Constructive bidding

[luckyloser]

MP, you play sayc, opps too.

 

LHO opens 1♦, p overcalls 1♠, RHO passes, you hold

 

♠ KQJx

♥ xx

♦ Axx

♣ QJxx

 

and bid 2♦ showing at least a game-invitational raise (good sup, 11 HCP or better). P now bids 2♥ showing ♥-values and not a minimum (whatever that is).

 

has your hand improved or not? and do you offer a further invitation (if yes, what do you bid?) or leave it to P to move on and bid only 2♠ for now (do you then bid 4 if P makes a further move?)?

[benlessard]

Partner overcalling range is something like a good 7 to a bad 18. with 0-6 you usually pass 1S even if you have fit. With 7 to a bad 10 raising to 2S is normal and with good 10 or better you can cuebid to 2D. Partner 2H mean an opening hand. Your hand has some extras and more importantly everything is working, so you need to bid 3 something and bidding only 2S would be a gross error. Some would even bid 4S with your hand now.

 

Note that 2H by your partner shouldnt show anything in H, he has only 2 bids before the 2S limit, 2S and 2H, so 2S is a subminimum overcall and 2H is 11+ range (artificial game try)

 

Hands like

Axxxx

Axxx

xx

Kx

 

Axxxxx

Axxx

x

Kx

 

Axxxx

Axx

x

Kxxx

 

Axxxx

Axx

xxx

Ax

 

and many more hands where partner has 5S4H all want to be in 4S

[gnasher]

Our hand was already significantly better than a minimum - it's a 13-count with four-card support, whereas it could have been an 11-count with three-card support.

 

Once partner shows a non-minimum, we're close to game. A10xxx AQxx xx xx would be enough, for example.

 

If he's shown a second suit, I think this is worth game. If "heart values" means it might be a three-card suit, then I'd just invite (and I dislike the methods).

[HighLow21]

Our hand was already significantly better than a minimum - it's a 13-count with four-card support, whereas it could have been an 11-count with three-card support.

 

Once partner shows a non-minimum, we're close to game. A10xxx AQxx xx xx would be enough, for example.

 

If he's shown a second suit, I think this is worth game. If "heart values" means it might be a three-card suit, then I'd just invite (and I dislike the methods).

I cannot imagine 4♠ failing based on the auction so far. I would guess it makes >90% of the time. Here are my thoughts:

 

I have a 7-loser hand, 13 HCP, great trump support, the ACE of diamonds (not any other honor is nearly as good), and shortness in partner's second suit.

 

The only way we're in trouble is if partner is dead minimum on the bidding so far, is exactly 5-4-3-1 with nothing in either minor, and the opening lead exposes a 4th loser. This may be the case, and the auction does warn that trump duplication is possible, but even with a dead minimum overcall (minimum for the action in the auction so far) game might be cold here.

 

In my opinion bidding anything short of game at this point is very very wimpy at any form of scoring, unless you have a descriptive forcing bid available. But I cannot imagine stopping short of game here.

 

Luckyloser, based on your description if partner's 2♥ bid was a classic help suit game try, then yes, your hand has improved quite a bit. In that scenario he would be worried about losing too many hearts and your hand says he can only lose 2 at the most. If 2♥ is unclear as to what type of strength is in that suit, then the answer could run the gamut from "improved tremendously" to "horrendous duplication." If partner has, for example, KQJT♥ it is a huge problem. If he has Axxx♥ or Kxxx♥ or AKxx♥ or xxxx♥ it is fantastic news.

[mikeh]

I don't understand why 2♥ should be viewed as potentially or actually artificial, unless one has made that specific, non-standard agreement.....given that the OP specified SAYC, it seems unlikely that they made this agreement.....btw, I think it is a bad idea....why can't we have a heart fit that plays as well as or better than spades?

 

Assuming, as I do, that partner has secondary hearts, I can count ruffs in my hand. As little as Axxxx AQxx xx xx gives me an excellent play for game, so I just bid 4♠.

[kayin801]

4♠ seems clear to me, after any noise by partner. I would take a "non-minimum" to be around a min opener in value at worst?

 

FWIW I am in the "2♥ should be an artificial game try" camp since it's the only available bid below 2♠ and it would be nice to be able to stop low if our ♠K was instead a spot card. We're never stopping in 2♥ so we have plenty of time to find a true heart fit by opting to bid 3♥ or 4♥ as part of our game acceptance. Without real hearts we can just go back to spades. I'm willing to give up a 4♥ cue for this.

[nigel_k]

I am bidding 4♠.

 

Game might be poor if partner is minumum with some diamond wastage and the wrong cards elsewhere, e.g. Axxxx KQxx Qx xx. But it's too pessimistic to try to cater to that specifically when so many other minimums make game near cold.

[the_clown]

I dont really get the problem. We have a 13 count and 4 card support for partner. With most partners I would just bid 4 without much of a thought, with some I would invite and sign of if they show minimum.

 

With his 2♥ bid partner told us that he is not min, which is more than enough to bid game. Our hand did not improve, it actually got worse (if p had shown ♣values our hand would improve). But now that we know partner has no garbage we can just bid 4. And yes, I saw that it is Matchpoints.

[WesleyC]

4S now seems clear.

 

For what its worth, 2H didn't improve my hand, I just had a very good hand to start with! :)