ATB 2/1

[scrote]

[hv=pc=n&s=sj3h7dkqj64caq982&n=skqt764hakqjd5ck5&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1sp2dp2hp3np4np6cp6nppp]266|200[/hv]

[kenrexford]

South, clearly. 5-5 minors, plus a doubleton in partner's spades, and 3NT?!?!?

 

Seems like an easy acution after 3♣. Opener rebids 3♠, Responder can ask for Aces if so inclined, and at least slam is avoided.

[ArtK78]

Seems like South likes to do a lot of guessing and not so much cooperating.

 

The jump to 3NT, with an undisclosed 5 card club suit, was precipitous. It happened to be accurate, but that was just lucky. For all he knew, North could have been 5404 and there could have been an easy slam (possibly a grand) in clubs.

 

When North shows significant extra values by bidding 4NT, South goes off the deep end by now introducing his club suit at the 6 level!

 

This is one of the easier ATBs ever posted. South gets 100% (more if I could give him more).

[mikeh]

South bid very badly.

 

3N was an appalling ugly bid for reasons already set forth.

 

My preference would be for 2N, rather than 3♣. This allows opener maximal flexibility.

 

We will miss a 5-3 club fit, but opener is rarely (if ever) going to support clubs if we bid 3♣, so this isn't a loss compared to 3♣.

 

More importantly, opener will be able to show 3 card diamond support, 5-5 majors, or the 6-4 majors he actually holds.

 

Over a 3♠ call, responder has a choice of calls....a conservative 4♠, which opener should pass (imagine S being xx x AQJxx KQJxx) or a mildly aggressive 4♣, which has to be a cue in support of spades in any auction that had S bidding 2N rather than 3♣. Opener would bid 4♥ and S would bid 4♠ having already made a try. Opener might take a push via 5♣ (if he were going to keycard, he'd so over 4♣, not waste time with 4♥), but responder has an easy signoff.

[Phil]

Much as I like responder to frequently bid 2N as the 2nd call in a 2/1 sequence, 3♣ is pretty clear and its a lot more descriptive than 2N. Could 3♣ be an attempt to 'right-side' 3N when responder holds Axxx or Axx? Yes I suppose, but it can also be a suit.

 

Either way, North rebids 3♠. South raises to 4, North RKC's and we stop at 5.

[mikeh]

Much as I like responder to frequently bid 2N as the 2nd call in a 2/1 sequence, 3♣ is pretty clear and its a lot more descriptive than 2N. Could 3♣ be an attempt to 'right-side' 3N when responder holds Axxx or Axx? Yes I suppose, but it can also be a suit.

 

Either way, North rebids 3♠. South raises to 4, North RKC's and we stop at 5.

Can you give me a hand on which opener should raise 3♣ and yet not bid 3♣ over 2N?

 

I don't say they don't exist, but I couldn't readily think of one.

 

To me, bidding 3♣ as a suit, rather than an attempt to right side 3N, requires a hand, and suit, on which I intend to pull 3N should opener bid 3N over my 3♣, and this hand ain't that hand.

[dboxley]

I also hate 3NT, 100% to South. What I don't understand about the other posts is the implication that 3C would show a club suit. Isn't that just 4SF? How else do you get to 3NT if South doesn't have a club stopper?: ♠xx ♥Axx ♦AKxxxx ♣Qx 2NT seems to be the right call with South's hand. I've been out of the game for awhile and maybe things have changed.

[mikeh]

I also hate 3NT, 100% to South. What I don't understand about the other posts is the implication that 3C would show a club suit. Isn't that just 4SF? How else do you get to 3NT if South doesn't have a club stopper?: ♠xx ♥Axx ♦AKxxxx ♣Qx 2NT seems to be the right call with South's hand. I've been out of the game for awhile and maybe things have changed.

I don't think that anyone is suggesting that 3♣ promises a club suit....it is one of those ambiguous calls that we find ourselves having to make in jammed auctions, which is why I rejected it in favour of 2N....if we want to show clubs of our own, we need to bid them twice, and this isn't that hand.

 

To me, we have two ways of investigating clubs as a trump suit: we bid 2N and afford partner a chance to pattern out, or we bid 3♣, intending to bid the suit again, with the first club bid being interpreted, initially, as a probe for 3N (which is why I suggested in a previous post that I couldn't think of any hand that would raise 3♣ but not bid 3♣ over 2N). I don't see anyone disagreeing with this last point.

[gszes]

I agree that 100% + should go to south, I am not so

sure I agree with most of the expressed opinions as

to why.

 

Mikeh and 2n I found the best start but I disagree

that 3c should be a suit. 3c is much better here

(especially since opener has at least NINE cards

in the majors) asking for a partial stopper for

NT (or many other meanings to be unveiled later).

