How do you bid this?

[maximusg]

[hv=pc=n&e=s2h83daq986caq762&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=pp1h?]133|200[/hv]

 

Obvious choices are 2nt, 2♣, and 2♦. Which do you choose? Sorry if this shouldn't be posted to the Expert board but I wanted expert opinions. Thanks. :P

[The_Badger]

Couldn't have a more perfect hand to bid 2NT as Unusual NT. It's perhaps at the lower end red vs. white with a passed partner, but South has passed too, so it's the most descriptive bid by far.

 

You'd be very unlucky to find partner with zilch and a bad fit.

[johnu]

Sorry if this shouldn't be posted to the Expert board but I wanted expert opinions.

 

You'll get "expert" opinions no matter which forum you post in. You'll also get intermediate and novice opinions as well. The same people usually post on every level forum, so posting on the Expert forum will not get better quality responses. The forum title is supposed to correspond to the level of the subject matter.

[rmnka447]

2 NT

 

Vulnerable, and especially vulnerable versus not, you just can't be bidding wildly on lousy suits. So this hand is about a minimum for a vulnerable unusual NT.

[Winstonm]

When my favorite partner, Bob, was alive, we were adamant that these two-suited bids like the unusual NT should be only 1 of 2 hand types: either weak and sacrifice-orientated or very strong, so strong that you can't tolerate partner passing a bid.

 

When you try to mix in this third type, you force an unnecessary guessing game into your own bidding - IMHO.

 

I would bid 2D and not worry if it didn't work out on this particular hand.

[Winstonm]

2 NT

 

Vulnerable, and especially vulnerable versus not, you just can't be bidding wildly on lousy suits. So this hand is about a minimum for a vulnerable unusual NT.

 

I'm not trying to start an argument, but isn't playing strength the key? The hands showng really don't have a lot of playing strength wtihout a 4-card fit opposite IMO, whereas a hand like x, x, KQJxxx, KJ1098x, while "weaker" is actually safer in the auction.

 

IMO, these hands fall into a mid-range strength without compensating playing strength which makes them quite dangerous to force a 3-level of bidding.

[wank]

When my favorite partner, Bob, was alive, we were adamant that these two-suited bids like the unusual NT should be only 1 of 2 hand types: either weak and sacrifice-orientated or very strong, so strong that you can't tolerate partner passing a bid.

 

When you try to mix in this third type, you force an unnecessary guessing game into your own bidding - IMHO.

 

I would bid 2D and not worry if it didn't work out on this particular hand.

 

bad hands don't bid 2nt. it's supposed to be opening hands upwards.

[alandel46]

2 NT means exactly that you have both minors with 5 cards and, at least 11 points

[nekthen]

IMHO This is a definite pass. We have no chance of a game our way. There is every chance they have game in hearts. Bidding will achieve one or both of two things. It will push opps to bid a making game that they otherwise would not bid and they will be able to place all the cards when declaring.

I will keep quiet and hope to give them some bad news in the play.

[MrAce]

IMHO This is a definite pass. We have no chance of a game our way. There is every chance they have game in hearts. Bidding will achieve one or both of two things. It will push opps to bid a making game that they otherwise would not bid and they will be able to place all the cards when declaring.

I will keep quiet and hope to give them some bad news in the play.

 

Then I suppose you and your pd always open hands like

 

ATx

xxx

Kxx

Kxxx

 

 

OR never play games on a finesse when opener is in front of you!

 

QJxx

QJx

JTx

Kxx

 

OR "We have no chance our way" was a gross overstatement.

[nekthen]

[hv=pc=n&s=st853ht96dkt3c954&w=sqj64hqj2dj4ckjt3&n=sak97hak754d752c8&e=s2h83daq986caq762]399|300[/hv]

 

This is a possible deal. There is no game for East West. If East passes South will pass and so I guess will West. For plus 110 to 170, depending on play in spades, to NS.

If East bids 2N N S may well compete to 4H and East West can choose to defend and go for a probable 420 or 300 in 5Cx

I agree that on this hand NS are unlikely to go all the way to 4H, but I think East will be shooting himself in the foot more often than not

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&e=s2h83daq986caq762&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=pp1h?]133|200|

Obvious choices are 2nt, 2♣, and 2♦.

