What would you have done?

[ArtK78]

I would think that South intends to bid all three of his suits, as he has slam invitational values opposite any opening bid that North might have.

 

As for North, it would never occur to me to rebid Jxxx of diamonds rather than AQxxxx of hearts.

 

So, my auction would start:

 

1♥ - 1♠

2♥ - 3♦ (intending to bid 4♣ over any 3 level call)

 

North is endplayed into raising diamonds as he cannot stop clubs, and getting to slam should be easy. Stopping short of 7 is the only issue. The bidding should stop at 6 as neither North nor South will be able to count 13 tricks with any degree of certainty (and for good reason).

[the hog]

H-H-D ( 6-6-4 ) shows a weaker hand than H-D-H ( 6-4-6 ).

 

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

2H - 3D

4D! - ?? [ But will North really bid 4D instead of 3NT ? or 3S asking for ( another ) stop ]

....... 4H ( 1st step = negative slam aspirations ; Zelandakh treatment )

....... 4S ( 2nd step = 0/3 )

....... 4NT ( = 1/4 )

....... 5C ( = 2 - ♦Q )

....... 5D ( = 2 + ♦Q )

After:

....... 4S

4NT ( next step = ♦Q-ask )

....... 5C ( ♦Q + ♣K )

6D

 

Well there you have it. North bids 2H and Sth bids C followed by Ds showing in most people's eyes and unbalanced hand with long Cs and 4Ds. Pray tell, Don, how would you bid a 2146 shape? The same way as your 4144? Now what about if Nth held a 45xx hand? How would you bid that? Please don't say that you would bid 2S over 2C with minimum opening value as that is not acceptable to many who like the reverse to show extra values. Perhaps you should play Flannery?

I note with interest that not one of the 2C bidders has addressed this point. Perhaps you should all convert to 2C being a gf relay in the Bocchi-Duboin style. Now that I would agree with.

[the hog]

 

Good one ! http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif

 

 

 

Did I hear the lapdog breaking wind?

[Trinidad]

Did I hear the lapdog breaking wind?

Hog, please grow up.

 

Sometimes you have something sensible to add to bridge discussions. (As an example: I also would have responded 1♠.) But the way you word your contributions could be improved.

 

You use words like "cannot bid properly", but feel insulted when someone else writes "experienced players have learned over the years". And as soon as you feel insulted, you start posting things like the above.

 

Please read what you wrote before posting and think whether you want to be as rude as you are.

There are two sure ways to maximize the risk of getting insulted by others:

- insult others

- feel insulted by everything others write

 

You are combining these two.

 

Rik

 

P.S. Though I do agree with you bidding 1♠, I also have learned over the years that it may create problems. However, that does not mean that I will stop bidding 1♠ with these hands, since I think that not bidding 1♠ creates larger problems.

[Lurpoa]

 

Good one ! http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, I like; ♥

[steve2005]

With five spades I respond 1♠ (exception for 5♠-6m). With four spades and a game-force I tend to respond 2m, although there are exceptions if the spades are really strong and the minor really weak, or if I don't have a four-card minor.

come on with 4-1-4-4 you have to always bid spades you can always bid minor later jumping if needed to force.

same with a more common 4-2-3-4, bidding a minor then spades is 5m4♠ or better

[steve2005]

I would think that South intends to bid all three of his suits, as he has slam invitational values opposite any opening bid that North might have.

 

As for North, it would never occur to me to rebid Jxxx of diamonds rather than AQxxxx of hearts.

 

So, my auction would start:

 

1♥ - 1♠

2♥ - 3♦ (intending to bid 4♣ over any 3 level call)

 

North is endplayed into raising diamonds as he cannot stop clubs, and getting to slam should be easy. Stopping short of 7 is the only issue. The bidding should stop at 6 as neither North nor South will be able to count 13 tricks with any degree of certainty (and for good reason).

I agree with bidding suits in this order. trouble with bidding clubs is opener's ♦ suit will be so ratty wont want to bid it and you know this.

this sequence is why I voted other.