Any partial stopper will normally help to right

side 3n if that is what is needed. A simple

rebid of 3d would ask for a full stopper since

if not majors next is NT.

 

2n has a second advantage--opener can now give a delayed

raise to responders suit since showing the 4 card major

was much more important and 5d or even 6d might be

superior to 3n especially when the club "stopper" is

something like qxx or JTxx.

 

2n has a 3rd advantage opener can bid 3h to show 55

bid 3s to show 64 or even 3c to show 5413 or 5404

and maybe 5c is superior to 3n. the ability to

pattern out with 5413 eliminates any need to show

a 5 card club suit.

 

DONT WAsTE SPACE try to give opener as much room

as possible to pattern out then make a decision.

[Phil]

Can you give me a hand on which opener should raise 3♣ and yet not bid 3♣ over 2N?

 

I don't say they don't exist, but I couldn't readily think of one.

 

To me, bidding 3♣ as a suit, rather than an attempt to right side 3N, requires a hand, and suit, on which I intend to pull 3N should opener bid 3N over my 3♣, and this hand ain't that hand.

 

Raising clubs isn't the only issue here. Don't you think partner's own hand evaluation will improve knowing that we have something in clubs, rather than some amorphous 2N call?

[MickyB]

Don't you think partner's own hand evaluation will improve knowing that we have something in clubs, rather than some amorphous 3♣ call?

 

FYP.

[mikeh]

Raising clubs isn't the only issue here. Don't you think partner's own hand evaluation will improve knowing that we have something in clubs, rather than some amorphous 2N call?

But does 3♣ show anything in clubs?

 

I know that on this hand we can't hold anything in hearts, but as a matter of theory, assume opener has some 5422 or 5413 hand.

 

We hold say xx Axx AKQxx xxx, do we bid 2N or 3♣?

 

If we hold Jxx or Qxx in clubs, again....do we bid 2N or 3♣?

 

If the answer is that we have to bid 2N, then we are going to be wrongsiding a heck of a lot of 3N contracts.

 

It's sort of like 1♠ 2♣ 2♦ 2♥.....most play this as silent on heart length...a punt or stall, often based on an inability to do anything else more than on 4=5/6 in the rounded suits.

 

As I think you noted yourself, in an earlier post on this thread, bidding 2N in these auctions is a very useful call. It maximizes space,and it facilitates allowing opener to finish describing his hand. Would we seriously think that we had missed a club slam if he raised 2N to 3N on this hand? Yes, it's possible, but no, it's not likely, and we weren't getting there over 3♣ anyway, were we?

 

Neither 2N nor 3♣ is, in the approach I suggest here, very descriptive, but that's not the point. 2N may include long clubs, but the main point is to promise that we have clubs stopped. 3♣ may include long clubs, but, if so, we have a hand driving beyond 3N.....in the meantime, opener makes his best attempt to describe his hand in the expectation that we hold something like xxx or Jxx in clubs...typically 2=3=5=3. Obviously he has less space than over 2N, but that's a price we pay to ensure that we don't play a silly 3N with xxx opposite xx in clubs.

[xxhong]

Although 3NT doesn't look very good, I can still live with it. The worst bid is 6C. Facing a 4NT invitation, south has no business to accept it with a misfit minimum.

[hv=pc=n&s=sj3h7dkqj64caq982&n=skqt764hakqjd5ck5&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1sp2dp2hp3np4np6cp6nppp]266|200[/hv]

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

#1 3NT is ok, of course, if 3C in the given auction is nat, than by all means

bid it, but for me this would be FSF, looking for a add. information,

espesially a club stopper

#2 North has a strong hand, and is certainly worth an move toward slam,

espsecially since he knowes about a likely 6-2 spade fit, but 4NT

is not the bid, 4NT is quant.

The only bid he has is either 4C, a generic / unspecified try, or 5S

quant. for spades, give the suit quality of spades and that the 6-2

is not certain ..., 4C looks best.

#3 Given that 4NT is quat., South should decline, he has a GF, but thats it,

and he knowes, that the hands really dont fit.

#4 6NT is ? North should at one point in time tell his p, that he happes to have

a 6 card spade suit.

 

I think North bidding is worse, but accepting the invite comes close, so 50/50.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS: Overlooked the fact, that 2NT was av., 2NT is clearly better than 3NT, since

we are already in a GF, so I guess I will need to give South a bigger share than

North.

[han]

My agreement is that 3C shows clubs.

 

A couple of weeks ago I bid 2NT in this auction on 9-fourth of clubs. Partner bid 3NT so he had at least a doubleton club (with extra length in diamonds, hearts or spades he would of course never bid 3NT).

 

Perhaps my agreement is not good. My 2NT bid does not promise a club stopper, and we may get to 3NT missing a stopper when 4S in a 5-2 fit is superior. On the other hand, I won't have to bid 2NT on a 2-1-5-5 but show my hand-type, which may slow partner down when he holds the majors or rightside 3NT in case of a heart lead.

