Do you have a strong opinion on this?

[jillybean]

4th seat, NV you open 1S and partner responds 1N

 

♠AKQT3

♥2

♦A753

♣632

[BillHiggin]

Yes, I do have a strong opinion on this!

 

(did you also want to know what it is?)

[chasetb]

Should you bid? Absolutely.

 

What should you bid? Most people will say 2♦, but to be different (and assuming it is MPs, but you know what assuming means) I will go with 2♠. AKQTx is better than most 6-card suits. At teams, I will pick the boring but practical 2♦.

[the hog]

Why would I not bid 2D on this everyday that ends in a "y"?

Can partner not have:

 

xx

xxxx

KQxxx

Ax

 

5D is excellent, 6D has a play and opposite a nigardly 2S bid, that is where you will play.

[CamHenry]

I always have a strong opinion.

 

On this occasion, it's that I'd bid 2♦.

[the_dude]

Like most Americans, I typically reserve my strongest opinions for the topics I have the least knowledge.

 

This hand is the exception though - I have a stong opinion that 2D is correct *and* I feel I know what I am talking about.

[CSGibson]

2♦ is clear, no 2nd choice.

[Free]

Too early in the auction to gamble imo. Just bid 2♦ and see where it gets you. For all you know, partner has long ♦ and 5♦ has some play!

[jillybean]

Too early in the auction to gamble imo. Just bid 2♦ and see where it gets you. For all you know, partner has long ♦ and 5♦ has some play!

If I can make game opposite a passed partner something has gone wrong! :)

 

A unanimous poll, I think that's a first.

I have been trying to experiment with this type of hand/auction where 2♦ is the book bid but nt is often the better spot in MP.

[Cyberyeti]

If I can make game opposite a passed partner something has gone wrong! :)

 

A unanimous poll, I think that's a first.

I have been trying to experiment with this type of hand/auction where 2♦ is the book bid but nt is often the better spot in MP.

Not at all, Jx, Axx, KQx, xxxxx looks like 3N to me, Jx, xxx, Kxxxxx, Ax looks like 12 tricks in a choice of suits, depends on your exact system and what is required for a 2/1.

 

You're on a gamble, basically if partner has Jx, Axx, xxx, Axxxx you probably have 8 tricks in spades or NT, if their cards are less crisp like Jx, Axx, xxx, KJxxx you're better with a trump suit as you get to lead clubs up twice. If you have a diamond fit you're probably better there given that partner will give false preference when you're not.

[PhilKing]

Pass is a decent matchpoint shot if partner is a great declarer and you suck. :unsure:

[neilkaz]

OK I am the 23rd vote for 2♦

[jillybean]

Pass is a decent matchpoint shot if partner is a great declarer and you suck. :unsure:

This.

[gszes]

I chose other if playing 2/1 and would bid 2c because I really

do not like 1n and I do not wish to bury a possible club fit.

 

If playing a standard system I am still unsure if 2d is best since

we could very easily be burying a club fit in order to show a

4th diamond. It would carry a bit more risk but overall 2c will

probably serve better in the long run than 2d. A2c bid here will

also much better facilitate getting to 5d if p bids 2d over our

2c and we raise to 3d and keep the bidding low while looking

for small target game.

 

IMO 2c=10 2s=9 2d=8 and I doubt I would be upset no matter

which choice my p made from those 3 pass=4

[the hog]

And if partner passes 2C on a1444 shape, or if pd rebids 2S on a 2452 shape, will you still be happy?

2C is worth a 0 in my opinion and I do not know one decent player who would bid this.

[mcphee]

Any choice other than 2D just seems poor. I really thought this was a non problem.

[jillybean]

There is rarely such a thing as a non problem on bbf :)

 

2♦ is clearly the book bid.

 

I think both pass and 2♣ have merit. My style after a forcing nt is to make the cheapest bid in a suit where I have tolerance to avoid forcing partner to the three level, I don't know why I would change this after a non forcing nt.

[ggwhiz]

There is rarely such a thing as a non problem on bbf :)

 

2♦ is clearly the book bid.

 

I think both pass and 2♣ have merit. My style after a forcing nt is to make the cheapest bid in a suit where I have tolerance to avoid forcing partner to the three level, I don't know why I would change this after a non forcing nt.

 

I don't disagree too strongly on the 2♣ approach but I do disagree.

 

Our bidding is based on 1. shape, 2. shape and 3. more shape

 

With an unbalanced hand we have the option of bidding 3♣ next to pattern out if it looks right. Losing the ability to play in exactly 2♣ (when the opps don't balance) while increasing our chances of getting to the right trump suit is a small price to pay.

[aguahombre]

The 2♣ rebid is one of those operations which might work out well on occasion. I leave that type of overthinking to the clever ones, and play the straight man most of the time. Whether those things work out badly or strike gold, they erode partnership confidence in other situations ---wondering if I might be trying another experiment.

 

She knows we don't play Godzilla.

[the hog]

There is rarely such a thing as a non problem on bbf :)

 

2♦ is clearly the book bid.

 

I think both pass and 2♣ have merit. My style after a forcing nt is to make the cheapest bid in a suit where I have tolerance to avoid forcing partner to the three level, I don't know why I would change this after a non forcing nt.

 

2C has no merit....none....zero.

Look at the following responder hands:

x

xxxx

Jxxxx

KQx

Responder will pass 2C and not correct to 2D which could be a 5-1 fit. Your Ds are not good. So you will play a 3-3 fit rather than a 5-4

 

x

xxxx

xxxx

xxxx

Responder will pass 2C, so you will play a 4-3 fit rather than a 4-4. Not so bad as the previous example, but still.

 

As agh posts, 2C is one of those bids that may occasionally work out, but it is a very poor guess. I would rate it as a zero. Even passing a 5143 is better, though still not good bridge.

[Charlie Yu]

Pass, 2D deserves to find p in 1534 or even 1525.

[aguahombre]

Pass, 2D deserves to find p in 1534 or even 1525.

And you deserve to find partner with 5-3-4-1, 5-4-5-0, or a host of other distributions. What fun if they take the first 9 or ten tricks when you could have taken eleven in Diamonds.

 

Of course you do have an opportunity to annoy the hell out of an opponent who balances and allows you to get to the right strain later.

[VM1973]

I think the hand is too strong to rebid 2♠. I'll bid 2♦. As others have pointed out, it's easy to envision a hand that partner would have passed initially but still makes a game in diamonds.

[ArtK78]

There is rarely such a thing as a non problem on bbf :)

 

2♦ is clearly the book bid.

 

I think both pass and 2♣ have merit. My style after a forcing nt is to make the cheapest bid in a suit where I have tolerance to avoid forcing partner to the three level, I don't know why I would change this after a non forcing nt.

We may have a semantic problem.

 

This is an obvious 2♦ bid.

 

In my opinion, neither passing 1NT nor bidding 2♣ has any merit. That is not to say that, on occasion, the winning action might be to pass 1NT or to bid 2♣. That is not the same thing as saying that either of those actions has any merit. You might as well just leap to 3NT - occasionally, it will make. But I don't think that leaping to 3NT has any merit (aside from the calamity that will result if partner takes another action over 3NT).

[PhilKing]

In my opinion, neither passing 1NT nor bidding 2♣ has any merit.

 

So, do you have a strong opinion, or not? ;)