Which do you choose?

Sorry if this shouldn't be posted to the Expert board but I wanted expert opinions. [/hv]

I rank

1. 2N = UNT. Terence Reese and many experts regard UNT as a bad convention because it leaks so much information. IMO, its descriptive (and pre-emptive) nature is an advantage for ordinary players provided that we use it only when we have enough playing strength, so that, at the prevailing vulnerability, if we have a good fit, then we judge it will be profitable to compete.
2. 2♦ = NAT. Some players like to restrict the UNT to "weak" or "strong" hands, so they wouldn't use it with an "intermediate" hand like this. IMO, there's little point in such exceptions.
3. Pass = NAT. At this vulnerability 2N is borderline.
4. 2♣ = NAT. A poor choice because it makes it harder to show your shape.

[MrAce]

[hv=pc=n&s=st853ht96dkt3c954&w=sqj64hqj2dj4ckjt3&n=sak97hak754d752c8&e=s2h83daq986caq762]399|300[/hv]

 

This is a possible deal. There is no game for East West. If East passes South will pass and so I guess will West. For plus 110 to 170, depending on play in spades, to NS.

If East bids 2N N S may well compete to 4H and East West can choose to defend and go for a probable 420 or 300 in 5Cx

I agree that on this hand NS are unlikely to go all the way to 4H, but I think East will be shooting himself in the foot more often than not

 

1. On which planet S passes if E passes but competes to 4♥ if E bids 2 NT? If anything, South will do the opposite or just pass in both auctions.
2. On which planet can NS make 10 tricks even if they play double dummy? Are you joking or miscounting your tricks?
3. Why are you trying to change the subject when my reply was due to your "We have no chance of game our way"?
4. How about trying to change diamonds of NS and give South a ♥ A or K instead , where 3 NT would be cold for EW ?

[nekthen]

OK I have analysed the hands with a proper tool 4♥ is not making but neither is 3N making for East even with Kings swapped around

I may have overstated it by saying no chance of game but it seems slim to me

Maybe someone with a hand generator can work out how often EW have game compared to NS

[Fluffy]

When my favorite partner, Bob, was alive, we were adamant that these two-suited bids like the unusual NT should be only 1 of 2 hand types: either weak and sacrifice-orientated or very strong, so strong that you can't tolerate partner passing a bid.

 

When you try to mix in this third type, you force an unnecessary guessing game into your own bidding - IMHO.

 

I would bid 2D and not worry if it didn't work out on this particular hand.

 

I don't mind playing this way, and have played like that many times, although I know most people are dropping this approach (I think because it gives away too much info if you end up defendin)

 

Nevertheless, when you are vulnerable vs not (and also all vul if you want), it is crystal clear that the weak range shouldn't exist, what I did was to clear the gap and use strong or stronger when vulnerable. This hand would be at the lower edge of strong as The Badger noted.

 

 

[MrAce]

OK I have analysed the hands with a proper tool 4♥ is not making but neither is 3N making for East even with Kings swapped around

I may have overstated it by saying no chance of game but it seems slim to me

Maybe someone with a hand generator can work out how often EW have game compared to NS

 

1. I did not say swing the kings but diamonds.
2. It is not all about making game. I can construct hands where they reach 3 NT from South and your side may need the correct lead and tempo to defeat them,. It is also about the partscore competition where your side has 9 tricks and they have 8 tricks so pushing them to 3 may gain. Your 2 NT is sort of preemptive bid and they may miss the game. Or they may miss their 4-4 ♠ fir and play the wrong game or partscore or due to not knowing ♠ fit they may just bail out to your 3m partscore. Or your side may have 10 tricks in a minor where they have 10 tricks in a major.
3. Of course like most things in bridge it has drawbacks. By bidding 2 NT you may be giving them info how to play their game or you may go for big minus number. Overall in the long run I do not think it will be anywhere close to shooting yourself in the foot. Pass is reasonable and I am not against it at these colors but personally I would bid with this hand and colors. But I think you are overstating the bad things that can happen. Even when you step into a disaster, one of the MOST under performed things at bridge, even by best players, is partcore penalties. But as I said, I have sympathy to pass even though it would not be my choice.

