Where is partner taking us?

[jillybean]

If 2♠ by opener doesn't require extras in your system and was an option as you said, 2♠ by responder may not be natural all the time. Consider this.

 

AKx xx AQTxx xxx

 

You may of course bid 2 NT with this, which is forcing, but if final contract will be 3 NT (since 2♥ didn't promise 6 of them) responder may regret grabbing NT from wrong side. I would personally bid 2♠ with this hand over 2♥, but i know my pd can not have 4 card spades when he bid 2♥ to show 6 of them, eventhough in your explenation it says it doesn;t promise 6 hearts, so i don't understand why you didn't start with 2♠ when your system allows you to bid it without extras.

2♠ does show extras for us.

 

With a 4523 hand I would happily bid 2♠ showing 4+♠5+♥ and a King more than minimum. Given that partner has shown length in

my void, (2♦ promises 5+) I decided it was better not to encourage and rebid 2♥.

 

 

P Marlowe - 3♦ did not set trump.

[P_Marlowe]

 

<snip>

P Marlowe - 3♦ did not set trump.

 

I guessed so, but whatever your agreement regarding 3D, or 3S / 4C is / will be,

the main question ist still open, see my questionmarks regarding your claim in your

post, that opener has already shown 6 hearts.

 

Usually confusion late in the bidding, starts a couple of rounds earlier in the

beginning, and if opener believes, that he has already shown the 6th heart, and

if responder thinks otherwise, than this is the point to investigate to find out

what causesed the different interpretations.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[jillybean]

My partner is a very smart guy, I think after 1H 2H 3S

he will be reasonably sure I have 6H but I will check :)

[P_Marlowe]

My partner is a very smart guy, I think after 1H 2H 3S

he will be reasonably sure I have 6H but I will check :)

Try to come up with a problem hand, a example, which may need fine tuning

due to system agreements not known to me, may be

 

AJx

AKJxx

x

xxxx

 

If he says, sure, you have shown 6 hearts in the given auction, ask him, what he

would bid with the sample hand.

Dont show the sample hand, before you have an answer, gut feeling / answers are

the most interesting ones.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[kenberg]

I would bid 2S with "extras" and 2H with a minimum open ( and 2H should promise 6 cards if not playing a special system .... 2NT would show 5 cards ♥...

 

This puts a very heavy load on 2NT, does it not? Suppose you open 1♥ with 4/5 in the majors and a minimum. Partner buds 2♦. You cannot bid 2♥ if it shows six, you cannot bid 2♠ if it shows extras. I suppose with one diamond and three clubs you can rebid 2NT but on at least some hands I won't be wanting to.

 

At any rate, it is one more way of playing, and demonstrates how quickly a simple auction can become ambiguous unless these matters have been settled. I would prefer to rebid 2♥ with the 4=5=1=3 minimum hand, and especially with the 4=5=2=2 minimum hand, but mostly we just need to be on the same page as partner.

 

 

I do play Flannery with one partner, a convention that I do not find as useful as its proponents claim nor as awful as its detractors claim. Of course then after 1♥ I never have the 4/5 minimum.

 

This may all sound far afield, but I really think that figuring out what partner has in mind with 4♣ requires that we first figure out what we have already shown him. If I were to ask pard abou the 3♠, and I probably will do that, I would simply ask what he would make of it. Maybe he will say 6-4. It's not what I would make of it.

[jillybean]

Try to come up with a problem hand, a example, which may need fine tuning

due to system agreements not known to me, may be

 

AJx

AKJxx

x

xxxx

 

If he says, sure, you have shown 6 hearts in the given auction, ask him, what he

would bid with the sample hand.

Dont show the sample hand, before you have an answer, gut feeling / answers are

the most interesting ones.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

1♥ 2♦

2♥ 3♦

3N

[jillybean]

Jb had said that she thought it better to show the sixth heart, leading me to believe that after the 2♥

No, I said I thought it was better to start to show the 6th heart because I downgraded my hand due to the ♦ void.

