Do you have a method to show this hand?

[jules101]

[hv=pc=n&n=sj8632had5cakj876&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=1n(12-14)p2n(trans%20to%20diamonds)]133|200[/hv]

 

 

If 1N is passed round to you then you'll bid 2S showing 5♠ and 4+ minor.

 

After (irritating) West has used 2N to transfer to ♦ can you find a bid to describe your hand?

 

The transfer to ♦ may be a very weak hand with 6+ card suit, or could be the start of a sequence to show an invitational or much stronger hand.

 

You are vulnerable, but with this 5116 shape you are keen to compete, especially when one of your singletons is an Ace!

 

 

Ideally you'd like to get both of your suits into the auction.

 

[i'm guessing 3♦ over 2N transfer might imply both majors, but you have no agreement! So that's no good!]

 

Any thoughts?

[Phil]

3♦ really has to be the majors, and if I held both I would bid 3♦ and expect partner to understand this.

 

I would bid 3♣ and then compete to 3♠.

[jdeegan]

3♦ really has to be the majors, and if I held both I would bid 3♦ and expect partner to understand this.

 

I would bid 3♣ and then compete to 3♠.

:P My sentiments exactly. Having a special convention to handle this particular hand in this particular auction makes no sense because it comes along so rarely.

[Hanoi5]

Phil nailed it already. 'Nuff said.

[gnasher]

4♣ should be clubs and a major. That doesn't need a special agreement, just a general one to play Leaping Michaels in all auctions where the opponents are at the two-level, they've shown only one suit, and it might still be our hand.

[gwnn]

It should be Leaping Michaels but should we do it on this hand? Or am I a chicken again???

[Free]

It should be Leaping Michaels but should we do it on this hand? Or am I a chicken again???

If you bid 4♣, it will push opps to 5♦ for sure. Just wondering if that's what you want...

[whereagles]

Special situations call for special measures. I think 3C + 3S is just about the best you can do here.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

This is essentially a Leaping Michaels situation over a 3-minor preempt.

There are a couple of methods to show your 2-suiter.

But normally it shows a BIG 2-suiter which you don't have.

 

Anyway, whether over 2S! ( ♣ ) or 2NT!( ♦ ) one method is similar to Andy's:

 

4C! = other minor (om) and a Major

.............4D! ( asks Major )

 

4D! = both Majors

 

3m = asks for a stop

 

3om/3M = natural

[kenrexford]

Two sequences seem to come up more than is acknowledged, namely 1NT-P-2NT or 1NT-P-2♠ as one or both minors.

 

IMO, there is a lot to be said for a structure here. If the 2NT call shows diamonds, then perhaps:

 

X = both majors

3♣ = clubs and hearts

3♦ = clubs and spades

 

If 2♠ is the call and chows clubs, then:

 

X = majors

2NT = hearts and diamonds

3♣ = spades and diamonds

 

If the call is 2♠ and shows either minor, then assume clubs and:

 

X = majors

3C = diamonds and hearts

3D = diamonds and spades

2NT = clubs and either major (3♦ by advancer asks for major

 

If the call is 2NT and shows clubs, then:

 

X = majors

3C = diamonds plus a major (3♥ is pass-or-correct)

 

If the call is 2NT and shows either minor, then:

 

X = majors

3♣ = clubs and a major

3♦ = diamonds and a major

 

This structre leaves out the ability to show the other minor. If it is diamonds, you get the chance to back in with 3♦. If it is clubs, your club bid would have been for $#!+s and giggles anyway, unless you were going to 4♣, so not that big of a loss. You can always blast 4♣ out there anyway if you really want to.

[Zelandakh]

Looking at ken's ideas I think I prefer X = clubs + a major and 3D = majors over 2NT = diamonds allowing us the luxury of a natural 3C overcall. Similarly when 2S shows clubs perhaps X = spades, 2NT = diamonds + a major, 3C = majors is simpler and more effective. An option might also be to bid the spade + diamond hand through X thus making 2NT specifically the red suits.

