Is this simple?

[paulg]

[hv=pc=n&s=s9hakq753dq742cq4&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1h1s2d2s]133|200

 

|IMPs, NS Vulnerable[/hv]

 

This felt like a tempo-sensitive situation at the table but even now when I have more time to consider I am still unsure what is best.

 

Partner's 2♦ is competitive and forcing for one round. You do not play good/bad 2NT.

 

Which calls do you consider and what is your final choice? It is not an appeal/ruling question, I was just unhappy with my choice.

[rhm]

I would bid 4♥.

Raising ♦ is likely to be better only if you can make six, which is possible if partner has ♦AK and ♣A. With that much he might move over 4♥ anyway.

If opponents continue with 4♠, I will next bid 5♦ next even if partner doubles. Too risky to leave the double in with so much support for ♦. If 5♦ goes down I do not expect to get doubled.

I see 2 distant alternatives: 3♠ or 3♦, with the intention of bidding 4♥ next. This assumes that 3♦ is unlikely to get passed out. Neither alternative does justice to the ♥ suit.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[hotShot]

Opps and partners bidding made 4♥ very attractive, 3♦ or 3♥ won't get me there.

 

Hopping that partner has 2♥s and that he covers my ♦ loser seems not asking to much.

 

So I would bid 4♥.

[Fluffy]

I wanna play 4♥ however I'd only bid 3♥ cos I consider it forcing.

[mikeh]

I want to play 4♥ most of the time as well, but I want to play 6♦ opposite as little as xxx x AKxxx Axxx, and no number of hearts is going to get me there.

 

This isn't matchpoints, so +600 in 5♦ rather than +650 in hearts is no big deal. I think I will bid 3♠...this preserves some chance of playing hearts (say he bids 3N..now I bid 4♥) while also allowing us to find some diamond slams.

 

4♠ is aimed more directly at slam and may turn out to have been the best choice, but I don't think I want to commit to diamonds quite as strongly as that call suggests.

 

Tough problem....at mps, I agree with 3♥, so long as I am sure partner will take it as forcing, since it (slightly) preserves diamond possibilities: at least compared to 4♥.

[gwnn]

3♠, good hand with a ♦ fit. will rebid 4♥ next, good hand with a ♦ fit and interest in ♥ too. I will not conceal my ♦ fit sorry everyone

 

jumping in this ♥ suit is far too unilateral to me, partner will pass me with x or not even x in hearts, what will I tell him then?

[Phil]

3♠ is one of those funny splinters, no? - since our pass is forcing over 2♠ (I hope!).

 

FYI, I do not play g/b after a two level response.

[gnasher]

I'd bid 3♠, given the methods. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to bid 2NT to show a diamond raise?

[han]

I'd bid 3S. I don't think pass is forcing, and I don't think that 3S is a funny splinter. Fluffy's suggestion that 3H is forcing makes this thread completely bizarre.

 

Whether you bid 3S, 4D, 4H, 4S, 5D, I don't think that there is anything time-sensitive about these calls.

[l milne]

Agree with Han.

 

I would've thought 2NT is 6♥ 4♣ with 3♣ showing 55+.

[Free]

Why would 3♠ be a funny splinter? It's just a cuebid...

No idea if pass should be forcing, I wouldn't consider it forcing actually.

 

3♠ seems like a good start, lets see what partner tells us.

[paulg]

Whether you bid 3S, 4D, 4H, 4S, 5D, I don't think that there is anything time-sensitive about these calls.

I was thinking that if you were considering making a non-forcing bid, such as 3♦ or 4♥, then you'd prefer to do it tempo. Which would mean you have to think about the other possibilities quickly.

[paulg]

On the actual hand it mattered little what you do. My partner even bid the diamond slam after I wimped out bid a strategic 3♦.

 

My concern about 4♥ was missing a diamond slam. My concern about 3♠ was continuations if LHO bid 4♠. My choice was made on the basis that I could catch up later, if there was a later. As I said, I was unhappy with my bidding on this.

