Hand evaluation rebid question

[Mbodell]

All red at teams you deal and hold:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sa632hak5da4ca842&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1cp1sp]133|200[/hv]

[jillybean]

Clear 4♠ bid now.

[perko90]

4♠. Text book example. wtp?

[psyck]

You can play 3!d rebid here as a variety of strong balanced/medium splinter raises.

[Finch]

The 'textbook' example of a 3S bid is 18-19 balanced, or weaker with compensating distribution.

That makes this a 3S bid.

You might decide that having 9 controls including all 4 aces really makes it too good for 18-19 balanced, but if so perhaps you should have opened 2NT.

 

p.s. if you play a very traditional style where responder promises 6+ HCP for a response there's more to be said for 4S, but if partner might easily have Qxxx Qxx Qxx xxx or Kxxxx xxx xx xxx then you should definitely restrain yourself.

[Cyberyeti]

I would have opened 2N as I play good 19 - 21, but by your methods, I think I bid 4♠. You really don't need very much from partner to make this playable, and the 1♠ response bypassing the reds (depending on what you respond with 4-4 ♦/♠) increases the chance of a 5th spade.

 

(I play a 4 card club but used to play 1♣-1♠-3N as this hand (4432/4441 with support meaning the splinter guarantees a 5th club, but we then amended the 2N range so now it's specifically 4(14)4)

[rmnka447]

Playing 20+ 2 NT bids, I would have opened the hand 2 NT anyhow. Aces are undervalued so holding all 4 the hand is worth more than the 19 point straight HC point count.

 

That said, given the auction, I would raise to 4 ♠ for a couple of reasons. First, you have the point count and number of ♠s for the bid. Second, your hand has NO intermediates that often prove so vital at NT contracts. So, the hand is more likely to play better at a suit contract than at NT.

[Statto]

The 'textbook' example of a 3S bid is 18-19 balanced, or weaker with compensating distribution.

That makes this a 3S bid.

Is 3♠ forcing? For me it is invitational, so I'll bid 4♠.

 

Playing 20+ 2 NT bids, I would have opened the hand 2 NT anyhow. Aces are undervalued so holding all 4 the hand is worth more than the 19 point straight HC point count.

They're not really for playing in NT with a balanced hand opposite a balanced hand. The intermediates are dreadful in this hand so I'd be more inclined to downgrade it to 18 balanced than upgrade to 20.

[Mbodell]

At the table I bid 3♠ (not forcing, but not often passed) and partner raised to 4. The person kibitzing me said afterwords they were extremely surprised I had bid only 3♠, but I had thought it was close but that 3♠ was better than 4♠ given partner can stretch to respond to 1♣ with less than 6, and partner will know we are red at teams too, and I have only a 6 LTC hand, albeit a very good 6 LTC. It looks like my call was a minority decision on the board. Maybe I've moved past my overbid all the time phase (aka junior) and have over corrected to underbidding too much as I get older?

 

Partner's hand was an 11 count, but the other table was in 6♠ -1, but don't know if their auction featured a 4♠ rebid or not.

[awm]

At the table I bid 3♠ (not forcing, but not often passed) and partner raised to 4. The person kibitzing me said afterwords they were extremely surprised I had bid only 3♠, but I had thought it was close but that 3♠ was better than 4♠ given partner can stretch to respond to 1♣ with less than 6, and partner will know we are red at teams too, and I have only a 6 LTC hand, albeit a very good 6 LTC. It looks like my call was a minority decision on the board. Partner's hand was an 11 count, but the other table was in 6♠ -1, but don't know if their auction featured a 4♠ rebid or not.

 

They opened 2NT, which they play as 19-20. Their auction:

 

2NT(1) - 3♣(2)

3♦(3) - 3♥(4)

3♠(5) - 4♦(6)

4♥(6) - 4♠

6♠

 

(1) 19-20 by agreement

(2) Puppet Stayman

(3) 4-card major, no 5-card major

(4) 4♠

(5) Agrees ♠

(6) Cuebid

 

Partner actually had a twelve count:

 

♠KQTx

♥Jxx

♦KQx

♣Jxx

 

I think you held slightly better club spots; in the play it was key that you had the ♣T, which enabled your partner to make six when the defenders did not cover the club jack (losing one club only). In fact 6♠ did have a little bit of play, but the club layout was not favorable and your teammate (my partner) covered the ♣J with the king.

 

Despite the 12 hcp, trying for slam seems a bit dubious to me on partner's hand even opposite a jump to 4♠ (or a 19-20 2NT opening). The lack of shape and controls together is just really bad, and it's hard to construct hands where slam is better than a finesse. Of course, by bidding only 3♠ you removed this decision for partner. :)

[MrAce]

This is definetely not a 3♠ for me.

 

Of course Francis can conveniently construct Kxxxx xxx xx xxx doubleton vs our doubleton but then again i can construct Kxxxx xxx xxx xx which makes game on 2-2 ♠.

 

It is not only about game either, if we show this hand as some sort of invitation hand we will miss a lot of slams or grandslams i am afraid.

 

And 3♠ showing 18-19 balanced is very new to me, i guess bridge has changed a lot during my break. I mean i know there are some lousy 18 hcps with 4333 that we bid 3♠ but this one ? I am surprised tbh.

 

I wouldnt bid 3♠ even at mp, let alone teams.

[nigel_k]

Agree with 4♠ rather than 3♠. Even if 3♠ is 18-19 it does not follow that either we bid 3♠ or we should have opened 2NT. We had quite a good 19 to begin with and it has improved after partner bid spades and because are playing a suit rather than NT.

[mike777]

looks like an easy 2nt(20-21) then 4nt then pass hand.

[gszes]

speaking for the minority once again IMO a nice simple

 

2h reverse for me.

 

 

Yes yes this hand equates to 20 count and 4s seems to fit the bill nicely but

how in the world is p ever going to make a move toward slam with an

intermediate hand missing all 4 aces????

 

By starting with 2h we can learn a great deal more from p next bid and it may

then be possible for us to take over with blackwood. It is almost never right

to take up huge amounts of space with a slammish looking hand (ie all controls)

opposite an unlimited partner. They will rarely make bids that assume you have

this type of miracle hand.

[Phil]

Very happy I play 3♥ to show this hand type.

[psyck]

After 1♣-1♠; you usually have 3♦ & 3♥ artificial that you can assign various meanings; e.g.

 

3♦ = 4♠'s (Bal or Med Splinter) on which 3♠ by Resp is NF, 3♥ is Relay (3NT = Bal 18-19, 3♠ = ♥ Splinter 16-17, 4♦ = ♦ Splinter 16-17, 4♣ = 5♣ +4♠).

 

3♥=18+ with good ♣'s.

[quiddity]

I also play 3♠ as 18-19 balanced but AAAAK is too good for that. I bid 4♠ now.

I don't think this means we have to open the hand 2NT; control-rich hands with no spots are great for suit play, not so great for NT. So I don't think it's inconsistent to start with 1♣ and then upgrade when we find an 8-card major-suit fit.