[aguahombre]

I agree with bidding suits in this order. trouble with bidding clubs is opener's ♦ suit will be so ratty wont want to bid it and you know this.

this sequence is why I voted other.

This doesn't compute. Opener's diamond suit will be so ratty, he will want to bid it rather than bid 3NT with no stopper. Responder, in bidding 3C, doesn't even care if 3D is a ratty 4-bagger or a hedge with nowhere to go ...2-6-(32). She will bid 4D anyway.

[the hog]

Hog, please grow up.

 

Sometimes you have something sensible to add to bridge discussions. (As an example: I also would have responded 1♠.) But the way you word your contributions could be improved.

 

You use words like "cannot bid properly", but feel insulted when someone else writes "experienced players have learned over the years". And as soon as you feel insulted, you start posting things like the above.

 

Please read what you wrote before posting and think whether you want to be as rude as you are.

There are two sure ways to maximize the risk of getting insulted by others:

- insult others

- feel insulted by everything others write

 

You are combining these two.

 

Rik

 

When you get a highly intelligent post just stating "good one" and adding nothing to any discussion, the poster deserves all he gets.

 

P.S. Though I do agree with you bidding 1♠, I also have learned over the years that it may create problems. However, that does not mean that I will stop bidding 1♠ with these hands, since I think that not bidding 1♠ creates larger problems.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

 

Please don't say that you would bid 2S over 2C with minimum opening value as that is not acceptable to many who like the reverse to show extra values. Perhaps you should play Flannery?

I've posted my "home grown" system before.

A direct 2S over 2C! would show extras ( w/ 4 cards ♠ )...

Or a direct 2NT ( over 2C! ) would show extras ( w/o 4 cards ♠ )

whereas:

1H - 2C!

2H! ( minimum w/ or w/o 4 cards ♠)

..... - 2S! ( asks which ? )

??

.. 2NT = minimum w/o ♠

The next 5 replies would show a Flannery type hand:

..2NT = no 4s

.. 3C = 4s/5h, stiff ♣

.. 3D = 4s/5h, stiff ♦

.. 3H = 4s/6+h, stiff or void somewhere

.. 3S = 4 5 2 2

.. 3NT = 4 5 2 2 with honors in both minors

[PhilKing]

come on with 4-1-4-4 you have to always bid spades you can always bid minor later jumping if needed to force.

same with a more common 4-2-3-4, bidding a minor then spades is 5m4♠ or better

 

You are referring to an imaginary problem. I would respond 2♣, but it does not follow that I or other Two Clubbers intend to follow up by bidding spades next (or that spades are in danger of being lost).

[MrAce]

Did I hear the lapdog breaking wind?

 

Merry Christmas to you too hog http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif

 

Cheers!

 

 

 

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=sk987htdakq5cak32&n=sajhaq6543dj987cj&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1hp1sp2hp3cp3np4nppp]266|200| Playing 2/1 as South... the only good slam is the one suit we did not bid. It's a given on this acution that North's Diamonds are at least Jxxx, right? If South had bid 4♦ over 3NT would your partnership be 100% that this was natural and slamming in Diamonds? Will partner look at Jxxx and know that's what I am meaning - in his mind he could just as easily have QJx? I didn't feel 4D was clear... we do play kickback though we have not discussed 4♦ on this particular auction - it doesn't make sense as kickback. 4D would have surely been RKC over any 4C bid... How would you get there?[/hv]

Did 4N make? Anyway, good question Humilities. Interesting and informative replies :) Mr Ace tried to foster the Christmas spirit :) HAPPY CHRISTMAS :) FWIW, IMO:

• After 1♥ - ??: 1♠ = 10, 2♣ = 9. Mainly because I didn't think of the latter.
• After 1♥ - 1♠ - ??: 2♦= 10, 2♥ = 9. Matter of style.
• After 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥ - ??: 3♣ = 10, 3♦ = 8. Again, the latter didn't occur to me.
• After 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥ - 3♣ - ??: 3N = 10, 3♦ = 7. The latter should show worse ♠ and better ♦.
• After 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥ - 3♣ - 3N - ??: 6♦ (PhilKing) = 11, 4♦ = 10, 4N = 6. But no votes for 4♦, perhaps because of objections to the earlier auction.

