And The Bid Is...

[eagles123]

[hv=pc=n&s=sk43hkt32d5cakj53&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=p1cp1sp]133|200[/hv]

 

I wasn't too sure what to bid here and considered it relatively close between:

 

2 clubs, 2 hearts and 2 spades :lol:

 

in the end I went for

2 spades

but I wasn't sure if that was right or not and would be interested in opinions!

 

Thanks,

 

Eagles

[EricK]

I don't think this is strong enough to reverse, and in such cases I prefer to raise a major with 3 card support, rather than rebid a 5 card suit, so 2♠ for me. But some partners pretty much demand 4 cards for the raise. In which case I bid 2♣, and hope we aren't left in a 5-1 (or 5-0!) "fit".

[wyman]

You don't have enough for 2H.

 

 

I don't like 2C, though it's not the worst ever. This should really show 6 or an excellent 5. You have merely a good 5.

 

So by process of elimination, I'd raise to 2S. Partner and I have a method for checking back in case he's invitational and wants to see whether I have 3 or 4 and whether I'm min or max (you are 3/max) so that we can end up in the right strain and at the right level, but I won't get deep into that here.

[TylerE]

You don't have enough for 2H.

 

 

I don't like 2C, though it's not the worst ever. This should really show 6 or an excellent 5. You have merely a good 5.

 

 

So what do I have to have to bid 2♣ in your opinion? AKQJx?

 

Personally, and I know this is not the "modern" trendy thing to do, but I *hate* 2♠ here. Life is so much easier on a bread and butter auction like 1m-1M-2M if responder is guaranteed an 8 card fit at least 99.9% of the time. I rebid 2♣ on these cards and don't feel the least bit guilty about it.

[Antrax]

I bid 2♣ here because I'm from a part of the world where you very rarely raise on 3 and my club suit is robust enough that I prefer rebidding it. If you're okay with raising on three then this is a hand to raise on three.

Another option you might want to consider on a 3=4=1=5 hand in this auction is 1NT. It's pretty bad when it goes 1NT-3NT, unless your opponents always lead a heart on this auction because you lead majors vs. NT. In other scenarios, though, you survive.

[the hog]

2S is obvious for me and for anyone I play with regularly.

[eagles123]

thanks everyone! :)

[CamHenry]

I may go out on a limb here and rebid 2♥. I know you're sub-minimum, but to me the Kxx in partner's suit makes up for that. If you don't play reverses as GF (and I don't think many people do), you can stop in 3♠ at worst.

[mcphee]

I would like to have 4 trumps to raise, just not always possible, and here the raise to 2S to me is just the most sensible choice. When partners hear you rebid 2C they have every reason to expect 6, while this is not always the case when a major is raised to know about 4 card support.

 

What is the reason for panic about the 3 card raise? If partner passes you are not going to be in a poor spot. Nor if he does anything else.

[Antrax]

What is the reason for panic about the 3 card raise? If partner passes you are not going to be in a poor spot. Nor if he does anything else.

The bad auction is 1♣-1♠, 2♠-4♠ when 3NT was our spot. I'm sure that's not a problem in your partnership, but if the partnership style is to require four cards, then most of us don't have the tools to figure out when opener raised on three.

[StevenG]

What is the reason for panic about the 3 card raise? If partner passes you are not going to be in a poor spot. Nor if he does anything else.

I've watched my partners butcher so many Moysians that, where possible, I avoid any prospect of them like the plague.

[helene_t]

if we bid up the line then partner will in principle have 4 spades only when he has <4 diamonds. In that case notrumps is unlikely to be better than spades. But of course it is possible that we end up in 6♠ when we should have been in 6♣, if we don't have a way to clarify opener's spade length.

 

Playing Walsh it's a bit different but even so I think it is worthwhile to discuss with partner how to deal with a possible 3-card raise.

[EricK]

I may go out on a limb here and rebid 2♥. I know you're sub-minimum, but to me the Kxx in partner's suit makes up for that. If you don't play reverses as GF (and I don't think many people do), you can stop in 3♠ at worst.

I think you are going to need very firm agreements as to follow ups if you are to reliably stay out of game when partner has a little more than a minimum, but bid to the right game if he has a bit more than that.

[cargobeep]

Interesting to note the topic below this one, with the very similiar title :)

 

I think 2♠ is probably best. Second best I would think is 1NT. Why do we want to be in 2♣ with a potential 6-card trump suit?

[Siegmund]

This hand is dangerously close to being too strong to risk a discouraging rebid like 2♠, rather than the ambiguous 2♣ or encouraging 2♥. On the posted hand, you may get away with 2♠; make it a tiny bit stronger -- add a stray jack or something -- and 2♠ is now telling two lies, partner expecting a minimum opening and four spades.

I worry a lot more about languishing in 2♠+4, than I do about reaching 4♠ when 3NT was better.

 

As such I quite often make slightly subminimum reverses when I have 3-card support for my partner's major; I would at least seriously consider 2♥ on the posted hand -- but not even dream of 2♥ on x KTxx Kxx AKJxx (or the same hand with a jack added or a king turned into an ace.)

 

All assuming you and your partner know what your continuations after reverses are, of course - an area that is a minefield for many novices (and advancing players, hence the forum sticky in the int/adv forum)

[the hog]

The bad auction is 1♣-1♠, 2♠-4♠ when 3NT was our spot. I'm sure that's not a problem in your partnership, but if the partnership style is to require four cards, then most of us don't have the tools to figure out when opener raised on three.

