Take me at an interesting table

[Lovera]

Yesternight, after playing, i chose it and watched: in N ♠ KQ1098 ♥ J86 ♦ 8 ♣ K1063 in W ♠ 2 ♥ Q74 ♦ AQ5432 ♣ 984 (E can support). Nine pairs bidded 2♥ transfert, two 2♠ (one interefferd) and one 2♣-2♠, 4♠. Among the 1NT (en passant 3/4 suits are covered) openers, five bidded jumping/superaccept 3♠ or game(=3NT or 4♠). How do you think about the various biddings ? Edited March 6, 2016 by Lovera

[1eyedjack]

Don't really follow this. We are given two of the four hands, one from each opposing pair. We are not told the scoring, dealer or vulnerability. We can infer that South opened 1NT. We are not told either pair's systems, styles, 1NT response structure, defensive methods over 1NT or defences to interference.

 

What meaningful contribution to criticising any bids can you possibly expect of us?

[Lovera]

Don't really follow this. We are given two of the four hands, one from each opposing pair. We are not told the scoring, dealer or vulnerability. We can infer that South opened 1NT. We are not told either pair's systems, styles, 1NT response structure, defensive methods over 1NT or defences to interference.

 

What meaningful contribution to criticising any bids can you possibly expect of us?

It was made by me for avoiding to see immediatly all for hands :although N/S notvul vs vul and S is the opener.From the W hand should be possible to have an idea of S hand (max points). Not criticism, but only what do you think about developing of bidding.About opener :it is better opener at first level (if points are not distribuite in all suits) or is possible the bidding of 1NT ? Thanks.

[kenberg]

I will take a crack at the various options.

 

1. S opens 1NT and W passes.

I, No interference, 1NT- 2H.

a. If S bids 3S I raise to 4. Yes slam is possible but I have a 9 count.A very good 9 count, but a 9 count.

If, instead, partner bids 2S I bid 2NT. I doubt 5C is where we want to be, and 3NT is a bit high on hcps, so I bid 2NT. If partner now corrects to 3S we have a fit, so I raise to 4S.

 

 

2. 1NT-(2D). I like my stiff diamond. I have good spades. I wish to invite. I Leb with 2NT, pard bids 3C, I bid 3S invit.

 

I think tis is my action regardless of vul and scoring.

 

Any or all of these choices could be wrong, but that's bridge.

 

Added: In the second version, after I bid 2NT, I gather E might raise diamonds. If the auction is at 3D when it gets back to me I bid 3S. If it is instead at 4D this is tougher but I think I give 4S a shot. From the presentation I know pard has spades so I won't regret this. At the table it may be tougher but it seems I need to do something.

Of course if the initial interference by W is artificial, either 2C or X showing a single suit, this is easier since system is on in either case. I can bid 2H trf, E won't know to raise diamonds, and all should be well.

[Lovera]

I will take a crack at the various options.

 

1. S opens 1NT and W passes.

I, No interference, 1NT- 2H.

a. If S bids 3S I raise to 4. Yes slam is possible but I have a 9 count.A very good 9 count, but a 9 count.

If, instead, partner bids 2S I bid 2NT. I doubt 5C is where we want to be, and 3NT is a bit high on hcps, so I bid 2NT. If partner now corrects to 3S we have a fit, so I raise to 4S.

 

 

2. 1NT-(2D). I like my stiff diamond. I have good spades. I wish to invite. I Leb with 2NT, pard bids 3C, I bid 3S invit.

 

I think tis is my action regardless of vul and scoring.

 

Any or all of these choices could be wrong, but that's bridge.

Thanks. Here the hand of S:♠ AJ64 ♥ AK ♦ 976 ♣ AJ75. Any question :originally to open with 1NT needs to have all suits covered, but now i can see not so (saving points 15-17). At table i was kib bidding was infact interferred with 2♦, but with N points is not better the bidding of 2♣ (w/o interf.) ? And when hearding 3♠(=max p.) why not 4♦ ? Bye.

[Zelandakh]

Thanks. Here the hand of S:♠ AJ64 ♥ AK ♦ 976 ♣ AJ75. Any question :originally to open with 1NT needs to have all suits covered, but now i can see not so (saving points 15-17).

Correct, it is completely unnecessary unless playing rather old-fashioned (and largely discredited) methods.

 

 

At table i was kib bidding was infact interferred with 2♦, but with N points is not better the bidding of 2♣ (w/o interf.) ?

That sounds like a terrible idea to me. Why bury a 5-3 spade fit hoping to find a 5-4?

 

 

And when hearding 3♠(=max p.) why not 4♦ ?

That would be great if it showed a shortage but for most it would deny a club control and therefore not be an option.

 

 

Bye.

This is very common at the end of your posts and imho comes across extremely rudely. I realise English is not your native language but you might consider re-thinking some aspects of your posting style.

 

 

If, instead, partner bids 2S I bid 2NT. I doubt 5C is where we want to be, and 3NT is a bit high on hcps, so I bid 2NT. If partner now corrects to 3S we have a fit, so I raise to 4S.

I think I want to force to game rather than invite here. It makes no difference on this hand of course.

[mgoetze]

you might consider re-thinking some aspects of your posting style.

