2/1 IMPS GA AKxx QT AKxxxx x

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&w=sak75hqtdak7632c7&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1d2cdp?]133|200|

2/1 IMPS GA. Your call?[/hv]

[mike777]

good problem, I will try 2s, yes I see i have more than a minimum.

 

second choice 3c.

[cherdano]

I can understand offering 3S as a choice, as some play it as forcing (good agreement IMO).

But I've never heard of 2S as forcing.

 

With no such special agreements the only options for me are 4S and 3C.

[cherdano]

Wow I have just seen the votes. I can't believe stopping below game with this hand. We want to be in game opposite ♠Qxxx and out! Or opposite xx Kxxx QTx xxxx (they don't always lead trumps).

[wank]

3S, yes forcing.

[Cyberyeti]

I don't play 3♠ as forcing, I'd bid 3♣ then 3♠ to force, but it's what I'd bid on the 4252 version of this hand.

 

Would 2♥ from partner instead of X have been forcing or not ? as this may have some bearing on whether partner has spades.

 

I probably bid 3♣.

[Phil]

4C looks pretty clear to me.

[Jinksy]

edited out

[Kaitlyn S]

Since Jinsky edited his post, I'll get rid of my response to it :)

[SteveMoe]

3♣ as a generic GF works well here to give partner a chance to define which major they hold. Jumping to 3♠ is right when partner holds ♠ but could be inconvenient when partner holds ♥ and no ♣ stop (or ♥ & ♣ and no ♦ fit).

[mr1303]

If 3S is forcing, that looks clearcut. If it isn't (and I'm not sure it would be for me), it has to be 3C then 3S. If partner hasn't got spades, he has diamonds or a club stopper.

[ahydra]

Depends on X. If it promises both majors, 4S (or 3S if that's forcing). If not, 3C and see what partner bids.

 

ahydra

[Trinidad]

X does not promise both majors. Instead it promises:

- At least 1 four card major

and

- The ability to reach a decent contract when there is no major fit and opener has a minimum

 

In practice, I would say that this means (with approxmate HCP strength):

• 
   
  
• Both majors (8+)
  
• One major and support for opener's suit (8+)
  
• One major and tolerance for the other (i.e. a decent three card suit) (9-10+)
  
• One major, a decent stop in clubs and some "body" to play 2NT (10+)
  
• One major and a good hand (12+)
  

 

Rik

[nekthen]

We could open 1♦ with xxxx, xx, xxxx, xxx and 13 hcp and we will bid 2♠, our hand is much stronger than that so my vote is 3♣ unless dbl promises 4♠ in which case 4♠ seems reasonable

[Joe_Old]

I'm not sure about modern treatments, but the old school meaning of double was:

1) 4 - 4 in the majors, 10+ points (don't count distribution unless you have tolerance for ♦);

2) a 4 card major, tolerance for diamonds and 10+ points (count distribution); or

3) a 5 card major, 6 to 9 points (not good enough to bid 2 of a major directly).

 

Looking at the example hand, I want to be in ♦ or ♠, since I know we don't have an 8 card ♥ fit, unless partner has something unexpected in ♣ for NT. Therefore, I bid 3♠ (forcing for 1 round). If I had a balanced 16+, I'd bid 3♣ (tell me more partner).

 

The problem hands for responder are a) xx AKxxx xxx xxx or b) xxx AKxx Qxx Jxx. By bidding 3♠ partner knows that opener has a distributional spade/diamond hand, and can safely bid game in ♦ with a or b, or bail out in diamonds below game with a hand less suitable than the examples.

 

If you play different meanings for X, ignore all this.

[Caitlynne]

You have a VERY good hand. AKxx of spades, the suit that partner must be prepared to hear you bid; QT of hearts, another suit in which partner has implied length and values; a singleton in the opponent's suit; and a SIX card suit headed by the AK which will produce a lot of tricks if partner has a strong fit with the spades. All partner needs to produce a hihg percentage slam is a very modest hand like QJxxx, AJxx, x, xxx; at worst, this slam is on a heart hook and there are several other chances to avoid that finesse.

 

So 2S is woefully insufficient.

 

The problem with 3C is that it suggests that partner choose a major while you have a very clear preference for spades.

 

To me, that makes 3S the most descriptive bid that gets the partnership moving toward the most likely game or slam while expressing the strength and playing potential of your holdings.

