Bodmin Swiss Pairs II

[mr1303]

[hv=pc=n&s=s9ha8642dq84cak82&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1d2sd(13+%20not%20suitable%20for%20raise)p3cp3h(Forcing)p3s(Can%20we%20play%203NT%3F)p]133|200[/hv]

 

You couldn't bid 3H the first time as it would be not forcing.

 

What do you want to call this time?

 

Comment on the bidding if you would have done something differently so far.

[Zelandakh]

Hard to talk about doing something differently without knowing how the system is constructed. Did 3♥ promise 5 or could it be only 4? Presumably partner can have anything from a balanced 12 to a huge minor 2-suiter. The alternatives seem to be 4♣ and 4♠. My initial reaction was an obvious 4♣ but the more I think about it the more I like 4♠, especially if partner cannot show extras after 4♣.

[mike777]

4s otherwise known as the transfer blame to pard cuebid :)

[Codo]

1. I would not play 3 ♥ as nonforcing, but as real good suit forcing, because I hate the idea of jumping with these hands or the need to put them into my X.

2. So, my bidding had been as yours so far. I guess 2 NT from partner had been natural last round? So, I still have no idea about his strength.

I bid 4 ♣ - and if this is nonforcing, I change my system. As written before, for me this is asking about the overall strength and with extras partner will show me his KCS on the way.

 

I may reach slam opposite Jxx,x,AKxxx,QJxx

[SteveMoe]

4♣ is enough for now. Must be forcing. Let's see where partner wants to go. We look to be heading toward 6♣.

[rmnka447]

If 4 ♣ wouldn't be forcing, then I'll bid 5 ♣. If it's forcing than I'll bid 4 ♣.

 

I'd like to be able to bid 4 ♠ to show the ♠ control, but we haven't agreed on a suit yet.

 

I agree the hand may be headed toward 6 ♣ if pard makes the slightest move in that direction. All of your cards are working.

[Phil]

3♥ should be GF, not simply forcing.

 

4♣ now.

[mr1303]

4S worked nicely, getting us to 6C opposite [hv=pc=n&n=sk3hqdakj652cqj63]133|100[/hv]