 

Where the minor is unspecified things are obviously trickier. Perhaps over the 2S variety, X = spades, and 2NT = hearts + minor is simplest. It does mean with both majors we need to double and then bid hearts but the urgency is lessened when the minor is unknown so not too bad. 2NT as either minor is obviously the most difficult but here I think we can use a little trick. Let us assume that the minor is diamonds; then we can use the X = clubs + a major, 3D = majors defence above. Should we actually hold a hand with diamonds and the opponents' suit is clubs we can pass first time round and compete when it comes back to us in 3C. Naturally the delayed 3M would then show that major plus diamonds. You could, of course, also use this trick for the 2S = either minor case if desired.

 

To summarise:-

1NT - 2S = clubs

X = spades

2NT = D + M (option D + H)

3C = H + S

others = natural

 

1NT - 2NT = diamonds

X = C + M

3D = H + S

others = natural

 

1NT - 2S = either minor

X = spades

2NT = H + m

others = natural

 

1NT - 2NT = either minor

X = C + M

3D = H + S

others = natural

 

1NT - 2NT - 3C - p

3M = M + D

others = natural

 

I think that you give up less with this scheme than ken's at the cost of knowing both suits at once all of the time. It is also easier to memorise which is not unimportant for a sequence you will probably only see a small number of times in a year.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

EDIT: See my next post ( # 13 ) first .

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

I have to weigh in on this too.

I'm not sure if this is any better or easier to remember, but it does get in all the options including the long, unbid suits:

 

1NT - 2S! ( ♣ ) - ??

DBL = long suit somewhere >> relays to next step, 2NT;

........... - 2NT; then 3D/3H/3S

2NT! = Diam+ Major

........... - 3C! ( asks Major )

........... - 3D = to play

3C! = majors

........... - 3D! ( asks Major )

 

1NT - 2NT! ( ♦ ) - ??

DBL = long suit somewhere >> relays to 3C!

........... - 3C! ; then pass/3H/3S

3C! = Cl + Major

............ - 3D ( asks major )

3D! = majors

........... - 3H for pass or correct to 3S

[TWO4BRIDGE]

I think I have an even easier method than my last post ( # 12 ) -- for memory purposes --

In either ♣ or ♦ transfer case, 3m! = Majors and 3om! = THAT other bid minor and a Major:

 

1NT - 2S! ( ♣) / 2NT ( ♦ ) - ??

DBL! = long suit somewhere >> relays to next step to ask where

 

3m! = Majors; for 3H/3S = to play ( Edited )

 

3om! = om + Major ; for (1) PASS or (2) 3H for pass or correct to 3S

 

Edited November 1, 2011 by TWO4BRIDGE

[kenrexford]

FWIW, my concern is in maximizing auctions where we want to bid beyond three of their minor most often and where the returns for so competing are greatest.

 

Major one-suiters can be handled at the same level, so a relay to show that seems somewhat silly. The other minor one-suiter, or one of the two possible minor one-suiters, are hurt because one (diamonds) can be shown later anyway and the other (clubs) yields little anyway.

 

Major-minor two-suiters have special calls because (1) they offer the greatest potential reward, meaning game in the major, (2) they are the hardest to bid without methods, and (3) the shape needed for action is such that the HCP contribution also needed is lower, meaning that the opportunities to bid because of sufficient strength should probably be more frequent. Identification of the major and minor held immediately seems somewhat critical, as otherwise the opposition auction, designed somewhat to impeded, works it magic.

 

But, I agree that ease of memory is important. That factor is one that is person-specific.

[jules101]

[hv=pc=n&s=sqt54hj742dt964c2&w=sk7hqt5dqj8732cq3&n=sj8632had5cakj876&e=sa9hk9863dakct954&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=1n(12-14)p2n(trans%20to%20D)3cp(denies%203%20diamonds)pp(long%20stare%2C%20eventually%20passes)]399|300[/hv]

 

Lucky that 3♣ makes I suppose, but not as good as 4♠X tick!

 

Amazing that shape and partner's 3 hcp is enough to make game!

 

Interestingly EW can make 3♦, 3♥, and 3N!

[Free]

EW are nuts

[han]

The comment about the singleton ace in the OP struck me as weird.