Only some? ;)

[Lovera]

So, as Zelandakh indicates, should be better 4♣ instead of 4♦ and it expecially if bidding is not interferred. But i think that if diamonds are bidded by opp 4♦ can clearly shows shortness (not excluding anything in club) that is what needs/ will hear S to continue.

[Lovera]

I will take a crack at the various options.

 

1. S opens 1NT and W passes.

I, No interference, 1NT- 2H.

a. If S bids 3S I raise to 4. Yes slam is possible but I have a 9 count.A very good 9 count, but a 9 count.

If, instead, partner bids 2S I bid 2NT. I doubt 5C is where we want to be, and 3NT is a bit high on hcps, so I bid 2NT. If partner now corrects to 3S we have a fit, so I raise to 4S.

 

 

2. 1NT-(2D). I like my stiff diamond. I have good spades. I wish to invite. I Leb with 2NT, pard bids 3C, I bid 3S invit.

 

I think tis is my action regardless of vul and scoring.

 

Any or all of these choices could be wrong, but that's bridge.

 

Added: In the second version, after I bid 2NT, I gather E might raise diamonds. If the auction is at 3D when it gets back to me I bid 3S. If it is instead at 4D this is tougher but I think I give 4S a shot. From the presentation I know pard has spades so I won't regret this. At the table it may be tougher but it seems I need to do something.

Of course if the initial interference by W is artificial, either 2C or X showing a single suit, this is easier since system is on in either case. I can bid 2H trf, E won't know to raise diamonds, and all should be well.

You have considered the eventualities in the session (bidding was natural). With these hands we have a slam that is possible managed for more plannings. Although you said "i have a 9 count. A very good .." but i consider that i have a 5-4 fit , probably 4 or 5 honors in spade, another suit (club) and a singleton (diamond), partner has bidded 3♠ and my hand can value surely more of 9 points. I think it useful to continue bidding because there are till informations to tell.

[rmnka447]

Opening 1 NT with the South hand ♠ AJxx ♥ AK ♦ xxx ♣ AJxx is normal now. At one time in the distant past, it was recommended to only open 1 NT with stoppers in each suit. But the problem was how to rebid hands without a stopper (like the one you posed) that you didn't open 1 NT. There was no satisfactory solution for accurately describing what you held. In practice, it was only rarely found that opening 1 NT without a stopper hurt in any way. So, people migrated to opening 1 NT when holding the right HCP and distribution without regard for stoppers.

 

After a simple transfer (i.e., no interference), players vary in how they respond. Some experts have recommended super accepting (here 3 ♠)when holding 4 card support and a maximum. Marty Bergen is one who advocates super accepting with any 4 card support hand maximum or not. The thinking is that known 9+ card fits are more valuable and should be bid aggressively. The downside is when responder has a horrendous hand and you end up playing 3 ♠ instead of 2 ♠.

 

However, some players stick to just taking the transfer with 4 card support to avoid that problem. But hiding the 9+ card fit loses when it precludes responder from bidding on with certain hands. OTOH, it does save some bidding space on certain hands.

 

After

 

1 NT - 2 ♥(transfer)

2 ♠ - ?

 

Some have suggested 2 NT or 3 NT as a continuation. But some bidders might also bid 3 ♣ to show the ♣ feature and emphasize to opener the potential shortness in the red suits. If opener holds, say ♠ AJ ♥ AKxx ♦ xxx ♣ AJxx, you might avoid a disastrous 3 NT after 3 ♣.

[Lovera]

Opening 1 NT with the South hand ♠ AJxx ♥ AK ♦ xxx ♣ AJxx is normal now. At one time in the distant past, it was recommended to only open 1 NT with stoppers in each suit. But the problem was how to rebid hands without a stopper (like the one you posed) that you didn't open 1 NT. There was no satisfactory solution for accurately describing what you held. In practice, it was only rarely found that opening 1 NT without a stopper hurt in any way. So, people migrated to opening 1 NT when holding the right HCP and distribution without regard for stoppers.

 

After a simple transfer (i.e., no interference), players vary in how they respond. Some experts have recommended super accepting (here 3 ♠)when holding 4 card support and a maximum. Marty Bergen is one who advocates super accepting with any 4 card support hand maximum or not. The thinking is that known 9+ card fits are more valuable and should be bid aggressively. The downside is when responder has a horrendous hand and you end up playing 3 ♠ instead of 2 ♠.

 

However, some players stick to just taking the transfer with 4 card support to avoid that problem. But hiding the 9+ card fit loses when it precludes responder from bidding on with certain hands. OTOH, it does save some bidding space on certain hands.

 

After

 

1 NT - 2 ♥(transfer)

2 ♠ - ?

 

Some have suggested 2 NT or 3 NT as a continuation. But some bidders might also bid 3 ♣ to show the ♣ feature and emphasize to opener the potential shortness in the red suits. If opener holds, say ♠ AJ ♥ AKxx ♦ xxx ♣ AJxx, you might avoid a disastrous 3 NT after 3 ♣.

Interesting and clear. When you said (at the end of your post) "But some bidders .." i know, speaking of Texas conv., that the re-open by responder with another bidding shows a strong hand and asking anytime about force of trump suit or about controls in the second suit bidded.

[Lovera]

With the N and S hands there in club another fit. If N bids 4♣ could do starting a sequence that, if not ending in 4♠, it will drive to slam. Infact are involved all suits to sure tricks.