Sanity check

[Hanoi5]

White vs Red, Cavendish:

 

♠Ax

♥AQx

♦xx

♣AQJxxx

 

1♣-1♦

???

[cherdano]

2NT.

[lalldonn]

3♣

[mike777]

prefer 2nt with no shortness, even if we assume pard wont have a 4 card major unless a gf hand.

[kayin801]

3♣ > 2NT

[aguahombre]

3♣ on the conditions.

 

Probably 2N screwing around at the local club.

[Hanoi5]

Today I was way off with my evaluation (as usual?):

 

♠AK87

♥Axx

♦Axxxx

♣x

 

P-1♦-P-1♠

P-???

[aguahombre]

Today I was way off with my evaluation (as usual?):

 

♠AK87

♥Axx

♦Axxxx

♣x

 

P-1♦-P-1♠

P-???

Not sure what this hand has to do with the title, but we have a 3♠ rebid available to show an unbalanced intermediate hand with 4-card spade support. Maybe a bit old fashioned, but...

[the hog]

Today I was way off with my evaluation (as usual?):

 

♠AK87

♥Axx

♦Axxxx

♣x

 

P-1♦-P-1♠

P-???

 

Uh, does this fit in this thread?

3S. wtp?

[mike777]

Today I was way off with my evaluation (as usual?):

 

♠AK87

♥Axx

♦Axxxx

♣x

 

P-1♦-P-1♠

P-???

 

 

assume the issue is between 3s or 4c?

[Codo]

2 NT and 3 ♣ are not insane in the first example,

 

3 ♠ is not insane in the second one.

[Hanoi5]

2 NT and 3 ♣ are not insane in the first example

 

So, are 2NT and 3♣ equivalent? I believe 2NT shows 18-19 while 3♣ 15-17, shall partner bid 3NT over both rebids with:

 

♠Tx

♥Kxx

♦ATxxx

♣8xx

[Codo]

If 3 ♣ is 15-17, you at least meet the HCP criteria, but your hand is for sure too strong. What will you do with an unbalanced club one suiter with 18-19 then? Whatever you do, if you decide to treat the hand as not balanced, you should choose that bid... I have no idea, what is common sense and I play the jump as 16-18, so I could rebid with this hand 3 ♣.

 

But of course, I would choose 2 NT, because this shows the real nature of the hand.

 

With partners hand, I would rebid 3 ♥ over 3 ♣- showing a stopper, asking for help in spades and 3 NT over 2 NT.

[Cyberyeti]

2N, a heavy 3♣ and a slightly underweight 3N (if you play it as this sort of hand) are all not insane on the original.

 

On the second hand, this is a potentially huge hand. I want to be in game opposite a lot of hands where partner won't accept an invite (and might not even respond to 1♦) QJxxx, x, xxx, xxxx would seem to give me chances for example. What's the worst that could happen ? something like Jxxx, xxx, Jx, KJxx where you might not make 3. Teams or pairs ? Pairs probably 3♠, teams I think I'm committing to game, depends on agreements on what splinters show as to whether I can afford to splinter.

[ahydra]

3C (kinda like 2NT though), 3S. To be honest the second hand doesn't look that great to me.

 

ahydra

[ahydra]

double post

[rhm]

2NT on the first

4♣ on the second one. It pays to overbid slightly and 4♣ is only a slight overbid to describe your hand.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[Phil]

3♣. This hand looks a lot more like 15(+)-18(-) with six good clubs than a balanced 18-19 with 3334.

 

3♠ is obvious on the 2nd.

[lalldonn]

I learned 3♣ as 16-18, don't know where 15-17 came from. I would rebid 2♣ with 11-15, which of course has a wider range since there is more room to invite over it.

 

As for this particular hand I am not saying 2NT is insane but I don't know why you would do it. If partner is passing our bid I'd probably rather be in 3♣ than 2NT. If partner is bidding over it then I don't see what 2NT gained for me. It's not like opening 1NT on a slightly worse hand, where I get the advantages of preemption and hiding my shape. They already aren't bidding and they know I have clubs. Is it just a matter of fooling them a little?

