jillybean Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 MP NVYou hold A987643, A54, A4, T you open 1♠ partner responds 1N (2/1) your bid and is it 100% clear? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtvesuvius Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 2♠, bad suit, not a great hand, and yeah I think it's pretty clear IMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elianna Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 I don't play 1NT forcing usually, but I can't imagine what else I would bid after 1NT (forcing or not). Unless 1NT were something highly artificial, that is... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 There's often a case for bidding 3♠ on light values when holding a seven-card suit as here. This hand seems borderline to me; I think I would bid 2♠ but slightly better spades (say the jack or even the ten) would be enough for me to bid 3♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 I would bid 2S. Despite holding a 7 card suit, the suit quality is not great. Agree with Adam - put a little more stuffing in the S suit and it is worth 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayin801 Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 2♠, though I think it is close. Yes we will miss game sometimes when partner passes with a doubleton spade, a red king, and just some extra junk, but when partner doesn't have spade support this isn't nearly as good of a hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 2♠ - This is an odd hand but 3♠ wouldn't occur to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted January 28, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 I bid 2♠, partner passed with QT, K7, J853, A7653 and we missed an easy game, we were both at the top for our bids. (A987643, A54, A4, T) I was talking with a local expert about this hand and he said one "expert" treatment is for you to bid 2♦ to limit the hand (i.e. non-forcing) but hope your partner doesn't pass. Then you bid ♠ again at the minimum level. In 2/1 with forcing NT your 2♦ bid typically only promises 3. He also added that this isn't mainstream, sounds good on paper but when partner passes 2♦ and you miss your 7-2♠ fit, don't call me. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 This is a clear 2 1/2♠ bid. :) Seriously, a case can be made for bidding 2♠ or 3♠. I would lean slightly to bidding 2♠. If you bid 2♠ and partner shows signs of life, the question then becomes do you bid 4♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSGibson Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 I bid 2♠, partner passed with QT, K7, J853, A7653 and we missed an easy game, we were both at the top for our bids. (A987643, A54, A4, T) Your 2♠ bid was not the reason you missed game. It is perfectly normal in a 2/1 system, and much better than bidding a 2 card diamond suit (imagine partner passing with 1 spade and 3 diamonds...shudder). In my opinion, your partner should not have passed 2♠. He has 3 cover cards (an A, a K, and the Q of trump), and should evaluate his hand as invitational opposite a 2♠ rebid, bidding 3♠ to show an invite with 2 card spade support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel_k Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 Partner should have raised to 3♠. 9 HCP with a ruffing value and no wastage is enough (disregarding the ♦J). I don't agree with a 2♦ rebid at all. It will be wrong if partner passes, and if not you are bidding 3♠ next which you could have done directly over 1NT. Though I think 2♠ is enough. It would be ok to bid 2♦ on something like Axxxxx Axx AKx x because then you might make 2♦ but not 3♠ when partner has spade shortage and because you don't want partner to raise 3♠ with a singleton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vuroth Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 I might almost like the 2♦ idea if we had 3, but never 2. Even then, I'd rather play in a 7-1 than a 5-3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted January 29, 2011 Report Share Posted January 29, 2011 Partner should have raised to 3♠. 9 HCP with a ruffing value and no wastage is enough (disregarding the ♦J). I don't agree with a 2♦ rebid at all. It will be wrong if partner passes, and if not you are bidding 3♠ next which you could have done directly over 1NT. Though I think 2♠ is enough. It would be ok to bid 2♦ on something like Axxxxx Axx AKx x because then you might make 2♦ but not 3♠ when partner has spade shortage and because you don't want partner to raise 3♠ with a singleton. I concur with Nigel. Your partner had 3 very fgood cards for you and should have raised to 3S. Bidding 2D is very poor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcphee Posted January 29, 2011 Report Share Posted January 29, 2011 2S with no other bid in mind. Partner could have bid 3S or even 2N, passing is being far too timid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggwhiz Posted January 29, 2011 Report Share Posted January 29, 2011 2♠ for me but I have the luxury of a partner that will bid 2nt over that with any reasonable excuse. ie. opposite the actual Qx, Kx, Jxxx, Axxxxx 3nt would roll opposite 6 running spades and the Ace of hearts. I have been convinced by her to bid 2nt in these situations much more often than I used to but it means we don't open nearly as many 11 counts as others do. Note: Just saw the comment for a raise to 3 spades which works for me too as long as you don't open modest 11's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 I was talking with a local expert about this hand and he said one "expert" treatment is for you to bid 2♦ to limit the hand (i.e. non-forcing) but hope your partner doesn't pass. Then you bid ♠ again at the minimum level. In 2/1 with forcing NT your 2♦ bid typically only promises 3. You might bid this way with Axxxxx KQx x AQx. The hand is quite strong for 2S and 3S doesn't look attractive with such a weak suit. Also, you could easily belong in hearts, and 2C makes it easier for partner to introduce them. If partner passes 2C, you probably haven't missed a game (more relevant at IMPS) and you might make 2C when 2S (or 3S) goes down. Suggesting this idea with A987643, A54, A4, T is truly horrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 Bandwagon...as others have noted your partner had a 2-card limit raise :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts