What's best? beats me.

[nige1]

The downside of bidding spades is as Charles Lee says - Partner may have a good hand like ♠-Kxxx ♥-Kxxx ♦-Qx ♣KJx - - partner will bid 4S over your 1S or Blackwood over 2S and you will be committed to playing in spades, vulnerable to bad trump breaks, when where you want to be is 6D.

For some players who employ a modern version of 2/1, a 1♠ rebid promises 4+ ♠s but a 2♠ rebid promises only 3+ ♠s (to cater specifically for difficult hands like this one). If responder has 4+ ♠s, he raises but only to 3♠.

[kenberg]

For some players who emply a modern version of 2/1, a 1♠ rebid promises 4+ ♠s but a 2♠ rebid promises only 3 (to cater specifically for difficult hands like this one). If responder has 4+ ♠s, he raises but only to 3♠.

 

This is very useful. If my 2S call had crashed and burned then, armed with this, I could have just said "Of course I play that my 2S bid only showed three, doesn't everyone play that way?". B-)

 

My actual thinking was that often partner won't have four spades and, if he is 4-4 in the majors, then with a little luck he might be able to handle it playing in spades. Of course he might have five hearts to go with his four spades. But then I can explain about how 2S only promises three cards. Well, I could try!

[jdgalt]

Assuming standard American, I bid 2S because, as someone else said first, 1S would not be forcing. And given partner's first response I want to be in game.

 

What I want to hear partner do then is bid clubs. If he can do that, I'll say 3NT. If he goes back to diamonds, 5D. If he rebids hearts, 4H.

 

The hard case to deal with is if partner raises spades (in which I've promised four). Since it's matchpoints, I think I'll pass him in either 3S or 4S. At IMPs I would bid 4 and pray.

[nige1]

This is very useful. If my 2S call had crashed and burned then, armed with this, I could have just said "Of course I play that my 2S bid only showed three, doesn't everyone play that way?". B-)

 

My actual thinking was that often partner won't have four spades and, if he is 4-4 in the majors, then with a little luck he might be able to handle it playing in spades.Of course he might have five hearts to go with his four spades. But then I can explain about how 2S only promises three cards. Well, I could try!

Even without specific agreement, perhaps partner should allow for the possibility. To handle similar predicaments, some partnerships agree that a reverse does not promise 4+ cards. e.g.

• ♠ A Q x ♥ A x x ♦ x ♣ A K J x x x : 1♣ - 1♠ -; 2♥
• ♠ A K x ♥ x ♦ A x ♣ K Q J x x x x : 1♣ - 1♠ -; 2♦

In Scotland, such practices are sufficiently common for some players to allow for the possibility, whenever such sequences are undiscussed.

[dave_beer]

It is likely that what will work best in practice is to jump shift in clubs - your only real losing case will be when partner has 6 clubs (of 12) rather than a losing case of partner having 4 spades (of 10). When 3C goes wrong, though, it can be ugly.

I think you underestimate the danger of a 3♣ rebid. Let's see what is likely to happen over each of responder's normal rebids:

 

3♥ shows a suit good enough to play opposite Hx. No problem here.

 

3NT shows 1½ ♠ stoppers and no slam interest. Are you going to hope that your 3♣ bid stops the suit or are you going to remove 3NT to 4♥ describing a hand (roughly) 1-3-5-4? Good luck!

 

3♠ usually shows a hand that wants you to declare 3NT. You do have them stopped but there is that nagging problem with ♣ again. Same great choices as over 3NT.

 

4♣ suggests at least ♣Hxxx and maybe a 5th trump and no interest in hearing about delayed ♥ support. Something like xxx-KQxx-x-KTxxx. Now we probably belong in 3NT but we can't get there from here.

 

3♦ shows none of the above. It is a mark time bid which asks for further description. It does not promise ♦ support and could even be a singleton (or void). You can now rebid 3♥ showing roughly 1-3-5-4. Good luck with partner making an intelligent choice after that if his ♥ aren't playable opposite 3-card support.

 

On the other hand, if you bid 2♠, I think you only have a problem if partner raises ♠ or decides to take control with Blackwood. I don't think your example hand is a Blackwood call but I'm sure some players would do it. With that hand partner might bid 6NT which could easily be better than 6♠ at any form of scoring but especially at match points.

 

4♠ shows good trumps and denies 1st or 2nd round control of ♣. Given that I have ♠AQx that means at least ♠KJxx. While I could be missing a slam or have better play for 5♦ or 5♥ I would pass.

 

3♠ shows primary ♠ support but denies a hand that bids 4♠. I think 4♥ at this point suggests roughly 4-3-5-1 and also think that it should be forcing but I will not be surprised if partner passes.

