Just when you think it's going well.

[mr1303]

Hand 1:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sk9852hq6d987cq72&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1cp1dp1sp]133|200[/hv]

 

1C was strong and artificial, 1D was negative. What do you call?

[ahydra]

what's 1S? Limited or unlimited? What are my available responses?

 

ahydra

[chasetb]

It would be nice to know what the lower limit of 1♠ here is. I will treat it like Precision, and therefore I will bid 3♠ as showing 6-7 HCP, 4-5 card support, and no shortness. I can't jump to 4♠ because not only does that kill cuebidding opportunities, I defined it in my system as a max, but a 6322 or 7222 hand.

[mr1303]

Basically, 1C 1D 2S would be GF, so partner has less than that. You play 16+ 1C and a 14-16 NT, so partner is something in the 16-20 ish range with 5+ spades.

 

Responses are fairly natural. 1C 1D 1S 2S would be something like 3-5 HCP, 3S would be a maximum with 4 card support you think, although you haven't any published agreement.

[kenrexford]

Basically, 1C 1D 2S would be GF, so partner has less than that. You play 16+ 1C and a 14-16 NT, so partner is something in the 16-20 ish range with 5+ spades.

 

Responses are fairly natural. 1C 1D 1S 2S would be something like 3-5 HCP, 3S would be a maximum with 4 card support you think, although you haven't any published agreement.

 

 

I thought Opener's 1♠ could be canape. Is that not popular anymore?

[CSGibson]

we have 2N by responder built in as "best possible hand, usually 5+ card support with a max". I think that makes way more sense then natural and NF, but maybe you have some "impossible" hands built into 1D, too.

[sfi]

1C was strong and artificial, 1D was negative. What do you call?

 

4♠ looks normal. If 2NT is available I like it to show a hand is now worth more than a negative response, and this hand doesn't really increase in value much.

[ThymePuns]

kuhchung says "limit raise"

 

He's really changed since he turned 50. Now all he does is upvote things.

 

I would also make a limit raise, though at IMPs I might try 4S if partner has shown 5+.

[kayin801]

I wouldn't get fancy and just make a game forcing raise. If I can't do that under 4♠, I bid 4♠.

 

I think I play 3NT as this kind of hand.

[the hog]

This is a 9 loser hand. 3S is sufficient, 4S is too much and 2S is not enough.

[lalldonn]

Definitely 4♠, well 2NT if I can but I'm forcing to game. I wouldn't try to stop with 23+ and a 10 card fit, especially since partner probably isn't balanced or he might rebid 1NT.

[billw55]

If we were playing 2/1 and partner opened 1♠, I would bid 4♠. So how could I not do so after a precision 1♣?

[ahydra]

I think I agree with treating this as a limit raise. Massive trump fits aren't always a good thing.

 

ahydra

[JLOGIC]

Bid a game and move on with life. You cannot try and stop in 3S on these kind of hands.

[Zelandakh]

If you have to waste 3 rounds of bidding with this hand then it argues strongly against any benefit from playing the strong club in the first place. There really should be a way for Responder to show a game-forcing hand below 4♠. If there is no such bid then perhaps it whould not be a bad idea to look at the system notes and find a spare call (2NT, 3♣, whatever) for the next time this comes up.

[sfi]

What exactly are you afraid of missing, and what do you expect a 4♠ bid to look like? It's worth knowing when to not use system as well.

[Zelandakh]

What exactly are you afraid of missing, and what do you expect a 4♠ bid to look like? It's worth knowing when to not use system as well.

How about Axxxxx/Kxx/-/AKxx for example, plus a card if that is too weak? Why would we not give Opener some extra space to investigate when they can have anything up to a hand just shy of a game force?

[helene_t]

Yes. If the reason for not bidding 4♠ is that it would make cuebidding impossible, then there should be an inference that 4♠ shows a hand without side suit controls. Hence, very good spade support and probably a couple of outside kings. I think a direct 4♠ bid describes our hand as accurately as anything.

