Sanity check 1-3

[nige1]

Notation: P = pass, X = Double, XX = Redouble, * = Alert, ?? = Your bid? (Opponents bids in brackets).

If you don't like a previous bid, please assume that you pulled the wrong card from the bidding box and now have to live with your mistake.

But comments are welcome

If you can spare the time, please mark second choices out ot 10 (Your first choice = 10)

[Antrax]

What, no 2NT option for the first one?

[nige1]

What, no 2NT option for the first one?

OK :) added :)

[nigel_k]

On the first one I chose 1♣. This is a little wierd probably, but I was taught to bid this way playing Acol and it has generally worked well as long as you hold good clubs and sufficient values to get the spades in twice. I don't think there is a material difference when playing five card majors.

 

The second one is a very clear double. It's quite unlikely that defending 3♥ is best for us and partner will be well placed to choose a contract after the double. There is room for partner to have quite a good hand, e.g. xxx xxx Qx KJTxx or maybe more.

 

2NT also seems pretty normal on the second one. If NT is correct it should be from my side and I've bid two other suits so partner will not expect me to have spades all locked up and has plenty of space to investigate if uncertain.

[the hog]

1S for the first. I understand 1C but this is an older style of game. 10 for 1S, 7 for 1C

 

X on the second

 

3S on the third. I notice most bid 2NT. Well for me this shows a stopper, not half of one. I don't want to have to apologise to partner after I lie and they run the first 5 S.8 for 3D, 0 for 2NT.

[lalldonn]

1. 1♠.

2. Double.

3. 2NT. If I have this shape with xx xx in the majors I would bid 3♣ but jlall much prefers 3♥ if I remember correctly.

[CSGibson]

1♠

 

Double

 

I object to not rebidding 1N the first time, or opening 1N if that's more in line with your evaluation of the hand. Now that I've bid this way, I'm going to rebid 3D (though I can easily be convinced that a bid of 3C is best). If all partner needs is a half stop, there will be an opportunity to bid it later.

[lalldonn]

Now that I've bid this way, I'm going to rebid 3D (though I can easily be convinced that a bid of 3C is best). If all partner needs is a half stop, there will be an opportunity to bid it later.

It's not only about the stopper situation, and about rightsiding. You are stealing his room to support either of your minors on the 3 level. Now he will have a guess whether or not to support your minor if it involves going beyond 3NT. That's also the reason I think 3♣ is best on a hand like this if I can't stand to bid 2NT, at least then he has room to support diamonds.

[nige1]

IMO

1. 1♣ = 10, 1♠ = 8. I prefer 1♣ because it is more likely to coax a response, because i can describe my pattern at a more economical level, and because my ♣ are better and more slam-suitable than my ♠.
2. Double = 10, Pass - 7, 4♣ = 1.
3. 3♠ = 10, 2N = 9, 3♥ = 8, 3♣ = 6, 3♦ = 5. I think 3♠ is the right bid but I'm plreased to find somebody to agree with me (Thanks to the Hog).

[awm]

1. 1♠ = 10, 1♣ = 8. It's normal to open in spades, but bidding clubs first might facilitate showing both suits more cheaply and I don't have a real problem with it. The other options are awful.

 

2. Dbl = 10, Pass = 7. This hand has quite a bit more in terms of shape and strength than partner will expect, and it's possible to make a game or even slam opposite some reasonable partner hands (say xxx xxx xx AKxxx). Double is far more flexible than any other option. Pass could work out if partner's hand is just bad, but seems quite wimpy.

 

3. 2NT = 10, Rebid 1NT initially = 9, 3♦ = 6. Notrump could easily play better from my side (imagine Axx of spade opposite) and bidding it saves a lot of space. Regardless of what 3♠ shows (I'd think a weaker/anti-positional spade holding) it will be quite difficult to find the right contract on this hand after that call. Rebidding 1NT initially has a bunch of advantages (limits strength better, lets us reach 2♥ if that's the best partial, saves a lot of space if partner has a complex hand).

[akwoo]

Elucidating on 2 (and somewhat on 3):

 

2. Double NV; pass vul.

 

3. You need a partnership agreement on 3C vs 3D. Even if you bid 2N on this hand, there will be hands where the Q is in hearts. (I also agree with 1N as the first rebid.)

[JLOGIC]

Well, everyone doubling on hand 2 is really shocking to me. I would pass without much thought. AQJ of spades...ugh

[Quantumcat]

1♠ is easy on number 1. Not really sure about hand 2. Hand 3 is an easy 3♥, we already denied three cards and we have none of the other options. If pard wants a half a stopper, he will bid 3♠ next, then I can bid 3NT. Usually rebidding 4th suit forcing shows a natural suit, but here we have raised hearts so if he did have a natural spade suit, he will have six hearts also and wouldn't bother showing his five spades since he has already found a fit.

[Zelandakh]

Hand 3 is an easy 3♥, we already denied three cards and we have none of the other options.

