Best rebid?

[Quartic]

[hv=pc=n&e=sa8h82daq743cat94&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=1dp2cd]133|200[/hv]

 

Your general system is Acol (4 card majors, weak 1NT), so you promised 4+ diamonds. Partner's 2♣ is (9)10+, forcing one round.

 

What's your rebid?

[hrothgar]

[hv=pc=n&e=sa8h82daq743cat94&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=1dp2cd]133|200[/hv]

 

Your general system is Acol (4 card majors, weak 1NT), so you promised 4+ diamonds. Partner's 2♣ is (9)10+, forcing one round.

 

What's your rebid?

 

3♣

[the hog]

3C. I am sorry to be rude, but why is this question not in the beginner's forum?

[Cyberyeti]

3C. I am sorry to be rude, but why is this question not in the beginner's forum?

Because there are several ways 3♣ (even though I'd bid it too) can go wrong.

 

You are very good for this, is partner expected to bid on with A♥ and Kxxxxx♣, or A♥ and KQxxx♣ (♦finesse prob works) ?

 

It's also possible that 3♣ lets the opps in and they can make 3♥ while you can make 3 or 4♣ but neither of you can bid again (give pd xxx, Kx, xxx/Jxx/J10x, KQJxx with K♥ not working, ♣ 3-1 and Q♦ winning for example)

[MrAce]

Deleted missaw the auction

[the hog]

Because there are several ways 3♣ (even though I'd bid it too) can go wrong.

 

You are very good for this, is partner expected to bid on with A♥ and Kxxxxx♣, or A♥ and KQxxx♣ (♦finesse prob works) ?

 

It's also possible that 3♣ lets the opps in and they can make 3♥ while you can make 3 or 4♣ but neither of you can bid again (give pd xxx, Kx, xxx/Jxx/J10x, KQJxx with K♥ not working, ♣ 3-1 and Q♦ winning for example)

 

And is there a reasonable alternative to 3C? Surely no one will think this is worth 4C? Redouble is absurd, of course, and no one would suggest that.

[Quartic]

I wasn't sure after the hand if I was too good for 3♣. Perhaps redouble shows a different hand type, but then how do I show a hand with extras and support that doesn't want to commit to beyond 3NT?

 

Unfortunately on this hand, partner passed 3♣. The field was in 3NT, but 7♣ was there due to the helpful lie of the cards. I'm not sure if 6♣ is biddable. The full hand:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=st765hkt63dj92c73&w=sk43haj7d85cqj865&n=sqj92hq954dkt6ck2&e=sa8h82daq743cat94&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=1dp2cd3cppp]399|300[/hv]

[MrAce]

I wasn't sure after the hand if I was too good for 3♣. Perhaps redouble shows a different hand type, but then how do I show a hand with extras and support that doesn't want to commit to beyond 3NT?

 

Unfortunately on this hand, partner passed 3♣. The field was in 3NT, but 7♣ was there due to the helpful lie of the cards. I'm not sure if 6♣ is biddable. The full hand:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=st765hkt63dj92c73&w=sk43haj7d85cqj865&n=sqj92hq954dkt6ck2&e=sa8h82daq743cat94&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=1dp2cd3cppp]399|300[/hv]

 

What is 2NT over 1♦?

 

Your pd has an invite in NT. Failing to do that creates problems especially when u play weak NT and have to open strong NT hands with a minor and they interfere. The guy who opens 1m with the intention of showing a strong NT later stuns most of the time due to stopper problems and has to choose between bidding NT w/o stopper(s) or showing a hand less or more than what he has in strength.

[Quartic]

What is 2NT over 1♦?

 

Your pd has an invite in NT. Failing to do that creates problems especially when u play weak NT and have to open strong NT hands with a minor and they interfere. The guy who opens 1m with the intention of showing a strong NT later stuns most of the time due to stopper problems and has to choose between bidding NT w/o stopper(s) or showing a hand less or more than what he has in strength.

 

I think we play 2NT as a forcing raise over 1m, similar to over 1M.

 

I was planning to rebid 2♣ with this hand.

[Statto]

The double may have helped here, in making pass an available option. I think West should have bid 3NT after 3♣.

 

Edit: on further thought, I like pass by E to show extras here, and anything else to show a min, but that wld have to be agreed, and I don't know if it's any good...

[Zelandakh]

I am not so sure about pass showing extra values here. Perhaps a better option would be for XX to be a good hand and include strong NT types, then 2NT can be a competitive club raise (plus some GF types) and 3♣ will now be a good club raise. But here's a more general question for you - if North had not doubled, how would you have bid it? This auction can often be difficult to fully unravel in traditional Acol. I like to make 1♦ - 2♣; 2♦ forcing for 1 round. This helps on a variety of hand types and gives you an easy path here since you can support clubs on the third round without taking the risk of being passed in a poor diamond fit.

[gordontd]

I'm not sure if 6♣ is biddable.

Since it requires two finesses, I'm not sure why you would want to bid it.

[gnasher]

1

♦

pass 2

♣

dbl

2NT

should be a good club raise, because you would redouble with a strong balanced hand. Playing with a good English player I'd assume that without discussion (but maybe I'd be unwise to assume that).