[Lurpoa]

Merry Christmas to you all

 

Be the♥ with you all.

[steve2005]

After 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥ - 3♣ - ??: 3N = 10, 3♦ = 7. The latter should show worse ♠ and better ♦.

I think some people will bid 3♥ not considering Jxxx♦ a good enough stopper for 3N.

& 6♦ will still be good without J♦ just xxxx

[steve2005]

This doesn't compute. Opener's diamond suit will be so ratty, he will want to bid it rather than bid 3NT with no stopper. Responder, in bidding 3C, doesn't even care if 3D is a ratty 4-bagger or a hedge with nowhere to go ...2-6-(32). She will bid 4D anyway.

the original poster said they play kickback. so 3♣ followed by 4♦ could be keycard for ♣ in some sequences.

safer to bid 3♦ followed by 4♣ and shows the same sort of hand but with better/longer ♦

[MrAce]

I think some people will bid 3♥ not considering Jxxx♦ a good enough stopper for 3N.

& 6♦ will still be good without J♦ just xxxx

 

Steve, bro

 

Of course in forums people always land on their feet. Because they all bid 3♦ with Jxxx or xxxx or rebid hearts the 3rd time with AQxxxx quality, because they are all focused on landing on their feet vs what pd holds. Everybody who advocates 1♠ with S hand, conveniently ignore the AJ doubleton spade as opener because they know pd has Kxxx spade and not a 5-6 card spades. (i include myself in this criticism)

 

What happens, god forbid, when responder holds different spade holding which will make the same bid in std methods.It is very easy of course, they will, again, conveniently bid their HH or Hx or xx Hxx or xxx spades as opener and will ignore Jxxx or xxxx diamond or AQxxxx hearts when responder happens to hold KQxxx or Kxxxxx or KQxxxx spades.

 

 

Starting 1♠ leading to unmanageable auctions are not limited to forcing-nf issues or excessive space consuming or helping not helping pd to which suit to focus. It has much more issues than that which would take a page if i start to, which i won't. .( such as slam invitation hands vs slam forcing hands vs slam forcing hands and kickback or minor wood or setting the trumps for keycards vs slam forcing hands but needs control cuebid hands, all will pile up at 4 level and in forums it is of course easy to know which one is which each and every time, unfortunately it takes its tolls in real life) I have sympathy if you are playing 1♥-2m-2♠ showing extrasCan you see how butterfly effect it makes on the whole system ? Some go around it simply by playing the F convention. Some like me play 2♠ after opening 1♥ over a 2/1 response just shows 9 cards in rounded suits.

 

Starting 1♠ with 4 cards only when responder holds a very strong hand, gains when opener rebids 1 NT, of course, and that's is pretty much about it that it actually matters.

[the hog]

1388183387[/url]' post='770958']

Steve, bro

 

Of course in forums people always land on their feet. Because they all bid 3♦ with Jxxx or xxxx or rebid hearts the 3rd time with AQxxxx quality, because they are all focused on landing on their feet vs what pd holds. Everybody who advocates 1♠ with S hand, conveniently ignore the AJ doubleton spade as opener because they know pd has Kxxx spade and not a 5-6 card spades. (i include myself in this criticism)

 

What happens, god forbid, when responder holds different spade holding which will make the same bid in std methods.It is very easy of course, they will, again, conveniently bid their HH or Hx or xx Hxx or xxx spades as opener and will ignore Jxxx or xxxx diamond or AQxxxx hearts when responder happens to hold KQxxx or Kxxxxx or KQxxxx spades.

 

 

Starting 1♠ leading to unmanageable auctions are not limited to forcing-nf issues or excessive space consuming or helping not helping pd to which suit to focus. It has much more issues than that which would take a page if i start to, which i won't. .( such as slam invitation hands vs slam forcing hands vs slam forcing hands and kickback or minor wood or setting the trumps for keycards vs slam forcing hands but needs control cuebid hands, all will pile up at 4 level and in forums it is of course easy to know which one is which each and every time, unfortunately it takes its tolls in real life) I have sympathy if you are playing 1♥-2m-2♠ showing extrasCan you see how butterfly effect it makes on the whole system ? Some go around it simply by playing the F convention. Some like me play 2♠ after opening 1♥ over a 2/1 response just shows 9 cards in rounded suits.