[Kaitlyn S]

The problem with 3C is that it suggests that partner choose a major while you have a very clear preference for spades.

 

To me, that makes 3S the most descriptive bid that gets the partnership moving toward the most likely game or slam while expressing the strength and playing potential of your holdings.

That makes sense when you are playing with a partner with which you have an agreement that 3S is forcing.

 

That probably doesn't work so well with a random "expert" in the Main Bridge Club who might not play "all strange bids are forcing".

[Trinidad]

That makes sense when you are playing with a partner with which you have an agreement that 3S is forcing.

 

That probably doesn't work so well with a random "expert" in the Main Bridge Club who might not play "all strange bids are forcing".

It is a matter of simple arythmetic:

 

The double shows ~9+

Opener's 2♠ rebid shows ~12-14/15

Opener's 3♠ rebid shows ~15/16-19

 

(15/16-19) + (9+) = game

 

That means that you are not allowed to pass 3♠. And that, in turn, means that (if your partner can do the math) you can even bid 3♠ on better hands.

 

Rik

[m1cha]

First we have to agree on what the double means. To me it neither promises more than one major suit nor does it promise more than 8 points.

 

So I need some 18+ points for opener's game-forcing rebid, 3♣. A minimum rebid such as 2♠ can be passed. In order to distinguish a 12-point hand from a 16/17-point hand I feel we need a discriptive invitational bid which should be 3♠, denying 4-card ♥. If so, I'd bid 3♣ here, partner should show the lowest 4-card major and we may end up in 4♠, 3NT or 6♦, who knows.

 

Otherwise, if 3♠ is forcing, I'm happy to bid that.

[MrAce]

 

 

The problem with 3C is that it suggests that partner choose a major while you have a very clear preference for spades.

 

 

Stayman also suggests pd to choose a major. That does not mean you have both majors. Bidding 3♣ and then bidding spades does not mean you have a tolerance to hearts.

 

I chose 3♠ because I play it forcing and it shows an unbalanced hand to me. I would spare 3♣ bid for more balanced hands and a major (18-19)

 

 

[Trinidad]

I chose 3♠ because I play it forcing and it shows an unbalanced hand to me. I would spare 3♣ bid for more balanced hands and a major (18-19)

Same here. (And for hands without a major)

 

Rik

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&e=sJt64haj64dq9c642&w=sak75hqtdak7632c7&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1d2cdp?]200|200| 2/1 IMPS GA.

 

I'm told that this auction is from a JEC match but the hand pips are incorrect. West bid 3♠ and East passed. Declarer made 12 tricks in his partscore.

John Matheson says West should have forced to game with 3♣. Although East should have bid again with his actual hand.

I like West's 3♠. IMO it's descriptive and should be forcing (because East might not have 4 ♠s).[/hv]

[Trinidad]

I don't get this.

 

Suppose you have the East had and partner opens a strong (15-17) 1NT. Wouldn't you at least be tempted to look for a major suit game?

 

In this case, West has shown 15-17 HCPs, a four card spade suit, an unbalanced hand with a diamond suit, and either short hearts or clubs, where either shortness fits your hand well. That is one and a half trick better than when West opens 1NT. Even if 3♠ wouldn't be forcing (not my idea) I would bid 4♠ without blinking, certainly at IMPs.

 

Rik

[eagles123]

We could open 1♦ with xxxx, xx, xxxx, xxx and 13 hcp and we will bid 2♠, our hand is much stronger than that so my vote is 3♣ unless dbl promises 4♠ in which case 4♠ seems reasonable

 

4 spades can't possibly be right because it leaves partner no room to cue. imo it's either 3c or 3s depending on whether 3s is forcing (for me it is)

[mike777]

[hv=pc=n&e=sJt64haj64dq9c642&w=sak75hqtdak7632c7&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1d2cdp?]200|200| 2/1 IMPS GA.

 

I'm told that this auction is from a JEC match but the hand pips are incorrect. West bid 3♠ and East passed. Declarer made 12 tricks in his partscore.

John Matheson says West should have forced to game with 3♣. Although East should have bid again with his actual hand.

I like West's 3♠. IMO it's descriptive and should be forcing (because East might not have 4 ♠s).[/hv]

 

 

geez east pass of 3s is crazy. I would raise with the east hand after 2s.

 

My only guess is that east thought he did not have a neg x over 2c and that he already had overbid.