[aguahombre]

Good post, Josh. I figured you would be too busy plotting with the LV clowns to win the $20 bet about Stayman from JLall.

[mikeh]

Seems this one-hand thread morphed into a two hand thread.

 

On the first, if playing mps in a weak field, I'd bid 2N because I expect to play the hand as well or better than my seat-mates, and I don't have any respect for most players bidding so am not too worried about missing slam. I know this sounds condescending, but I suspect that most good players have the same attitude (even if they wouldn't make this call). In a real game, including all imp games, I'd bid 3♣ since I am not often missing a making game via this, which I would have reached via 2N, and I like this hand for slam purposes if partner has decent values. Not to mention that sometimes 5m is better than 3N.

 

On the second, I bid 4♣. While I am a little light on hcp, I am heavy on controls. Not only are all my controls golden, but they mean that partner will not go crazy on me unless he has well-fitting cards. He will be reluctant to overbid when missing AK A A, so that balances and justifies my overbid on those cards. I can't imagine just bidding 3♠. It's not that I fear missing a lot of games, since I invite heavy and accept light for game purposes, but he won't even consider slam with say Qxxxx Kx xx Axxx opposite 3♠

[cherdano]

As for this particular hand I am not saying 2NT is insane but I don't know why you would do it. If partner is passing our bid I'd probably rather be in 3♣ than 2NT. If partner is bidding over it then I don't see what 2NT gained for me.

Over 2NT, partner won't worry about major suit stoppers. And we probably right-sided 3NT.

[JLOGIC]

I would bid 2N but I feel like it's w/e.

[rhm]

I learned 3♣ as 16-18, don't know where 15-17 came from. I would rebid 2♣ with 11-15, which of course has a wider range since there is more room to invite over it.

 

As for this particular hand I am not saying 2NT is insane but I don't know why you would do it. If partner is passing our bid I'd probably rather be in 3♣ than 2NT. If partner is bidding over it then I don't see what 2NT gained for me. It's not like opening 1NT on a slightly worse hand, where I get the advantages of preemption and hiding my shape. They already aren't bidding and they know I have clubs. Is it just a matter of fooling them a little?

If we belong in a partial, 3♣ is likely to be safer than 2NT. Also if we belong in a high level club contract, a 3♣ rebid has better chances of getting us there.

However, both are narrow targets.

Most likely we belong in 3NT, most likely it should be played from this side.

Showing 18-19 gives the right encouragement for a close 3NT without telling opponents much about our hand.

It is not true that they know you have club tricks, even more so if 2NT might bypass a 4 card major.

This will often make the lead and defense against an eventual 3NT more difficult than if we rebid 3♣.

People often lead passive if you show a strong balanced hand.

On average 2NT has more to gain than to loose.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[lalldonn]

If we belong in a partial, 3♣ is likely to be safer than 2NT. Also if we belong in a high level club contract, a 3♣ rebid has better chances of getting us there.

However, both are narrow targets.

Most likely we belong in 3NT, most likely it should be played from this side.

Showing 18-19 gives the right encouragement for a close 3NT without telling opponents much about our hand.

It is not true that they know you have club tricks, even more so if 2NT might bypass a 4 card major.

This will often make the lead and defense against an eventual 3NT more difficult than if we rebid 3♣.

People often lead passive if you show a strong balanced hand.

On average 2NT has more to gain than to loose.

 

Rainer Herrmann

If you belong in a club partial, you can not get there after 2NT.

If you belong in a club game or slam, you can get there after 2NT but it's quite difficult.

If you belong in 3NT, you will get there easily after either rebid.

 

I won't argue strongly. If you are hiding your hand or trying to mildly deceive about it, ok. But I would rather show my hand and increase my chances of reaching the best contract whatever it may be, not be focused on the one most likely contract which I don't yet know I belong in.