising this, decided to improvise in an undiscussed way and that is the reason for the disaster. The best way to look at a hand like this is an an opportunity to improve your bidding agreements. Assigning blame to either player is rather missing the point.

[nige1]

No blame except for failing to agree more system. We play an unorthodox but simple method that might fit in with the Babalu style:

1. Inverted minor-raises that may include four-card major(s).
2. A one-notrump rebid that may have a singleton in responder's suit.

After 1Banana - 1Rasberry -; 1N - 2♣ is the only checkback (Modified Crowhurst). Over this...

• 2-level suit-bids = Min as natural as possible. (Then new suits and jumps are forcing).
• 2N = Max flattish (then 3-level bids are natural and forcing)
• 3-level suit-bids = Max as natural as possible with a singleton Rasberry.
• 3N = Max flat 5 Bananas and 2 Rasberries.

[Fluffy]

Well true, I tend to hide 4 card majors in favour of 1nt the reason being that if partner can go beyond 1nt he can reverse in spades.

 

There is a reason to hide majors with balanced hands and people do this routinelly, however if you start bidding NT with unbalanced hands you will face problems like partner willing to play in your singleton (Where you were suposed to hold at least 2), or missing good games/slams because partner doesn't suspect your ruffing potential.

 

Also helps when you happen to not bid 1NT, as an example, this very same hand, if partner knows you bypass majors after 1♣-1♦-1♠ he knows you have a singleton somewhere, and that means 11 card fit in clubs at least!. Now he is on the way to slam, maybe even grand.

[P_Marlowe]

Well true, I tend to hide 4 card majors in favour of 1nt the reason being that if partner can go beyond 1nt he can reverse in spades.

 

I open 1 club with 4-4 clubs and diamonds, if the guy has 5 diamonds and 4 spades he can reverse.

 

I did not know, as Mrs. Frances said that 2 club is a continental forcing bid.

And to expect him to understand all my 1-on-1 peculiarities, is a bit of rabitussis.

 

 

 

SAYC arghh.

#1 why should your p introduce spades, if you denied them?

You even pretend to have a bal. shape, which is also not true?

#2 Playing SAYC - open 1D, I am pretty sure, that this is the SAYC bid

 

So in short - if you dont bid like it is common SAYC practice, dont blame

SAYC, if the bidding implodes.

And 2C in the seq. we are currently discussing is not NMF, the 2C bid is

called checkmback stayman, but since opener and responder have bid both

minors, it gets a bit messy.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS: A possible auction could go like

 

1C - 3S (1)

4D (2) - 4NT (3)

5S (4) - 6(5)

 

(1) splinter, you have a fit, no 4 card major, you want to play game, why mess around?

If p has lots of spade honors, you want to play 3NT otherwhise, 5/6C.

(2) cue, depends on agreement, but for us the bid would show a top honor, but I dont

think, that this is universal, but the cue showes some live, which translates to

promising at least 1 KC

(3) RKCB, alternative would be 5C (it is close), but 5C would end the auction

(4) 2KC+Q

(5) you are there

 

I dont think, that 4NT over 4D is clear cut, and the auction may well end in 5C,

which is ok, if you play without a lot of agreements.

In the end the had do fit nicely.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Free]

You deserve each other :P

- you have the most obvious 1♠ rebid ever. Not even considering that is very strange imo. It's not because your partner denies 4M with a weak hand, or can reverse with a strong hand, that you don't have to show your holding. Note that bidding 1♠ here also shows an unbalanced hand and implies 5+♣!

- your partner didn't start with inverted minor (do you play that?) and didn't start with a splinter. After 1♣-1♦-1NT he's apparently out of options. He didn't look ahead.

[Gerardo]

C'mon, guys... gotta stick to the conditions of contest... Well, unless you're saying that their system's lack of inverted minors deserves a (significant) share of the blame...

 

I would assume inverted undiscussed.

 

Lacking that, whatever number of ♠ as splinter, but might be taken as natural.

 

Lacking that, probably 1♦, then 4♣

Edited November 8, 2010 by Gerardo
Didn't look at Free's post before answering

[helene_t]

Make sure you make sensible agreements about what responder can do to force after the 1NT rebid.

 

If the 1NT rebid denies a 4-card major, they can "invent" a reverse in a major suit since opener is not going to raise to game anyway.

 

If the 1NT rebid does not deny a 4-card major, you need to play the 2♣ bid from responder as forcing. This is not NMF as it's not a new suit. You can play XYZ or CBS or some such.

[Fluffy]

what is this crying about inverted minors?

 

after 1♣-1♦-1♠-2♥-2NT responder knows about the 4315 (or 4306 or 4216), he can easilly pinpoint that he just needs 2 aces and any king for 13 tricks.

 

Inverted minors might get you to the same level of knowledge (I doubt), but they will never be better than natural on this hand.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

what is this crying about inverted minors?

 

after 1♣-1♦-1♠-2♥-2NT responder knows about the 4315 (or 4306 or 4216), he can easilly pinpoint that he just needs 2 aces and any king for 13 tricks.

 

Inverted minors might get you to the same level of knowledge (I doubt), but they will never be better than natural on this hand.

What am I missing in your 4th-Suit GF auction ?

 

Why couldn't Opener be 4 2 2 5 ?

And if 1♠ didn't promise longer ♣ in the first place, couldn't s/he be 4 3 2 4 ?

[helene_t]

Well presumably this pair is playing Walsh. At least, opener is :)

 

But yeah, 4225 is certainly possible.

[Fluffy]

4225 is rebidding 1NT obviously, if 4315 is 4225 definitelly does :)

[nige1]

what is this crying about inverted minors? after 1♣-1♦-1♠-2♥-2NT responder knows about the 4315 (or 4306 or 4216), he can easilly pinpoint that he just needs 2 aces and any king for 13 tricks. Inverted minors might get you to the same level of knowledge (I doubt), but they will never be better than natural on this hand.

Never is a long time :)