 

Starting 1♠ with 4 cards only when responder holds a very strong hand, gains when opener rebids 1 NT, of course, and that's is pretty much about it that it actually matters.

 

Rofl

[Phil]

Anyone that bids 1♠ needs some remedial education.

[aguahombre]

Anyone that bids 1♠ needs some remedial education.

Translation: We need to adopt your style. Since I don't know your continuations after a 2C response and you don't know whether we have adequate methods after 1H-1S or what we would give up by bidding 2C..or whether other complications/ inferences are involved --- the education would have to be more than remedial.

[Phil]

Translation: We need to adopt your style.

 

?

 

Not at all. 1♠ looks like one of those completely obvious bids but it leads to having to create some artificial force later that makes the auction unmanageable. Or, create some home brew workaround.

 

Now, MY style would be to respond 2♣ with one or even two less clubs or even one more spade but I don't expect you or a lot of others to adopt it or even appreciate the merits, especially if you thiink 1♠ is correct on this pattern, which it isn't.

 

It's so funny. I have a distinct memory in about 2006 reading Rexfords views on the subject and thinking what a retard how can we ever express our club length? When I came around I started enjoying easier auctions and getting to good slams.

 

1♥ - 1♠ is the ugliest start to any natural auction.

[the hog]

1388252820[/url]' post='771030']

Anyone that bids 1♠ needs some remedial education.

 

I remember a post quite a while ago where Phil bid 2c on a hand and then instead of showing the bal hand with a 2nt bid, bid another 4 card suit. Now this needs remedial bidding lessons. Treating a 6-4 the same way as a 4-4 is not good bidding. I f you play a relay structure or similar to one posted in this thread fine. Otherwise good luck ink conveying your shape if you don't rebid 2nt.

[mike777]

I thought this was a very interesting thread so I emailed the responder hand around.

This is one email I got from someone who helped me learn bridge back in 71. He touches on several issues when you start with either one spade or 2c and further bids. He is a well known bridge player in the greater Boston area today. From Urbana back when.

 

 

"2C risks the partnership not being able to figure out how many clubs it has. It is slightly better if your agreement is for opener to bid 2S with any 4-5. Otherwise, if opener bids 2H YOU have to bid 2S and now you will never convince him that you have only 4-4. If opener raises 2C to 3C you can really be boxed in. You may find out he has a good hand for slam but unless he has a miracle hand you don't want to be in 6C in a 4-3 fit.

 

 

 

On the other hand, auctions that start 1H-1S when responder has a game force can get very ugly. Pard bids 2D, you have to bid 3C to force to game, pard bids 3NT and you have to bid 4D. I actually like to play transfers here so 4C would show diamonds, but in standard, pard will rarely be able to do anything intelligent over 4D, especially when you have this hand. I guess if you have an agreement that 4NT over 2D is key-card for diamonds you would be OK.

 

 

 

The other problem with 1S is that if pard bids 2S with 3-5 in the majors, 4-1 or 1-4 in the minors you will never find your 8-card minor suit fit.

 

 

 

I'd call the initial choice between 1S and 2C a toss-up."

[mike777]

btw here is an email response to the above from an old friend.

 

"I play that opener is obligated to bid 2s over 2c with 4, and cannot immediately raise clubs without 4. I think this is now fairly standard. So I don't think 2c has any of the drawbacks of 1s."

 

I note that some forum members disagree with the above further bids.

 

Some posters will not always rebid 2s with openers or always rebid 2s with responder's hand.

[MinorKid]

The golden rule for slam bidding is not to bid a poor suit with a very good hand.

Playing with usual partner I will bid 2♣ over 1♥ but knowing that my partner not preferring to rebid 2♦ with ♦xxxx over 2♣, I will consider responding 2♦ over 1♥.

 

I would ignore Spades and bid the other minor next round.