[Caitlynne]

First, I do agree that there are three obvious calls to consider,but they are not 2C, 2D, and 2NT; they are Pass, 2D, and 2NT. 2C risks losing the diamond suit because, even if you get another chance to make an unusual NT bid, you will have shown diamonds that are shorter in length than you clubs.

 

Pass should be considered - especially at this vulnerability - given the lack of bolstering lower honors/intermediates to support your high honors in your long suits.

 

Nevertheless, I prefer 2NT. It is risky, but it is also risky to call Pass. Your side could very well be making a minor suit part-score (or even a game). What's more, you have defense, so if partner chooses to double and defend, partner should not be disappointed in what you have to contribute to the campaign.

[msjennifer]

My bid is 2 Diamond.I am not brave enough to bid 2NT which this hand with the given vul does not qualify.Add two minor suit Knaves in place of one small in each minor and my bid will be 2NT.

[ggwhiz]

I'm a passer and it's based solidly on our partnership style.

 

Partner can have 11 that some would open just as easily as nothing but if 1♥ is passed to them they don't even need a heart stopper to balance with 1nt or a 5th spade to bid those.

 

With modest to nonexistent game ambitions it's a pass and balance hand and red v white dives are not on our radar. 2nt bids on these colours are almost always 6-5 with at least a mediocre shot at making game.

 

2nt at my next turn (when appropriate) is more descriptive in shape AND strength. I would risk that just about anytime the bid is still available and expect partners further decisions to be better informed.

[Winstonm]

I don't mind playing this way, and have played like that many times, although I know most people are dropping this approach (I think because it gives away too much info if you end up defendin)

 

Nevertheless, when you are vulnerable vs not (and also all vul if you want), it is crystal clear that the weak range shouldn't exist, what I did was to clear the gap and use strong or stronger when vulnerable. This hand would be at the lower edge of strong as The Badger noted.

 

My view is that adverse vulnerability means more playing strength is needed for the weaker hands - more like 6-5 and quite good suits.

 

I understand that modern style is more optimistic. I can't help it - I'm old. ;)

[MrAce]

My view is that adverse vulnerability means more playing strength is needed for the weaker hands - more like 6-5 and quite good suits.

 

........... I can't help it - I'm old. ;)

 

How old? http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif

[dave_beer]

A matter of agreement.

 

The older style for both unusual NT overcalls and Michaels cue-bids was split range, i.e., either save-oriented or hands strong enough so that there would be a good chance to make if partner took the save. The strong hand might take another call even if partner passed.

 

The modern style is continuous range, i.e., just get your shape into the auction and hope to be able to sort it out.

 

Playing split range, the given hand falls in the middle and you bid 2♦ hoping to bid ♣ next if the level is convenient; playing continuous range, you bid 2NT.

[aguahombre]

When my favorite partner, Bob, was alive, we were adamant that these two-suited bids like the unusual NT should be only 1 of 2 hand types: either weak and sacrifice-orientated or very strong, so strong that you can't tolerate partner passing a bid.

 

When you try to mix in this third type, you force an unnecessary guessing game into your own bidding - IMHO.

 

I would bid 2D and not worry if it didn't work out on this particular hand.

At these colors, and opposite a passed hand partner, if you don't bid 2nt you are creating an unnecessary guessing game instead of letting partner select the correct suit. And, you are not gobbling up any room for the opponents to use at the two-level. Even if partner weren't a passed hand, 2nt would be right at red v red or red v white.

 

Regarding 'split range', fine. But it should mean the lower range is appropriate for the colors and the higher one is a moose. This one is not the "third type" to which you referred.

[wank]

 

Playing split range, the given hand falls in the middle and you bid 2♦ hoping to bid ♣ next if the level is convenient; playing continuous range, you bid 2NT.

 

well that's just silly, because there are no hands weaker than this which can bid 2nt

[Nabooba]

When my favorite partner, Bob, was alive, we were adamant that these two-suited bids like the unusual NT should be only 1 of 2 hand types: either weak and sacrifice-orientated or very strong, so strong that you can't tolerate partner passing a bid.

 

When you try to mix in this third type, you force an unnecessary guessing game into your own bidding - IMHO.

 

I would bid 2D and not worry if it didn't work out on this particular hand.

 

This is a poor philosophy. Show your shape first and then worry about the strength.