All 2♥ promises is 5+. When I bid 3♠/3♦ this is what indicates that I have 6♥/4♠ otherwise I would have supported partners minor or bid nt.

[Fluffy]

My partner is a very smart guy, I think after 1H 2H 3S

he will be reasonably sure I have 6H but I will check :)

 

I agre with Uwe here, you haven't shown the 6th heart yet if 2♠ promises extras. You could have 4513 without stopper in clubs

[kenberg]

No, I said I thought it was better to start to show the 6th heart because I downgraded my hand due to the ♦ void.

All 2♥ promises is 5+. When I bid 3♠/3♦ this is what indicates that I have 6♥/4♠ otherwise I would have supported partners minor or bid nt.

 

I misunderstood, sorry.

[jillybean]

My partner is a very smart guy, I think after 1H 2H 3S

he will be reasonably sure I have 6H but I will check :)

 

 

Try to come up with a problem hand, a example, which may need fine tuning

due to system agreements not known to me, may be

 

AJx

AKJxx

x

xxxx

 

If he says, sure, you have shown 6 hearts in the given auction, ask him, what he

would bid with the sample hand.

Dont show the sample hand, before you have an answer, gut feeling / answers are

the most interesting ones.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

I checked with my partner tonight and he did expect me to have 6♥ after 1♥ 2♦ 2♥ 3♦ 3♠,

I'm glad we are on the same wavelength.

 

On the example hand you gave, he bids it exactly as I did. 1♥ 2♦ 2♥ 3♦ 3N

[kenberg]

The whole sequence is of interest. With my Flannery partner, the 3♠ bid would, I hope, unequivocally be a spade fragment attempting to get to 3NT. A minumum 4-5 and a minimum 4-6 are bthj opened 2♦. With non-Flannery partners I still would expect 3♠ to be interpreted as an attempt to get to 3NT if he has some help in clubs. But I guess there might be more ambiguity.

 

But now we still have to come to grips with partner's 4♣, given that he expects 4-6 and a minimum (since with enough extra you would have bid hearts-spades-hearts instead of hearts-hearts-spades). I guess i see two main possiblilies:

 

A Partner is delighted to find that you have six hearts and now wants to make a slam try in hearts. 4♣ shows a good heart doubleton, probably at least second round control in clubs, and a desire to move forward if you have some extra values.

 

B Partner is dismayed by the fact that no fit has emerged. His 4♣ asks you to choose among the least of evils.

 

Both A and B have been advocated in one form or the other in this discussion.

 

Perhaps a preliminary question is: Suppose partner, instead of 4♣, had bid 4♦. Is this passable? I can see an argument for making it so. When partner bid a game forcing 2♦ he did not envision the whole hand developing so badly and now he just wants out. This wouldn't be crazy. In this way of thinking, partner could have put you in 4♠ if he had a strong three card holding (not ideal, but maybe it would work) or in 4♥ if he had a stiff heart, or bid a passable 4♦ if he had neither a strong three card spade holding nor a stiff heart.

If these options are available to him, what to make of 4♣? Sounds like A.

 

Otoh, maybe pard thinks 4♦ still forces you to bid, so he bids 4♣ intending to pass a major suit rebid, and he might even pass 4♦ if his gf has nothing extra in it. That is, he is going with B.

 

 

Beats me as to which one he might be intending, or even if he might have some third plan C in mind.. Justin and others say that it should be A. Clown and others go with B. I can see the point of either, but if undiscussed, I haven't a clue.

 

So relieve the suspense. How was it intended?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

So relieve the suspense. How was it [ 4♣ ] intended?

You have some well thought out posts here.

 

I agree with you that having Flannery on your card can solve the bidding problem .... ♥ - ♠ - ♥ would show a 6-4 w/extras ...