What do you rebid with ♠5 ♥432 ♦AKJ97 ♣AKJ9 after 1♦ - 1♥?

[Rossoneri]

I always thought raising the Fourth Suit Force has some other meaning or am I wrong?

[Zelandakh]

I always thought raising the Fourth Suit Force has some other meaning or am I wrong?

As a junior/beginner I played it as showing a half-stop and nothing more constructive to say. In other words just this hand. I stopped doing that because I did not find anyone else who thought it was a good idea. I think the Americans play it as a pattern bid but I could easily be wrong on that.

[JLOGIC]

As a junior/beginner I played it as showing a half-stop and nothing more constructive to say. In other words just this hand. I stopped doing that because I did not find anyone else who thought it was a good idea. I think the Americans play it as a pattern bid but I could easily be wrong on that.

 

Raising the 4th suit when you could have 4 of them being natural would be nearly universal here as a standard agreement when the suit is hearts, and I think also when the suit is clubs (1D 1H 1S 2C 3C)

 

Raising spades in the auction 1D 1H 2C 2S when you cannot have 4 seems to have much less of a universal understanding as far as I can tell, I think many people play it as pattern + anti positional stopper + extras(?), basically Axx and 3154 and extras. Many people would also play it as no stopper and pattern I think, like 3154 with 3 small. Maybe some others would include 2254 with 2 small, maybe some others would include that but exclude 2254 with Hx of hearts. I may be wrong but my experience has been that many people play this differently here.

 

I'm not sure about how most people would play 1C 1H 1S 2D 3D, guess it shows that I have played too much strong club in my expert partnerships in the past years. I know a lot of people are using 2S as a default type bid in that auction, so 3D would probably show 4 diamonds, but this is far from standard obv. Probably many would play a quick 3D shows 4 diamonds and a slow one shows 3 small or Axx :P

[Quantumcat]

What do you rebid with ♠5 ♥432 ♦AKJ97 ♣AKJ9 after 1♦ - 1♥?

 

Yeah you are right - I was thinking when you have a weak hand. I guess in this case we will still bid 3♥ and when pard bids 3♠ (meaning previously described) or 3NT (whatever this shows - extras?) then bidding 4-minor next probably shows this hand - if you had extra diamonds or clubs you would have bid 3♣/3♦ over 2♠ so it should be a cue-bid for hearts? With an in-tune partnership perhaps 4♥ shows cue-bids in both minors - so pard does not get unduly discouraged when he holds no control in the minor you didn't cue-bid.

[nige1]

Thank you all for your help, FWIW,

[1] Partner held ♠ Jxx ♥QJ9xx ♦ AK ♣ T9x opposite my ♠ AQxxx ♥ K ♦ xx ♣ AKQJx. I opened 1♣ not 1♠. We fizzled out in 5♠. RHO had singleton ♠K so 6♣ is a poor contract but had play.

[2] Partner held ♠ xxxx ♥ Kxx ♦ xx ♣ Jxxx and passed my double. 4♣ wouldn't fare much better. I'm now persuaded that I should have passed.

[3] I can't remember partner's hand but my 3♠ worked badly. I now agree that 2N with ♠Qx is a better rebid. (but with ♠Ax I would advocate 3♠).

[mikl_plkcc]

Notation: P = pass, X = Double, XX = Redouble, * = Alert, ?? = Your bid? (Opponents bids in brackets).

If you don't like a previous bid, please assume that you pulled the wrong card from the bidding box and now have to live with your mistake.

But comments are welcome

If you can spare the time, please mark second choices out ot 10 (Your first choice = 10)

 

IMO:

 

1. I always open the higher of 5-5 or longer suits of equal length, with no exception. I don't think that this is strong enough for a 2♣ bid (1.5 tricks short of game)

 

2. I don't feel safe going to the 4-level with this auction, so I pass.

 

3. Every bid is a lie:

2NT: suggests a ♠ stopper;

3♣: suggests 5 ♣s

3♦: suggests 6 ♦s

3♥: suggests 3 ♥s

3♠: suggests 3 ♠s

so I choose 3♦.

[han]

On hand 3 I am not that surprised that exactly half the panel chose not to bid 2NT, but I think they are very wrong. We are not in 3NT yet, there is room. In the meantime, 2NT is the most economical, and notrump should likely be from our side. Bidding notrump first with Qx in the fourth suit is often a good idea.

 

I think that hand 1 is mostly a matter of style. 80 years ago people were opening 1C, nowadays almost everybody opens 1S. I would just go with my agreement, I think it has little to do with sanity.

 

Hand 2 was interesting, and I must admit that unlike Justin I had to think about it for some time. In the end it seemed that doubling would just very often lead to bad results. I don't know why so many experts have voted for double, perhaps it is an intuitive "I have a good hand and short hearts so I must double!" reaction. It seems quite unlikely that we have a game on, and we have no idea whether we can beat 3H. I consider 4C a joke of course.