single raise in minor after comp.

[benlessard]

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1d1s2dp2np]133|100[/hv]

 

AFAIK in a weak NT setup, 2Nt here show a hand worth 16-17 pts, with 18-19 bal and a stopper north is too strong to bid 2NT. This mean that 2D need to be somewhat constructive and if you dont want to play game facing an opening of 18-19 bal you must make make the preemptive raise of 3D or pass rather than make the single raise.

 

However if your in a strong NT setup do you also play that 2D is somewhat constructive or that 2D can be trash ? If 2D can be bid with only 4 pts, it mean that opener will need to bid 2NT wide ranging. 2NT could be some offshape 16 pts up to 19 bal.

 

 

 

If your NT range is 14-16 what does opener do with 19 bal & a stopper ? Do you bid 2NT wide ranging or you simply GF ?

 

My poll question, assuming that you play 15-17 1NT and a jump to 3D is preemptive what the minimum for 2D here ?

[Caitlynne]

If 2D is enough to be game forcing opposite a balanced 18 to 19 HCP, what are you supposed to do over the 1S overcall holding something like x, Kxx, QJxx, xxxxx?

 

You can't deny four card support to an honor with ruffing value. And if partner has spade values, they aren't very useful in producing tricks. You have to be able to take a bid in case partner has a hand like xxx, AQxx, AKJxxx, void - a 14 count that produces game and maybe even slam. But if partner has something like QJx, Axx, AKxx, AJx, being forced to bid on is just insane. 2NT is the right spot.

[benlessard]

This look like a wtp 3D for me. For sure i would prefer to have 5 trumps but QJxx and a stiff is good enough.

[gszes]

I See no reason a 2d bid cannot look like xxx xx QJTx QJxx and I would not want that to be GF opposite 18-19 bal with a single spade stop. I also would have little qualms passing such a hand if playing inverted minors on in comp since opener has another chance to bid. Caitlynne ex would be a 3d bid IMHO no matter which way I was playing.

[rmnka447]

+1 for gszes.

 

How are you playing 1 ♦-(1 ♠)-2 ♠? If limit+ in ♦, then 2 ♦ ought to be exactly the hand gszes suggests.