 

and ♥ - ♥ - ♠ should be asking for NT -- worried about a stop in the 4th suit ( unbid ) ... in this case ♣ .

 

Here, however, the 4♣ ( going past 3NT ) seems to be some sort of advance cuebid ( as you think so ) .... but for which suit as trumps ? The only one that seems to make sense is ♦ .

 

Will we ever see the OTHER hand ??

[han]

Surely your partner would expect 4 spades and 6 hearts for the auction

 

1H - 2D

2S - 3D

3H,

 

as well as the extra values per agreement. A good and clear description of your hand.

[jillybean]

[hv=pc=n&s=sakj9hkjt876dcqj9&n=sq32hadkq7642cak3&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1hp2dp2hp3dp3sp4cp4np6hppp]266|200[/hv]

[ArtK78]

Surely your partner would expect 4 spades and 6 hearts for the auction

 

1H - 2D

2S - 3D

3H,

 

as well as the extra values per agreement. A good and clear description of your hand.

I agree that this sequence shows the 4-6 shape, and it is the sequence that I would have chosen on the hand in the OP.

 

I disagree that the 2♠ bid shows extras. 2♦ forced us to game. It is important to show one's shape accurately as soon as possible so that the proper strain can be determined. I find no reason to distort the shape of the hand by requiring that a natural call of 2♠ shows extras. I can understand rebidding hearts on a 4-5 or 4-6 minimum if 2♦ is not game forcing. But you have to figure out what strain you are playing in before you can determine the level, and requiring extras for a 2♠ rebid makes the process more difficult because of the nebulous nature of the 2♥ rebid.

 

Repeating a quote from Jilly's signature: "And no matter what methods you play, it is essential, for anyone aspiring to learn to be a good player, to learn the importance of bidding shape properly." - MikeH

 

As for the last two bids in the sequence shown in the post immediately preceding mine, the result was excellent. 6♥ is absolutely the right contract. I don't know if North and South were on the same wavelength, but the operation was a success.

[JLOGIC]

per. agreement.

[cherdano]

No, I said I thought it was better to start to show the 6th heart because I downgraded my hand due to the ♦ void.

All 2♥ promises is 5+. When I bid 3♠/3♦ this is what indicates that I have 6♥/4♠ otherwise I would have supported partners minor or bid nt.

You hold KQx AQxxxx xx xx. Your bid after 1H 2D 2H 3D. Wouldn't we all bid 3♠?

[aguahombre]

It seems as if, in the OP case we still have a problem in defining shape ---even if we rebid 2S (with which I agree). The problem would be caused by responder's rebid:

 

1H-2D

2S-3D

3H.....Does 3H show 6 of them? I don't think so, and with responder's club holding, it is even more likely that 3H is just a stall.

 

However, if responder does the stalling over 2S:

 

1H-2D

2S-2N

3H....now the 4-6 is clear, and we can proceed toward the good slam.

[aguahombre]

You hold KQx AQxxxx xx xx. Your bid after 1H 2D 2H 3D. Wouldn't we all bid 3♠?

Yes, but here we would have shown neither 6 hearts nor 4 spades, possibly KQX AQXXX X XXX. I don't have a solution to that dilemma, because with either your shape or mine the auction must be the same. Maybe someone could make a recommendation on that, other than "oh, well, live with it".

[RSClyde]

I don't understand not bidding 3nt over 3♦. I would not think that spades is a suit here. In my view I've shown 6 hearts and partner has denied spades via bypassing them and I'm anxious to shut this down. As long as the majors are clear at this point, where else would we want to go?

[jillybean]

I don't understand not bidding 3nt over 3♦. I would not think that spades is a suit here. In my view I've shown 6 hearts and partner has denied spades via bypassing them and I'm anxious to shut this down. As long as the majors are clear at this point, where else would we want to go?

2♥ did not show 6 and I'm not anxious to shut down the bidding, I am not ashamed of my hand.

