no surprise?

[jillybean]

I was given this hand at the club yesterday and was surprised by the majority choice.

 

xx, AJx, AQJxx, Jxx

 

You open 1♦ and partner responds 1♥, what now?

[gwnn]

I think 1nt and 2♥ are both reasonable, depending on your partnership style. 2♦ is bad. I could see some extraterrestrials rebid 2♣, but I wouldn't understand their language.

[aguahombre]

Yeh, both are very close. Rebidding 1NT with small doubleton spade is fine for us size and shape oriented folks. I chose 2H because everything I have is in diamonds and hearts on this one; but 1NT usually works out better for us with balanced weak NT hands.

[kenrexford]

1NT for me, but that's a style choice thing.

 

2♣ would be my choice in a somewhat similar situation, had partner responded 1♠ instead and had my hand been the slightly different ♠x ♥AJxx ♦AQJxx ♣Jxx. I point this out because it is not completely insane to rebid 2♣ with this pattern, planning to complete a picture, after an anticipated courtesy correction:

 

1♦-1♥

2♣-2♦

2♥

 

But, this sounds too much like 1-3-5-4 pattern. The general strength is a tad light without the extra shape. With these exact cards but the better shape, or with this exact shape but perhaps converting the round Jacks into the heart Q and the diamond Q to the K, perhaps.

[mgoetze]

Not close for me, but then I come from a planet where people don't raise with 3-card support here.

[ahydra]

I open what? :) [i live in England where we play weak NT]

 

ahydra

[SimonFa]

1NT mandatory for us unless we have 4/5-card support for partners major. Partner can ask for 3 card support using check back Stayman.

[VM1973]

I'd probably bid 2♥ but 1NT is also reasonable. If you're playing MPs you're going to end up either in majors or hearts.

[Phil]

I actually like 2♦ > 1N with these black suits.

 

But you know I would bid 2♥ and I don't consider it all that close.

 

For a club player this is a "2♦ wtp".

[cherdano]

I would bid 2♥ but would expect 1NT to be the majority choice in most clubs.

[dickiegera]

I was given this hand at the club yesterday and was surprised by the majority choice.

 

xx, AJx, AQJxx, Jxx

 

You open 1♦ and partner responds 1♥, what now?

 

 

2♥ or 2♦. Almost a toss up.

I guess 2♥ because of AJx

[han]

2H, this is a good hand for hearts, and notrump may be better from partner's side. Partner can still ask.

[JLOGIC]

2H for me for sure. If you do not raise to 2H with this, I feel like you are making an inferior bid on the hand in order to have a more well defined 2H raise. There is no way I can be convinced that 1N is a better bid in a vacuum with this hand. You will simply too often wrongside NT, and a 4-3 heart fit will play so well on average.

 

I don't think there is much gain to agreeing to not raise with 3 trumps and a balanced hand if you would sometimes raise with 3 trumps and an unbalanced hand (1354). That said, if you literally never raise with 3 then obviously there are some nice gains to knowing your partner has 4 for his raise (for instance you can bid 4M a lot rather than checking to see if partner has 3 trumps), but I think it is too big of a loss in general.

[eagles123]

Was torn by 1NT or 2H, but went for 1NT to show a balanced hand.

[BunnyGo]

Out of curiosity, what was the majority opinion at your club? FWIW, I too bid 2♥.

[jillybean]

Out of curiosity, what was the majority opinion at your club? FWIW, I too bid 2♥.

"Majority" opinion of those polled was 6-1 for 2♥

[Phil]

"Majority" opinion of those polled was 6-1 for 2♥

 

Consider yourself lucky :)

[jillybean]

"Majority" opinion of those polled was 6-1 for 2♥

 

 

Consider yourself lucky :)

 

LOL Your club must have very weak players Phil or are you talking about the 0-199'er game?

[P_Marlowe]

1NT.

 

If you have agreed before hand, that raising with 3 cards is allowed

(and does not require a singleton), than the hand is certainly perfect

for a 2H response, hopefully you also have discussed the add. agreements,

that are needed to make this agreement work.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS (Added later): My feeling is, that the raise with 3 cards and a bal. hand

is one of those things, that show only up, if one plays a strong 1 NT opening.

It is possible, that I am overlooking something.

[kenrexford]

I don't think there is much gain to agreeing to not raise with 3 trumps and a balanced hand if you would sometimes raise with 3 trumps and an unbalanced hand (1354).

 

Not that much at the first bid (except for the fact that a Moysian works better with a stiff somewhere), perhaps, but on the third call, huge benefit. For one, Responder can enable an unwind that gives you a more precise call as Opener.

 

For example, after 1♦-1♥-2♥, Responder (as I play) is already assured of 4-card support or 3-card support with specifically a stiff spade. After, say, a 2♠ unwind check, Opener will be able to show the precise 1-3-4-5 pattern low enough to play 3♥, 3♣, or 3♦, should that be desired.

[helene_t]

My feeling is, that the raise with 3 cards and a bal. hand

is one of those things, that show only up, if one plays a strong 1 NT opening.

It is possible, that I am overlooking something.

If you play a weak NT, the balanced hands that open in a suit are less likely to have a small doubleton.

 

On the other hand, playing a strong nt, it is problematic to raise on three when you have a minimum with no shortness. You also make the single raise with a minimum with 4-card support and a singleton, so if responder has some 9-10 points with a 5-card in his suit, you can come too high. Also, if responder's next bid is 2NT, you really want to pass, but

1m-1M

2M-2NT

is probably played as forcing.

 

Playing a weak nt you don't have those problems as the lack of trump support and ruffing value is compensated by extra hcps. So you will have less opportunities to raise on three with a balance hand, but you will be more comfortable when you do.