tell me your bid

[aguahombre]

bidding spades to show spades can work well.

Found a new quote for my tagline.

[kenberg]

Found a new quote for my tagline.

 

My wife does not play bridge, but she has listened to enough from me so that she immediately opined that this approach will never fly.

[Zelandakh]

My wife does not play bridge, but she has listened to enough from me so that she immediately opined that this approach will never fly.

Bidding spades to show spades is ok; it is bidding clubs to show clubs that has no chance. ;)

[helene_t]

One would surely have ways to find majors after 2NT (e.g. Stayman), right? I don't like 2S, prefer a 5-card suit if I'm going to eat loads of room.

2NT denies a four card major in principle. I suppose doubler could bid the opps' suit and then you could bid spades which partner would take as a good 3-card suit or maybe a very bad 4-card suit, but mostly he will just raise to 3NT if he has values for it.

 

I think 2NT is really wrong with this hand. Your spades are decent and your diamond stopper is questionable.

[Zelandakh]

Style is definitely important.

 

Would we double with, say, AQx AJx xx Kxxxx?

 

I'd be very reluctant to overcall on Kxxxx. I'd be very reluctant to pass with 14 hcp, support for the unbid suits, and shortness in diamonds. So I think I'd be stuck with an uncomfortable but clear double.

 

Then partner impales me further on my self-selected hook by cue-bidding. Unless I decide that I am now bidding a 3 card major, and I really....really....don't like that idea, I am endplayed into bidding 3♣.

I certainly would not overcall 2♣ but passing is always an option with a weak NT. If I did double with this shape then I would bid a major over the cue bid, as icky as you find it. Even if that leaves us in a Moysian it might be our best game. It is a rare enough problem that I can live with the downside. If 3♣ can be bid on this hand then what can you do with a genuine double and bid hand though? It seems like that cannot now explicitly be shown below 3NT, which is also not ideal. Of course that is a rare problem too.

 

I actually wrote the paragraph above a couple of days ok but held off on posting to check the system document from a while back (5-10 years) where this style got developed. I learned something I had forgotten from that in that we played this "better major" 2M advance as not forcing and limited to a max of 15hcp, mostly because the minor suit cue bid could be made with quite a weak hand that was just looking for the best strain. All other bids showed a strong hand type. As I recall this structure was inspired by ideas of my partner at that time. But even in a context where the cue is forcing to suit agreement it still feels to me that the upside beats the downside. It is just rare that one has to make a minimum take out double of a 1m opening without a 4 card major.

[Fluffy]

To the question what would I bid, I am sure I would bid 2♠. Which is not the same as saying I am sure that is right. If I held the North hand and partner, bid 2♠, I hope I would bid 3♦. The logic would be something like this:

 

North's double: Please tell me about a major if you have one

 

South's 2♠: I have spades and a decent hand

 

North's 3♦ over the 2♠: We are going to game, I am still not sure about strain.

 

It is very clear that 3♣ >>>>>> 3♦, which sshows same strength but gives more room and shows where you live. Never ask when you can show.

[kenberg]

It is very clear that 3♣ >>>>>> 3♦, which sshows same strength but gives more room and shows where you live. Never ask when you can show.

 

I'm not so sure. After the X-2♠, I would take 3♣ to mean, approximately, forget about what I siad with the double, I am telling you now that I am interested in pursuing clubs. While I don't think 2♠ hows five, it certainly doesn't deny five, and while North is looking at six clubs, but they are pretty shaggy.

 

Suppose it goes X-2♠-3♦-3NT. I am not at all sure I recommend that 3NT bid rather than 4♣, but suppose it happens. Now North thinks: Pard appears to lack a fifth spade or a fourth heart, so unless he has a real freak he has some clubs. I have six clubs and a diamond void. I think we play in clubs. 4♣.

As I say, I think it may be tough to sort this out to get to 7 although I guess it has a good play even if South's hearts are xxx. But after 3NT-4♣ I think they reach 6, and maybe 7. Similarly, if over 3♦ South bids 4♣ it should go well.

 

 

The reason that I think 4♣ is better than 3NT over 3♦ is that at this point South does not know North has a 17 count. Good hand yes, 17 count no. So East could have a few points. The opening lead against 3NT might well be a small diamond from AJxxx. Or some variant. On the auction so far, five diamons in the West hand seems highly likely.

[Zelandakh]

Never ask when you can show.

I disagree with the premise but not the result. I think it is almost always better to ask providing you know the answer(s) you will get are what you need to know. A great example of this is RKCB (ask) versus cue bids (show). The problem with 3♦ is that we cannot be so sure that the answer we get is going to be completely helpful so involving partner seems like it should work out better.

[mcphee]

When I saw this hand I felt it was rather clear 2D bid, I want to express that I hold maximum values for my passed hand. Why this bid should show both majors is impractical. Facing a dble this is a hand that may make 4S, and 3NT is not entirely out of the photo. A 2S jump would be my second choice.

[phil_20686]

I'm not so sure. After the X-2♠, I would take 3♣ to mean, approximately, forget about what I siad with the double, I am telling you now that I am interested in pursuing clubs. While I don't think 2♠ hows five, it certainly doesn't deny five, and while North is looking at six clubs, but they are pretty shaggy.

 

Suppose it goes X-2♠-3♦-3NT. I am not at all sure I recommend that 3NT bid rather than 4♣, but suppose it happens. Now North thinks: Pard appears to lack a fifth spade or a fourth heart, so unless he has a real freak he has some clubs. I have six clubs and a diamond void. I think we play in clubs. 4♣.

As I say, I think it may be tough to sort this out to get to 7 although I guess it has a good play even if South's hearts are xxx. But after 3NT-4♣ I think they reach 6, and maybe 7. Similarly, if over 3♦ South bids 4♣ it should go well.

 

 

The reason that I think 4♣ is better than 3NT over 3♦ is that at this point South does not know North has a 17 count. Good hand yes, 17 count no. So East could have a few points. The opening lead against 3NT might well be a small diamond from AJxxx. Or some variant. On the auction so far, five diamons in the West hand seems highly likely.

 

3C is right I think. It should just show a "strong flexible hand". After the 2S bid showing some values, it should be GF.