 

I find the idea of passing over the double with primary support unappealing. The auction won't be any easier after

1

♦

pass 2

♣

dbl

pass 3

♠

pass pass

I think the 2♣ response is normal, given the methods. There's not much point in playing Acol-style 2/1 responses if you're not going to use them.

[Zelandakh]

1

♦

pass 2

♣

dbl

2NT

should be a good club raise, because you would redouble with a strong balanced hand.

Andy, is there any theoretical advantage to playing 2NT as strictly sronger than 3♣ here? My initial impression (without giving it much thought admittedly) was that 2NT as competitive or GF and 3♣ as extras (ie split-range) would be better.

[Cyberyeti]

Since it requires two finesses, I'm not sure why you would want to bid it.

Well they are about 4:1 on to work given the double.

[JLOGIC]

3C if it's non forcing seems ridiculous lol. Look at our hand. 2N being a raise makes a lot of sense obv, since I do not play standard 2C bids ever I was thinking I'd just XX and then raise clubs to show a GF club raise.

[gnasher]

Andy, is there any theoretical advantage to playing 2NT as strictly sronger than 3♣ here? My initial impression (without giving it much thought admittedly) was that 2NT as competitive or GF and 3♣ as extras (ie split-range) would be better.

I'm sure your suggestion is theoretically better in this sequence, because the are no preemptive benefits in bidding 3♣ on the weakest raises.

 

Without such an agreement, I'd assume that 2NT is the same as in these sequences:

1x dbl 2NT

 

1x pass 1y dbl

2NT

where the direct raise is best played as weakest because of the preemptive value.

 

(Note that I'm only talking about methods in England, where Support Redoubles are rarely played.)

[MrAce]

 

(Note that I'm only talking about methods in England, where Support Redoubles are rarely played.)

 

I play supp doubles but i also dont like supp redoubles, i think they are totally 2 different positions which are being treated by most people as if they are not.

[gszes]

WHY do i keep removing my flak jacket

lets see my hand was

 

KQ

xxxx

KQxx

QJx

 

right ?? oh no thats what a 3c bid looks like a min with club support

better for blocking and warning p of your weakness than anything

else.

 

Now the hand shown is a fair bit better than the somewhat ragged collection

that one would bid 3c with. IMO (minority though it my be) we should begin with

xx. This does a couple of things ---one it shows extra values this could be either

w or w/o club support. The point is we don't want to give our poor p the impression

we are min or worse min with no fit (where we would pass). Our hand is just short

of 15-17 NT with 4 card support. The aces and even dia Q in long suit are all

working cards and we should easily have the values for 3n or even 5 of a minor.

 

xx has the additional benefit of keeping the bidding low and since this is almost

assuredly our hand keeping the bidding low will probably be advantageous. We

have the goods lets let p in on the good news.

[hrothgar]

WHY do i keep removing my flak jacket

lets see my hand was

 

KQ

xxxx

KQxx

QJx

 

right ?? oh no thats what a 3c bid looks like a min with club support

better for blocking and warning p of your weakness than anything

else.

 

 

What do the words "Your general system is Acol (4 card majors, weak 1NT)" mean in your part of the world?

[the hog]

Obviously not the hand he posted, Richard.

xx should be reserved for hands that wish to penalise the opponents, not for bids showing support which then allow the opps a cheap shot at bidding. xx is truly very poor.

[Quartic]

1

♦

pass 2

♣

dbl

2NT

should be a good club raise, because you would redouble with a strong balanced hand. Playing with a good English player I'd assume that without discussion (but maybe I'd be unwise to assume that).

 

I find the idea of passing over the double with primary support unappealing. The auction won't be any easier after

1

♦

pass 2

♣

dbl

pass 3

♠

pass pass

I think the 2♣ response is normal, given the methods. There's not much point in playing Acol-style 2/1 responses if you're not going to use them.

 

I like the idea of using 2NT as a good club raise here, moving the strong balanced hands into redouble. I'll discuss that with my partner.

[JLOGIC]

Obviously not the hand he posted, Richard.

xx should be reserved for hands that wish to penalise the opponents, not for bids showing support which then allow the opps a cheap shot at bidding. xx is truly very poor.

 

But bidding 3 non forcing club with this hand is not? How can you risk not playing in game after 1D p 2C with this hand?

[mike777]

But bidding 3 non forcing club with this hand is not? How can you risk not playing in game after 1D p 2C with this hand?

 

 

I think for nonexperts you raise the key point here that many might miss. In fact many will bid a nf 3c. This is real teaching hand.

 

if 2c is 100% gf not an issue but this is acol.

[hrothgar]

But bidding 3 non forcing club with this hand is not? How can you risk not playing in game after 1D p 2C with this hand?

 

As I learned things, the 3♣ bid is a free bid and shows extra values...

(I have the option to pass the double holding a minimum hand with a club fit)

 

Personally, I think that its better to have a more complex set of agreements and have the ability to show different strength club raises, however, I wouldn't assume this without discussion.