is it possible to invite?

[Fluffy]

[hv=pc=n&s=sqj98543h5dak8c64&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1c1h1n]133|200[/hv]

 

MPs, nobody vul

[helene_t]

dbl followed by 2♠ (or 3♠ if necesary) maybe? As long as partner doesn't take the double as penalty.

[the hog]

[hv=pc=n&s=sqj98543h5dak8c64&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1c1h1n]133|200[/hv]

 

MPs, nobody vul

 

You have 2S, 1H, 1D and 2C to lose - a total of 6. It is unrealistic to expect a 1NT bidder with 6-9 to be able to cover 3 of these. Just bid 2S.If pd shows up with AK of C and the D Q and S break I will apologise.

[Fluffy]

I really hope the 1NT bidder doesn't cover 3 of my losers because he is the opposition.

[rhm]

Again a matter of agreements, where few will have one

 

I see many sequences after (1♣)-1♥-(1NT):

 

DBL: should probably show more general strength and is without special agreement not takeout oriented.

2♣: Often reserved for hands with ♥fit. Could be agreed that subsequent spade bids cancel the message and shows such a hand (problematic)

2♠: not invitational except with very good spade support.

3♠: could be construed as preemptive

3♣: unclear, but without agreement probably a splinter in support of hearts.

 

That leaves 2NT, which must be forcing. Without agreement 2NT followed by 3♠ should be invitational. You can not be balanced since you would double with that.

With stronger hands and spades you can easily bid differently after 2NT (e.g.4♠)

 

Rainer Herrmann

[the hog]

You have 2S, 1H, 1D and 2C to lose - a total of 6. It is unrealistic to expect a 1NT bidder with 6-9 to be able to cover 3 of these. Just bid 2S.If pd shows up with AK of C and the D Q and S break I will apologise.

 

My eyes are getting bad. I thought you opened 1S

[Hanoi5]

I hope partner moves over my 2♠ with the approppriate hand for game. So that would be the invitation for me.

[rhm]

I hope partner moves over my 2♠ with the approppriate hand for game. So that would be the invitation for me.

Would you move with ♠Kx ♥AKxxx ♦xxx ♣xxx or even ♠Kxx ♥Axxxxx ♦xx ♣xx ?

The truth is partner will rarely move over 2♠ when 4♠ makes

 

Rainer Herrmann

[cherdano]

Again a matter of agreements, where few will have one

 

I see many sequences after (1♣)-1♥-(1NT):

 

DBL: should probably show more general strength and is without special agreement not takeout oriented.

2♣: Often reserved for hands with ♥fit. Could be agreed that subsequent spade bids cancel the message and shows such a hand (problematic)

2♠: not invitational except with very good spade support.

3♠: could be construed as preemptive

3♣: unclear, but without agreement probably a splinter in support of hearts.

 

That leaves 2NT, which must be forcing. Without agreement 2NT followed by 3♠ should be invitational. You can not be balanced since you would double with that.

With stronger hands and spades you can easily bid differently after 2NT (e.g.4♠)

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

I would take 2N either as showing a good heart raise, or as a game-forcing hand, possibly two-suited. Invitational would not occur to me.

 

I also don't think 3♠ should be preemptive. It should be bid with the expectation to make. We are perhaps a tad strong for it, but I still think partner should raise on many hands where we make game.

 

I fully expect partner to pass 3♠ most of the time. I also don't expect to make overtricks very often - we need prime cards from him.

[whereagles]

2♠ seems canonical (and is also non-forcing). With both opps bidding, I can hardly imagine having game here.

[y66]

BWS 2001:

 

After our simple overcall of a one-bid:

 

When new-suit advances are forcing, a cue-bid guarantees a fit, a jump cue-bid is a mixed (i.e., semi-preemptive) raise that shows at least one defensive trick, a new-suit bid followed by a same-suit rebid is invitational, and a new-suit jump is a fit-jump.

 

When new-suit advances are nonforcing, a cue-bid may be either a strong raise or a prelude to a forcing bid in a new suit, a jump cue-bid is a mixed (i.e., semi-preemptive) raise that shows at least one defensive trick, a new-suit bid followed by a same-suit rebid is weakish, and a new-suit jump is invitational.

[rhm]

BWS 2001:

I wonder how many people play new-suit advances forcing when responder interjects 1NT as here.

