How to bid a 1642 12 count hand

[jillybean]

I am posting this hand on behalf a friend who is inexperienced and wanting advice on hand evaluation.

 

Playing SAYC, 3 passes to you , opponents not bidding. A,AK7643,9762,J4

 

1♥:1♠

2♦:2N

3♥:3N

 

3N - 3

 

Partner says I have a 2♥ bid, I should not bid 2♦ on xxxx but having done so I must pass 2N.

I have a 2 suited hand, if I had more values I would have opened 1nt. I want to play in ♥ or ♦,

it's partners fault we are too high. Partners hand was J874,J,AQJ,QT762

[jjbrr]

honest question since I never learned SAYC very much: should partner bid 2C instead of 1S?

 

anyway, i wouldn't bid 2D. the hearts are great, the diamonds are bad, the stiff spade ace is bad, and i have minimum values. lots of things in favor of 2H

[the hog]

I would bid 2H with your hand. The Hearts are pretty good and the Ds are awful. Bid where you live. To be honest, I do not know whether 3H is forcing in SAYC; I suspect it is. Your partner should pass 2H.

[squealydan]

2♥ for me every time.

 

I'd need something like ♥Kxxxxx ♦AQxx to suppress the fact that I have a 6-long major in order to show a 4-card minor.

[nigel_k]

I will usually bid the minor unless there is a significant difference in suit quality, which there is here obviously. For example, if it was A KQxxxx Kxxx Jx I would bid 2♦ but would consider 2♥ instead if the diamonds were any weaker.

 

I also think that 3♥ should be non forcing on the given auction. If you want to offer a choice of games, bid 3♣ and let partner give preference to hearts with a doubleton if they have that.

 

Responder's bidding is worse IMO. I doubt that the sort of partner who bids 3NT over 3♥ would have let you play 2♥ anyway.

[mike777]

I am posting this hand on behalf a friend who is inexperienced and wanting advice on hand evaluation.

 

Playing SAYC, 3 passed to you , opponents not bidding. A,AK7643,9762,J4

 

1♥:1♠

2♦:2N

3♥:3N

 

3N - 3

 

Partner says I have a 2♥ bid, I should not bid 2♦ on xxxx but having done so I must pass 2N.

I have a 2 suited hand, if I had more values I would have opened 1nt. I want to play in ♥ or ♦,

it's partners fault we are too high. Partners hand was J874,J,AQJ,QT762

 

 

easy 2h rebid not 2d

 

 

for me pard rebid 2nt too much....... Iwould just pass 2d.....but you have an easy 2h rebid that is the biggest error

 

your rebid over 2nt bigger error

 

so 90=10 error

[Antrax]

I always thought (= read somewhere) that if you can show 9 cards out of your hand or 6 cards out of your hand, you usually show 9, so the 2♦ rebid is generally (though probably not in this case) more descriptive (= better), no?

[mike777]

I always thought (= read somewhere) that if you can show 9 cards out of your hand or 6 cards out of your hand, you usually show 9, so the 2♦ rebid is generally (though probably not in this case) more descriptive (= better), no?

 

 

NO ...big NO

 

minors suck...if you want to bid them have extras......bias against minors. xxxx minors suck even more......

[Antrax]

Well, if it's a *big* no I guess no explanation of the logic to the opposite is required. Anyway, as misguided as it might be, in my partnership we play that 2♥ is a hand willing to play opposite a small singleton, so many six-card suits don't qualify if we can make another bid.

[mike777]

Well, if it's a *big* no I guess no explanation of the logic to the opposite is required. Anyway, as misguided as it might be, in my partnership we play that 2♥ is a hand willing to play opposite a small singleton, so many six-card suits don't qualify if we can make another bid.

 

 

 

in what world does xxxx in d qualify another bid?

 

 

yes 2h says pard Ihave minimum......6h.......but you did open the bidding....so.....how much can you have for 1h and 2h? IN 4th seat?

[Antrax]

Should I have posted "generally" a couple more times? Did my "(though probably not in this case)" throw you off? I wasn't advocating it on this hand, particularly because I don't really feel I'm qualified to answer anything, but I was wondering about the general principle, since the title referred to this shape and not this particular hand.

[mike777]

Should I have posted "generally" a couple more times? Did my "(though probably not in this case)" throw you off? I wasn't advocating it on this hand, particularly because I don't really feel I'm qualified to answer anything, but I was wondering about the general principle, since the title referred to this shape and not this particular hand.

 

 

 

If you think your 6-4 is minimum in your style rebid 2 major...if not rebid 2 minor...

 

general principle.

[HighLow21]

Grunching a bit, but 2♥ rebid the first time around. It's the best way you can say you have a weak, 1-suited hand, which is what you have.

[jillybean]

I also think that 3♥ should be non forcing on the given auction. If you want to offer a choice of games, bid 3♣ and let partner give preference to hearts with a doubleton if they have that.