[lycier]

[hv=pc=n&s=saq5haj4dak6542cq&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=pp1dp1hp]133|200[/hv]

 

Opening 1♦ is correct,no problem.

After responding 1♥,the opener should know they must have a try to bid to game.

A pity that there is a defect - singleton in ♣ in the opener hand.

 

1- If rebid 2nt,it usually shows 18-19 hcp with balanced hand,the worse thing is 2nt is non-forcing, and at the same time 2nt also covers up the defect of hand shape,so 2nt should be not a good option.

2- Jump 3♦,it still is non-forcing,not a good option.

3- 2♠ ! usually it shows 4-card ♠ and forcing.

The advantages of 2♠ is that opener give responder a second chance so as to describe the feature of the hand much further.

 

[zillahandp]

No disrespect but in order of most silly first 2nt, 3d, 1s .

[MrAce]

The downside of bidding spades is as Charles Lee says - Partner may have a good hand like ♠-Kxxx ♥-Kxxx ♦-Qx ♣KJx - - partner will bid 4S over your 1S or Blackwood over 2S and you will be committed to playing in spades, vulnerable to bad trump breaks, when where you want to be is 6D.

 

Why would pd bid 4 NT over 2♠ instead of 3♠? What does he know about my shape? I can be 4144 4162 4153 even if he lacks the experience that this may be a 3 card jump. But even if he did bid 4 NT, we are not barred from bidding 6 NT at the end, are we?

[billw55]

No disrespect but in order of most silly first 2nt, 3d, 1s .

This sounds odd, in view of:

 

2hts whats the prob harder at imps

2♥ is clearly a gross underbid - at matchpoints or IMPS.

[masse24]

A jump shift shows the value of your hand, but the only suit you can jump shift into is clubs . . .

 

I intend to Jump-Shift into 2♠ :blink:

[dhsackett]

This is the "Bridge World" death hand, so named because it was presented in the Master Solvers Club many times, and no one ever devised a good response. I think Al Roth first suggested 1 ♠

[mikestar13]

Nobody here knows how to bid the Bridge World Death Hand in a reasonably natural 2/1 or SAYC style system? Neither does Bob Hamman or Eric Rodwell, neither did Howard Schenken or Charles Goren back in the days, nor Ely Culbertson before that, nor Milton Work before that. No wonder Harold Vanderbilt himself played a Big Club system. :rolleyes:

[mike777]

But often, very often make a bid with options and you will survive...see this hand.

 

the death hand need often very often not be death.

 

my choices were:

 

2nt

3d

 

 

we survive

[nige1]

Nobody here knows how to bid the Bridge World Death Hand in a reasonably natural 2/1 or SAYC style system? Neither does Bob Hamman or Eric Rodwell, neither did Howard Schenken or Charles Goren back in the days, nor Ely Culbertson before that, nor Milton Work before that. No wonder Harold Vanderbilt himself played a Big Club system. :rolleyes:

Obviously, if you agree a consistent approach to handling this predicament (e.g. always jump-shift or fake-reverse or whatever), then partner will be aware of this possibility when you choose that option; and partner can also be confident that other possible options are uncompromised.

[Cyberyeti]

Nobody here knows how to bid the Bridge World Death Hand in a reasonably natural 2/1 or SAYC style system? Neither does Bob Hamman or Eric Rodwell, neither did Howard Schenken or Charles Goren back in the days, nor Ely Culbertson before that, nor Milton Work before that. No wonder Harold Vanderbilt himself played a Big Club system. :rolleyes:

 

Actually, this is in part a strong notrump problem. You can handle it playing weak as you can widen the range of your 1N opener and/or rebid so that there is no gap between the 1N rebid and 2N opener, meaning that 1x-1y-2N is GF unbalanced so you don't need to bid 3 card suits.

[ArtK78]

My regular partner and I play a notrump structure which is referred to as continuous range. We play a 10-13 1NT nonvul in 1st or 2nd seat nonvul, 14+ - 17 otherwise.

 

When we play the mini NT, we open 1NT with 10-13, rebid 1NT with 14-17, and open 2NT with 18-20. Stronger balanced hands are opened 2♣.

 

When we play the strong NT, we rebid 1NT with 12-14, open 1NT with 14+ - 17, and open 2NT with 18-20. Again, stronger balanced hands are opened 2♣.

 

This frees up the 2NT rebid for a special holding, which we use for a strong hand with 6 in the suit opened and 3 card support for responder's major suit - the Bridge World death hand. So, on this hand, we would open 1♦ and rebid 2NT over 1♥.