 

On this hand it would lead to a pleasant auction.

[kenrexford]

My agreement is that 3C shows clubs.

 

A couple of weeks ago I bid 2NT in this auction on 9-fourth of clubs. Partner bid 3NT so he had at least a doubleton club (with extra length in diamonds, hearts or spades he would of course never bid 3NT).

 

Perhaps my agreement is not good. My 2NT bid does not promise a club stopper, and we may get to 3NT missing a stopper when 4S in a 5-2 fit is superior. On the other hand, I won't have to bid 2NT on a 2-1-5-5 but show my hand-type, which may slow partner down when he holds the majors or rightside 3NT in case of a heart lead.

 

On this hand it would lead to a pleasant auction.

 

You and I seem to be rather radical. Clubs showing clubs? Weird.

 

I was thinking perhaps of a system where no minor bids meant anything but were simply tapdancing to decide who should bid notrump first. Then, I decided, "Why just the minors?"

[whereagles]

3NT was absolutely correct. A bit of a mastermind, that's true, but certainly acceptable: South has a minimum 2/1 and a misfit. The message of this bid to pard is "DON'T EVEN THINK OF SLAM. I HAVE A BAD HAND."

 

4NT was remorse for not having bid 3H before and 6C is a bit out of order, though I don't really see how to stop below slam after 4NT.

 

Responder took some unilateral actions, but would say OPENER is mostly the culprit.

[dboxley]

3NT was absolutely correct. A bit of a mastermind, that's true, but certainly acceptable: South has a minimum 2/1 and a misfit. The message of this bid to pard is "DON'T EVEN THINK OF SLAM. I HAVE A BAD HAND."

 

4NT was remorse for not having bid 3H before and 6C is a bit out of order, though I don't really see how to stop below slam after 4NT.

 

Responder took some unilateral actions, but would say OPENER is mostly the culprit.

 

I agree completely except for the following points:

 

1. minimum 2/1

2. misfit

3. BAD HAND

[han]

You and I...

 

Your post didn't start well and didn't get any better either.

[Poky]

[hv=pc=n&s=sj3h7dkqj64caq982&n=skqt764hakqjd5ck5&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1sp2dp2hp3np4np6cp6nppp]266|200[/hv]

Very funny to see all the people blaming South. :rolleyes:

 

North 95%

South 5%

 

With 3NT South clearly said - "I have 12-13 without interest in your suit(s)", since 2NT would show:

a) More points, or

b) Interest (and enough equity) in finding some better spot.

 

Where is it going North now with 30-31 points on the line, a misfitting hand, singleton diamond and just one ace?!?!!? Come on.

 

5% for South because he could have bid 5♣ instead of 6♣.

[gnasher]

I don't think 3NT showed anything clearly. 3NT can be played as minimum balanced, minimum and a misfit but not necessarily balanced, medium balanced, or probably other things. I suspect that the first problem was that the players didn't have an agreement about what 3NT meant.

 

Similarly, 3♣ can be played as natural, "something in clubs" (Phil), "clubs" without necessarily being descriptive (Han), or fourth-suit forcing. Not knowing which of these meanings was in use, it's hard to judge whether this hand should bid 3♣ or something else.

[whereagles]

If you play 3C as natural (instead of 4SF or stop ask or whatnot), then I think it's clear to bid that. It cannot show less than a 55 and North can still have 5413/5431.

[billw55]

It seems there is some dispute over whether responder should rebid NT or clubs, and indeed what a club bid would show.

 

My question is: with the misfit in evidence, why should south not consider a simple preference of 2♠? Is Jx so terrible that south should shun it entirely? Or would 2♠ definitely promise 3 cards?

[kenrexford]

It seems there is some dispute over whether responder should rebid NT or clubs, and indeed what a club bid would show.

 

My question is: with the misfit in evidence, why should south not consider a simple preference of 2♠? Is Jx so terrible that south should shun it entirely? Or would 2♠ definitely promise 3 cards?

 

This question is strangely related.

 

I would guess that those who like to bid 2♠ with hands like these tend to favor notrump/strain probes and right-siding over slam probes when in doubt.

 

Those who instead bid 3♣ as artificial probably have the same bent toward notrump/strain probes and right-siding over slam probes, but with a purity to the major raise, probably.

 

Those who bid 3♣ naturally might be in the first category (also bidding 2♠ as possibly two) and thus favor notrump/strain probes and right-siding over slam probes when in doubt. However, they want side-suit purity.

 

Those who bid 3♣ as real, 2♠ as 3+, and 2NT as waiting (and possibly wrong-siding) probably stress slam auctions more than right-siding and strain probing.