 

Hi, do you think is it standard to play 3♥/2N as nf or would this be by specific agreement?

[MrAce]

Hi, do you think is it standard to play 3♥/2N as nf or would this be by specific agreement?

 

Here is some notes from a very good pair in USA about which bids mean what after responders invitational 2 NT ( i think i posted this in the past but w/e)

 

A= Opener's first suit

B= Opener's 2nd suit

 

 

ABA

A--something

B--2NT

3A shows extras and forcing, accepting 2 NT invitation and seeking the best game with 6+ card in A suit

 

AAB

A--something

2A--2NT

3B wants to play partscore in A suit unless responder supports B suit with 4 or more cards.

[Codo]

I always thought (= read somewhere) that if you can show 9 cards out of your hand or 6 cards out of your hand, you usually show 9, so the 2♦ rebid is generally (though probably not in this case) more descriptive (= better), no?

 

YES YES Yes, a big yes (just to give a counterweight to Mike).

 

 

Seriously: What is right to do with 6/4 is a style thing. There had been more then one discussion in the BW whether you should always rebid your major, always the minor or whether this should depend on your overall strength.

 

Like Nigel, I need a good reason not to show my second suit. This hand does qualify, but it is the exception.

And I would agree that 3 ♥ should be non forcing. Partner is limitted, if I need to force him, I bid 3 ♣.

[Zelandakh]

2♥ rebid? or 2♥ opening? This looks like the latter to me...

[Antrax]

With a side four card suit, opening strength and two aces?

[Zelandakh]

With a side four card suit, opening strength and two aces?

Did you notice the 3 pass cards already on the table?

[Antrax]

Nope, thanks for pointing that out.

[Codo]

Zel is right. This is a 2 ♥ opening, I missed the three passes part too. :(

[plaur]

I bid 2♦ and pass 2NT (unless its my agreement to open this 2♥ i 4th seat)

[mikeh]

Given that this was a 4th seat hand, 2♥ seems correct to me. Beginners probably don't know that in 4th seat one should beef up the range for the weak two bid. While some players use weak 2 bids as primarily or even purely preemptive calls (as I do at favourable), many players use weak 2 bids as a combination of constructive and preemptive bids. However, in 4th seat, there is no need for much preemption.....if we are afraid this is 'their' hand, we can pass. So a 4th seat weak two can usefully be played with a range of a maximum other seat weak two up to and including a minimum opener.

 

Assuming, for the moment, that this was not in 4th seat, such that the correct opening is 1♥, the traditional and (I think) still standard meaning of 1♥ 2♦ 3♥, in the given auction, is that 3♥ is forcing.

 

This has sound logic behind it. Responder has invited game, but doesn't yet know that opener has 6 hearts. Opener will often have a hand that wants to be in game but can't unilaterally commit to either 3N or 4♥. So 3♥ as forcing, with a 6 card suit, allows responder input into the choice of games.

 

 

The corollary to this is that opener has to bid differently with a weak 6-4, and the standard sequence is 1♥ 2♥ 3♦. Whether opener would choose this approach on a side suit of xxxx is another issue for another day.

 

There is a solution, should you feel that not being able to show diamonds at your second bid is an issue. The solution belongs in the A/E area, since it involves opener playing transfers over 2N (and doesn't work if opener's second suit is clubs, because there is no way to transfer to 3♣ over responder's 2N)

[ArtK78]

It is my understanding that bidding the suits in this order - hearts - hearts - diamonds - is weaker than bidding the suits in this order - hearts - diamonds - hearts. Both show 6-4 shape.

 

Neither is forcing.

 

However, in this case, you really don't have a four card diamond suit. xxxx is not a real suit. I would ignore it completely and treat this as a one suiter, essentially the same as A AKxxxx xxx Jxx.

 

*I see that partner is a passed hand. So, even if one played the sequence hearts - diamonds - hearts as forcing opposite an unpassed hand, it would be nonforcing opposite a passed hand. Whether you want to treat this hand as a weak 2 bid opposite a passed hand is an entirely different issue. I would open the hand 2♥ opposite a passed hand.

[HighLow21]

2♥ rebid? or 2♥ opening? This looks like the latter to me...

The more I think about it the more I kind of like this suggestion. The hand is a bare minimum anyway, 5 of the 12 HCP are in short suits, the 4-card side suit is horrendous, and partner passed originally. The hand is not worth the 12HCP it originally contained, and as far as 12 HCP 6/4's go, it's pretty yucky.

 

Either way, 1♥ followed by a 2♦ rebid is not nearly discouraging enough opposite a passed hand for my taste. Move the black honor cards to diamonds and then it makes much more sense to me to encourage with 1♥/2♦. The point is, absent a big heart fit you know you don't want to be in game opposite a passed hand, and 1♥/2♦ fails to convey that.