[sfi]

How about Axxxxx/Kxx/-/AKxx for example, plus a card if that is too weak? Why would we not give Opener some extra space to investigate when they can have anything up to a hand just shy of a game force?

 

Do you have a way to find out which two suits have third round controls in an otherwise flat hand when both hands are limited? I am impressed. Remember, half the people here don't even want to force to game, so if these hands don't get included in some forcing raise we're better off when I do use one.

[mr1303]

If anyone has any suggestions as to better kit we could use after 1C 1D bananas auctions, please suggest it.

 

Partner passed 3S and made 2 overtricks, although I maintain she should have bid 4 on her hand. I did feel at the time that 3S was a slight underbid.

 

It was matchpoints rather than IMPs if that makes a difference.

[SteveMoe]

I like the following after 1♣-1♦:

1 Major shows 5+ and 16+ HCP, Partner will have 4 cards if holding singleton or void (4441 54xy 64ab, etc. where 5+ card suit is a minor). Forcing one round.

Then responder bids as follows:

1♠ = 0-5 HCP and 0-3 ♠s

1NT = 0-5 HCP (Promises 4+ ♠ over opener's ♥s. Intended as forcing.

(Kaplan Inversion right sides majors. Switch back to natural if you like).

2♣ = 6-7 HCP 0-2 M cards, not 5+ cards in OM.

2♦ = 6-7 3 card raise.

2M = 2-3 HCP, 3+ card raise

2 OM = 5+ cards, 6-7 HCP denies 3+ card fit for M.

3♣/♦/OM = mini splinter: 0/1 with 4-5 HCP and 4 trumps.

3M = 4-5 HCP and 4+ card raise

2N = 6-7 HCP Balanced raise. Opener new suits are asking bids (epsilon or suit control ask)

4♣/♦/OM = mini splinter: 0/1 with 4-5 HCP and 4 trumps.

4M = Preempt raise 5+ Trumps and a 0/1 somewhere, with one outside .

 

This hand is a clear 2N. Partner will take one more bid and you will insist on game (your 5th trump told you to do this).

We avoid jumping to 4M as partner is unlimited.

 

Aside - the older Italian Ask Jump rebid by opener (zeta) could be made on a 4-card suit. We avoid that. Too much space consumed. This means the 1M rebid is unlimited. Work relly well. Now we use Zeta only when we need to know partner's exact holding in our suit.

[the hog]

The immediate 4S bid is poor. 4S should at least have some ruffing value. What did your partner hold?

[RunemPard]

I want to play game...and see no reason to not try.

[Zelandakh]

If anyone has any suggestions as to better kit we could use after 1C 1D bananas auctions, please suggest it.

Here's an idea. You play 1♠ as 11-15 with 5+ spades, right? And 1♣ - 1♦; 1♠ is 16-20ish with 5+ spades. Well you could just play exactly the same system for both but with 5 hcp transferred from Opener to Responder for the second. Then a 2NT response will probably show a good spade raise. Easy. For anything more complicated it would probably be necessary to know what you use 2NT and 3♣♦♥ rebids for now. Most likely one of these could be absorbed into something else in order to free up the bid to show the super-max spade raise that cannot splinter.

[JLOGIC]

If anyone has any suggestions as to better kit we could use after 1C 1D bananas auctions, please suggest it.

 

Partner passed 3S and made 2 overtricks, although I maintain she should have bid 4 on her hand. I did feel at the time that 3S was a slight underbid.

 

It was matchpoints rather than IMPs if that makes a difference.

 

I play something simple over 1C 1D 1S, 2N shows a GF 4+ card raise then opener can ask for shortness (3C), or show shortness (3D/3H/3S). The GF raise does not promise shortness as it might be based on a hand like this.

 

Of course, opener will usually just bid 4S over 2N and no information is leaked, but if there is a slam you will have plenty of room to show/deny shortnesses and then cuebid. This is basically no memory work, no information leakage, but allows you to show the main features of your hand if there is a slam.