han Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 IMP pairs, non vulnerable. AxAxxxK10xxxxx (1C) - 1S - (p) - ?? What is your first call? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 Are you suggesting that 1NT is a valid alternative to 2♦? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 Two Diamonds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowerline Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 IMP pairs, non vulnerable. AxAxxxK10xxxxx (1C) - 1S - (p) - ?? What is your first call? 2♦. What's the alternative? Steven 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 The alternatives are all flawed, which would be an argument in favour of playing the cuebid as invitational with no clear direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TWO4BRIDGE Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 2♦. What's the alternative? StevenIf you play Transfer Advances: 2C! ( ♦ ) . Then if partner "simply accepts", then bid 2S = usually showing a good 3 card raise but A x will suffice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSGibson Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 a non-forcing constructive 2♦ call looks right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
straube Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 I like a transfer advance and then 2S. If I'm not playing them, I'll bid 1N. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted June 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 The call chosen at the table was 2C. I thought 2D was clearly best, but when I asked a good player their first reaction was 1NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dake50 Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 I play 1D (insufficient) for just this hand.10-ish Qx support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ByChechi Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 If we define 1♠/N as 9-15 HPC , 5+cards ♠,primary concern of the partners to reduce their stakes - min or max. I will say 2♣(short ♣ and forsig to 2NT).If my P have 9-11(12) points , he may repeat his ♠.Then i think 2♠will be a good contract. So keep all options open.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 The call chosen at the table was 2C. I thought 2D was clearly best, but when I asked a good player their first reaction was 1NT.I don't understand 2♣. I know there are some people who play that it doesn't promise a fit, but don't they play it as either a fit or a game-force? It seems unplayable to use it as an undefined hand of invitational or better strength. When I first saw the hand, I thought 2♦ was obvious, but now that you mention 1NT I think that's better. If 2♦ is forcing, partner may be forced to rebid 2♠ on a five-card suit, so we'll have to pass 2♠ if he bids it. If 2♦ is non-forcing, we will often play there, possbly in a 5-1 fit, and possibly with a 4-4 heart fit. After a 1NT advance, partner will usually bid a second suit if he has one, or 2♠ if he has six, so we won't often miss a fit. We can happily raise 2♠ to 3♠. If he passes 1NT, he may have a club stop, or it may not matter that he doesn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 Andy, I don't quite understand why the overcaller should be less happy to have a chance to introduce his 4 card heart suit over 2♦ than over 1NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 Andy, I don't quite understand why the overcaller should be less happy to have a chance to introduce his 4 card heart suit over 2♦ than over 1NT.Because a non-forcing 2♦ bid will on average have fewer hearts than a 1NT bid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
straube Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 Change the problem a little to Ax AKxx xxxxx xx. What do you bid now? I think that 1N suggests a stopper but doesn't promise a stopper. Bidding 1N leaves plenty of room for either partner to inquire about a stopper. It's less directional than a constructive/nf 2D call. I think 2D ought to suggest a better suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgr Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 I play 1D (insufficient) for just this hand.10-ish Qx support.I play DBL to show this hand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 I think that 2♦ is clear, and I am not convinced by the arguments in favor of 1NT. Aside from the fact that we don't have a stopper in clubs, my values are all controls, which suggests playing in a suit contract. My diamond suit is not the greatest opposite a short holding, but at least 2♦ is a fair description of my hand and my values. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 I would always bid 1N. If partner passes either 1N or 2D I would imagine 1N is better, and 1N is more encouraging to partner to bid 2S or 2H (he will always bid 2S with 6 or 2H with 4 over 1N, he might pass with one of those over 2D especially if he has 2 diamonds or his hand is a pretty bad overcall/bad suits). This is a well known sequence where 1N does not promise a stopper (the other one being 1N over a negative X), so I am not disturbed by having no stopper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 Another way to put it is 2D places emphasis on diamonds. Our hand is clearly about getting to game in 4M or 3N and if we can't then getting to a playable partial. 1N cannot be such a horrible spot opposite a balanced 1S overcall, 2D could easily be poor in a 5-1 fit or even a lousy 5-2 fit. 1N accomplishes all of those goals, even wrongsiding NT is not much of a concern, LHO opened the bidding and if we have enough to play game it's unlikely to matter that it's not from partners side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 My diamond suit is not the greatest opposite a short holding, but at least 2♦ is a fair description of my hand and my values. Wouldn't you also say that a 2D bid is also clear on x Qxx KQJxxx xxx, and a fair description of your hand and values? Yes, if your "description" includes a huge range of values and suit qualities and orientation then 2D will be a "descriptive" bid with many hand types, but then it is useless. 1N seems like a pretty fair description to me, I have ~8-11 without 3 spades and no good suit to bid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
straube Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 I would always bid 1N. If partner passes either 1N or 2D I would imagine 1N is better, and 1N is more encouraging to partner to bid 2S or 2H (he will always bid 2S with 6 or 2H with 4 over 1N, he might pass with one of those over 2D especially if he has 2 diamonds or his hand is a pretty bad overcall/bad suits). This is a well known sequence where 1N does not promise a stopper (the other one being 1N over a negative X), so I am not disturbed by having no stopper. I think I prefer 1N now to a transfer advance and then a 2S rebid. A transfer advance can easily lose hearts and overemphasizes diamonds. After 1H (1S) P what would you bid with xx xxx AKxx Kxxx ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 Wouldn't you also say that a 2D bid is also clear on x Qxx KQJxxx xxx, and a fair description of your hand and values? Althou you convinced me 1NT is better, I don't buy this argument, you can make the same statement for x Qxx xxx KQJxxx, overloading 1NT with wide ranging and wide shape of hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akhare Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 2♣ (showing ♦s) followed by 2♠ playing transfer advances; 2♦ otherwise. Edit: I think 1N is pretty good too, given the ratty diamond suit and pard may surprise us with a red suit bid :)... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 I think I prefer 1N now to a transfer advance and then a 2S rebid. A transfer advance can easily lose hearts and overemphasizes diamonds.Well yeah if I have transfer advances then obviously I rebid 2♥ rather than 2♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 I think I prefer 1N now to a transfer advance and then a 2S rebid. A transfer advance can easily lose hearts and overemphasizes diamonds. After 1H (1S) P what would you bid with xx xxx AKxx Kxxx ? Of course Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.