Then why not get them? Use 2S over 2H and 2NT over 2S as an ask.

[Cyberyeti]

I've watched my partners butcher so many Moysians that, where possible, I avoid any prospect of them like the plague.

 

Find better partners :)

[Antrax]

Then why not get them? Use 2S over 2H and 2NT over 2S as an ask.

I personally use those as a short-suit game try.

[mgoetze]

I think it cannot be emphasized enough that you should only bid 2♠ here if your partner knows that you regularily do so with only 3-card support. Yes, that style has a lot of fans on these forums, but as pointed out by Antrax there are parts of the world where it is almost unheard of and if your partner will be surprised then you are much better off playing it straight and bidding 2♣.

[helene_t]

Then why not get them? Use 2S over 2H and 2NT over 2S as an ask.

This is the N/B forum ..... it may be appropriate to advice partner not to blast 4♠ with only four spades. He could suggest 3NT with a suitable hand. But an artificial asking bid is not on the menu imho.

[wyman]

So what do I have to have to bid 2♣ in your opinion? AKQJx?

 

Personally, and I know this is not the "modern" trendy thing to do, but I *hate* 2♠ here. Life is so much easier on a bread and butter auction like 1m-1M-2M if responder is guaranteed an 8 card fit at least 99.9% of the time. I rebid 2♣ on these cards and don't feel the least bit guilty about it.

 

Your style is not a problem at all.

 

You are correct; the "modern" thing to do -- which is modern, incidentally, because people have thought about it and have agreed, by-and-large, that it works -- is to raise to 2S. I hinted earlier, and later in the thread others have made it explicit, that a modern standard system will have a way for responder to check-back and see what opener really has going on with his raise to 2S. We can discuss these sequences and their merits/disadvantages in I/A. But even without a checkback, a flat game-forcing responder with 4 spades should bid a natural (!) 3N to cater to a flat opener and to an opener with a 3-card raise (even if this only happens, as you suggest, 0.1% of the time).

 

As to why I choose not to bid 2C with this hand: For many (especially "modern") partnerships, responder does not have many non-GF responses after 1C-1S-2C. For my partnerships in particular, even 2D and 2H are GF. So 2C will/should be passed an awful lot by responders who don't hold a lot of extras. And AKJxx opposite x is just not likely to be the right spot.

 

If you have many invitational (NF or F1) bids after 2C, it is considerably more palatable to bid 2C on these cards. However, there are disadvantages here as well. With Kxxxx / xxxx / Kxx / x, is responder now supposed to rebid 2S to play? I'm imagining now an opener who is x / xx / QJxx / AKJxxx. Wouldn't we just rather be playing in 2C here with the misfit? Obviously this is cherry-picked, but this kind of situation is why the 2C rebid tends to show a "real" club suit -- responder can pass with nothing (and in modern systems, where responder may respond very light, as opposed to the traditional must-have-6HCP-to-respond philosophy, there is real value in getting out very cheaply and somewhat safely).

 

eagles has been around enough that I don't feel bad distinguishing between what he might do in his system and what most of us would do playing a basic BBOF-standard 2/1, though perhaps I could have been more clear about the system assumptions I was making in my last post.

 

To your point about clarifying bread-and-butter auctions, however, I lost a Swiss match in Atlanta to barnets (who ended up leading the open Swiss after d1) by a few imps when partner assumed I had 4 cards for my raise to 2S (after 1H-1S-2S). We played the wrong game, and it was enough of a disaster to swing the match. So I'm very sympathetic to your point. But we do have methods to untangle this; one just needs to be comfortable enough (and remember) to use them.

 

edit: and yes, for me AKQJx is a fine 2C rebid. AKQxx may be ok; I don't know that I've ever defined the worst suit/hand with which I'd bid 2C. But I really stretch to not rebid my minor unless it's a real feature of my hand.

[billw55]

IMO 2♠ > 2♣ > 1NT > 2♥. I choose 2♠ but if my partner chose 2♣, I would not dream of criticizing.

[rmnka447]

A lot depends on your agreements. If partner can field you occasionally raising on only 3 ♠s, then 2 ♠ is the proper call.

 

Yes, you may be putting partner into a 4-3 fit. But a key factor if you do so is where a ruff may have to be taken if the opponents play a forcing defense. A 4-3 fit is less a problem if the ruff(s) can be taken in the short trump (3 card) hand. This prevents a forced ruff in the 4 card trump hand. Shortening that hand to 3 trump loses control of the trump suit when the trump are breaking 4-2.

 

Here, you have a good ♣ holding and honors in the ♥ suit preventing the opponents from forcing your side in those suits. It looks like if ruffs are forced, they will be in ♦s which can be safely taken in your hand.

 

If partner would have apoplexy if you raised on 3 trump, then you're stuck with rebidding 2 ♣. In that case, you have to hope partner can find another call so you can show your ♠ support.

[RSClyde]

I actually once did a video on this exact hand distribution: as a pilot to the more general topic of 3 card raises.

[PhilKing]

I actually once did a video on this exact hand distribution: as a pilot to the more general topic of 3 card raises.

 

I went slightly on tilt because it reminded of of Brian Townsend's Cardrunners videos.