 

btw, off topic - I did some "bbf 3nt bidding" in a team game tonight and my partner and I won the match for our

team, thanks also to a fantastic (P)2H (P) 6N hand :)

 

No hand records so I can't post the actual hands.

[RSClyde]

2♥ did not show 6 and I'm not anxious to shut down the bidding, I am not ashamed of my hand.

 

btw, off topic - I did some "bbf 3nt bidding" in a team game tonight and my partner and I won the match for our

team, thanks also to a fantastic (P)2H (P) 6N hand :)

I understand that some people play that (I don't understand why but forget that). Like I said "in my view I've shown 6 hearts", maybe I should have said "with my partner". I don't think this is good hand at all. I did, until I found out that all partner wanted to do was bid diamonds.

[kenberg]

I understand that some people play that (I don't understand why but forget that). Like I said "in my view I've shown 6 hearts", maybe I should have said "with my partner". I don't think this is good hand at all. I did, until I found out that all partner wanted to do was bid diamonds.

 

Since the original Q about the 4♣ call has probably run its course, let me take a minute to say something about the promise of six cards.

 

First, just as authorities go, I that it is pretty easy to find quite a few on either side of the issue. If i am not mistaken, Marty Bergen thinks it shows six, Mike Lawrence thinks it does not. I believe that an expert poll would go with the nots, but I am not certain. I think that the votes would change if we discussed 1♠-2♣-2♠. Here one can reason that partner did not support clubs, did not bid a red suit, and did not rebid 2NT, any of which can be done at the 2 level. Presumably he has six spades. The 1♥-2♦ auction leaves less room. Lawrence at least suggests ( he says it is worth considering) that 1♥-2♦-3♣ shows 5-5. I am pretty sure that this is on his CD on 2/1. I'll check this.

 

What you get for allowing a rebid of 2♥ on five cards is greater clarity when you do not rebid 2♥. If the 2♥ bid unequivocally shows six, then whenever you do not have six you have to do something else, and at least sometimes the choices will be unappealing. If, for example, over 2♦ you rebid 2NT, and if you could have bid a no extras 2♠ or 3♣ with four, then it is true that partner pretty much knows your shape. But you also may have KQx in one black suit and xxx in the other. I would rebid 2♥ with that hand. Similarly, if i have Qxxx in spades and a minimum hand, I rebid 2♥ and wait for partner to bid the spades if he has them.

 

If one way or the other were clearly superior we would all be doing it. Those who regularly play at a higher level than I do can perhaps say which approach is most in vogue. But I have played both ways and I prefer that 2♥ not promise six.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

...... let me take a minute to say something about the promise of six cards.

My take on that when a direct 2S shows "extras" :

 

South

1H - 2D! ( 2/1 GF )

2S - 2NT! ( "asks distribution" much like in a Flannery auction )

??

... 3C = 4 5 3 1

... 3D = 4 5 1 3

... 3H = 4 6 ( shortness somewhere ) >> 3S! asks where

... 3S = 4 5 2 2

...3NT = 4 5 2 2 honor(s) in both minors [ EDIT ]

 

After:

3H - 3S!

??

...3NT! = stiff ♦

... 4C! = stiff ♣

... 4D! = ♦ void

... 4H! = ♣ void

after:

4D! - 4S! ( kickback RKC for ♥; not worried about ♦-wastage since partner with extras must have "stuff" in the black suits )

5D ( 2 - ♥ Q ) - 6H

Edited January 11, 2013 by TWO4BRIDGE

[mike777]

A very interesting thread on many points during the bidding process and posts by all.

 

Give responder:

 

Qxx..A...KQTxxx...AKx or

 

Qxx...x...AKQxxx....AKx

 

I found myself bidding:

 

1h=2d

2h=3d

3nt=4nt

5nt=6d

6h?

 

2d=gf

2h=6

4nt=quant

5nt=pick a slam