 

Thanks for the contributions.

[Fluffy]

paul I am a bit puzzled with the definition of "competitive and forcing for one round"

 

What is the worst hand partner would bid it on?. Can he pass if we bid 2♥ over 2♦?

[paulg]

paul I am a bit puzzled with the definition of "competitive and forcing for one round"

 

What is the worst hand partner would bid it on?. Can he pass if we bid 2♥ over 2♦?

2♥ would not be forcing over 2♦, if partner has bid with a misfitting nine count. I think 'competitive' means an ultra-light 2/1, so minimum of 8 or 9 points with a fair (6-card) suit.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=s9hakq753dq742cq4&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1h1s2d2s]133|200|

IMPs, NS Vulnerable

Partner's 2♦ is competitive and forcing for one round. You do not play good/bad 2NT.

This felt like a tempo-sensitive situation at the table but even now when I have more time to consider I am still unsure what is best.

Which calls do you consider and what is your final choice? It is not an appeal/ruling question, I was just unhappy with my choice.

[/hv]

IMO 3♠ = 10, 4♥ = 9, 4♦ = 8. 3♥ = 7

4♥ is best if it shows this kind of hand, conventionally.

[Phil]

Why would 3♠ be a funny splinter? It's just a cuebid...

No idea if pass should be forcing, I wouldn't consider it forcing actually.

 

3♠ seems like a good start, lets see what partner tells us.

 

Maybe someone else can provide the link but in several places we have discussed an auction like:

 

1♠ - pass - 2♦ - 2♥;

3♥

 

and a sizable and intelligent group thought this was a splinter. Why not a cuebid? Because you do not need a cue since we are in a forcing pass auction, which prompted my question to Paul.

[paulg]

In the UK I would not expect pass to be forcing over 2♠, though gnasher may correct me.

 

For the majority of players this is because light 2/1s in Acol mean that a force through 2NT (or higher) has not been created. Gnasher or Frances probably has more insight into the top English players, but it doesn't feel a forcing auction to me.

[gnasher]

Maybe someone else can provide the link but in several places we have discussed an auction like:

 

1♠ - pass - 2♦ - 2♥;

3♥

 

and a sizable and intelligent group thought this was a splinter. Why not a cuebid? Because you do not need a cue since we are in a forcing pass auction, which prompted my question to Paul.

 

That's (probably) a very different auction. If you found a sizeable group of people to discuss this sequence, they were probably discussing a game-forcing 2♦.

 

In Paul's sequence, 2♦ is forcing only as far as 2♥. I don't think it's normal for such a call to set up a forcing pass above 2♥.

[Fluffy]

Seems that the difference is paul's 2♦is forcing but doesn't promise a rebid

[Finch]

I admit I find a number of things about this thread somewhat surprising.

 

I don't see why either pass or 3H are, or should be, forcing. More interesting is whether 4D should be forcing.

I don't see why it's a tempo sensitive position when I have an obvious game drive.

[whereagles]

Agree to 3♠. The hand needs very little for slam.

[phil_20686]

Maybe i live in a world on my own but I was pretty sure that this was like the 1d-1s-4d auction, where a 4d bid would show basically exactly this hand. 6 good hearts, 4 card diamond support, but not particularly strong in HCP (say <17).

 

What do other people use 4d for after 1h-2d? There really aren't that many hands which can unilaterally bypass 3N here.

[gwnn]

nice idea, sounds more than sensible.

[JLOGIC]

Phil I don't agree that this is a funny-splinter auction, mainly because it implies to me that you would pass and then bid with a strong hand and a diamond fit and no spade shortness. I don't think you can afford this, and personally if I passed and partner Xed (or 3C) and I bid 3D I would expect I might have xxx AKQxx Qx Jxx or something, not a strong hand with diamonds. Or maybe you are implying a 3D raise is forcing, I'm not sure. The difference in this auction and 1S p 2D 2H 3H is that a 3D raise is available there as forcing.