If new-suit advance is considered non forcing there are 2 cue-bids here 2♣ and 2NT.

And anyway the issue here is to have an invitational sequence.

This means you want to show your suit non forcing but still show a hand with high potential.

The problem I see with immediate ♠ bids is that I would expect partner to pass often, when 4♠ will be laydown.

I do not see how your quote helps very much in that respect.

(Maybe just bidding 4♠ directly is best)

 

Rainer Herrmann

[PhilG007]

I would pass this hand on the auction given.

Partner has bid your singleton suit so its possible that

he also holds a singleton ♠ He will rebid his [hearts

and the contract escalates from the dodgy to the dangerous

Allow the opps play in their 1NT and let them worry about the unbalanced

distribution.

[PhilG007]

There is an old bridge adage. "Let the opponents play the misfits,we'll

play the fits." Like all old sayings,it has more than a grain of truth about

it. :)

[MrAce]

There is an old bridge adage. "Let the opponents play the misfits,we'll

play the fits." Like all old sayings,it has more than a grain of truth about

it. :)

 

Actually you have a fit even if pd holds stiff spade. Sometimes they hold 2 or 3 cards too.

 

Our hand may end up taking only 2 tricks if pd is short in spades in defense vs NT. While it offers a lot of tricks in 2-3 ♠. Or they may take 5-6-7 tricks in 1 NT by the time we set our spades.

[gnasher]

I don't see why we need a special agreement to play double as for takeout. These are all for takeout:

  1♣-p-1NT-dbl

  1♣-1♥-1♠-dbl

  1♣-1♥-2♣-dbl

 

So why isn't

  1♣-1♥-1NT-dbl

also for takeout?

 

That doesn't solve all of the problems, though. If I make a takeout double and then convert 2♥ to 2♠, does that show a good 2♠ bid or just a two-suiter that doesn't want to play in hearts?

[billw55]

To me, the 1NT call suggests that partner's heart values are not going to work to full value opposite my singleton. Therefore I restrain myself to 2♠.

[redtop]

I would interpret double as card-showing, penalty-oriented.

 

Pass is way too chicken. If partner has the spade 10 and heart A I am cold for +110. This is also a terrible vulnerability to sell out at.

 

I think 2S should be the same as if RHO had raised clubs, new suit constructive after an overcall. Partner should know that spade honors and prime cards elsewhere are working and other cards are not. I wouldn't bid 3S, although I think it's definitely weaker than 2C followed by a spade bid. But I don't expect the auction to end at 2S; I expect to bid 3S later and partner may have another chance to evaluate his hand.

[HedyG]

am i really the only one who plays transfers over opps 1 NT overcall? bid 2 !h for !s and then raise to 3 if you like. double would be penalty.

and how to show symbols here ???

[MrAce]

am i really the only one who plays transfers over opps 1 NT overcall? bid 2 !h for !s and then raise to 3 if you like. double would be penalty.

and how to show symbols here ???

 

Hedy opponents did not overcall NT, one of them opened other one responded 1 NT over our pd's 1♥. But perhaps what you said can still work fine here with agreement.

 

To show symbols use [ ] and put in between cl di he sp whichever suit u want to. No space between the symbols.

[whereagles]

I wonder how many people play new-suit advances forcing when responder interjects 1NT as here. (...)

 

I don't know. What I do know is that there is a meta-rule for this:

 

If RHO bids, new suits by advancer are NF.

If RHO passes, they are forcing.

 

The reasoning is if RHO bids, advancer can hardly have a strong hand. It's much more likely he would merely want to compete. And even if he does have a good hand, then the overcall almost certain to be sub-par and again there's no game on...

 

...bar a psyche by RHO.

 

The good thing is, this isn't the sort of situation that's psyche-prone.

[HedyG]

i dont see why transfers should not apply here too. but prepared to discuss.

thanks Helene and Timo for ♠♥♦♣

[beowulf]

What, pray tell, is wrong with double? I don't want it to be takeout. I want it to be for penalties, which it should be (opponent has bid 1NT in competition). I know we aren't guaranteed to set the contract (if, for example, opener has 6 or more good clubs) but I think that 9 times out of 10 we will beat any score that we could make in our own contract.

[vcalimidi]

I do not give much significance opps bid of1nt. I expect partner to have atleast 10 hcp.

We are either equal or stronger than opps. I prefer 2 spades bid as an advancer .