Your bid.

[Zelandakh]

There is certainly (much) worse out there!

A couple of additional entries from poorbridge:-

Gorski

Matic

[Zelandakh]

Thanks a lot for your kind suggestions ,uncle Zealandakh.As a matter of fact,we do have different hand treatments for distributional hands after an intervention .However space limitations forbid me from discussing them right now.Perhaps,some other occasion!

Space limitation is certainly the name of the game after 3NT. ;) B-)

[forgo]

Partner has a very nice hand... probably a solid 6 card club suit , maybe A Q of spades.. i hope not. would love for p to

have just the ace of spades and k of hearts!!! because i am jumping to 6 hearts over the 3nt.. maybe we can make 7!!

i think 4 spades a very misleading bid over 4nt,,

[miamijd]

I still don't understand why partner can't have something like:

 

KQT x Kxxx AQJxx

 

Maybe someone can explain to me how partner should bid this hand other than 3NT at his second turn.

 

Cheers,

Mike

[MrAce]

I still don't understand why partner can't have something like:

 

KQT x Kxxx AQJxx

 

Maybe someone can explain to me how partner should bid this hand other than 3NT at his second turn.

 

Cheers,

Mike

 

I don't know why you keep writing things as if anyone here said 3 NT bid showed giant hands only. Alex wrote it is either 18-19 or mediocre semi balanced or unbalanced hands that could not open 1 NT.

 

 

With this hand pd bids and plays 4 NT over 4♠ or we bid and play 5♥

With 18-19 balanced he bids slam himself or cues 5♠ or offers you to make a choice via 5 NT over 4♠. These require agreements about which of them means what.

With Club oriented hands he should either bid slam or 5 ♣ depending on his values.

 

With all due respect, just because pd can hold a hand with 5♣+4♦ and a hand only and only a diamond contract prevails, does not mean 4♦ here over 3 NT should show only 4 of them.

 

 

[miamijd]

I don't know why you keep writing things as if anyone here said 3 NT bid showed giant hands only. Alex wrote it is either 18-19 or mediocre semi balanced or unbalanced hands that could not open 1 NT.

 

 

With this hand pd bids and plays 4 NT over 4♠ or we bid and play 5♥

With 18-19 balanced he bids slam himself or cues 5♠ or offers you to make a choice via 5 NT over 4♠. These require agreements about which of them means what.

With Club oriented hands he should either bid slam or 5 ♣ depending on his values.

 

With all due respect, just because pd can hold a hand with 5♣+4♦ and a hand only and only a diamond contract prevails, does not mean 4♦ here over 3 NT should show only 4 of them.

 

Timo, I can't see how a treatment of either (A) 18-19 OR (B) mediocre semi balanced or unbalanced hands that could not open 1 NT is workable. If it's the mediocre semi-balanced hand, then 4H could easily be our last makeable game. If it is the 18-19 balanced hand, then we very possibly (even likely) have a slam. How do we investigate without risking going overboard? 4D doesn't really describe the hand (in standard bidding, 4D would be much more of a two-suiter), unless you specifically agree that 4D is a slam try, not diamonds (not a common agreement, and then what do you do with the two-suiters).

 

It seems to me that the 18-19 balanced NT hand is better handled with a 2S bid, followed by 3NT. That leaves the jump to 3NT only being the mediocre semi balanced or unbalanced hands that could not open 1 NT, and then a simple 4H seems best.

 

With your suggested treatment, we end up in 5H when partner has the mediocre hand, and then what happens when partner tables:

 

KQT x KQx KQJTxx

 

Losing 10 IMPs (or 12 if vul; I can't recall). I think there has to be a better way.

 

Cheers,

Mike

[razorsharp]

Pure Goldilocks Syndrome:

 

6!H tastes TOO HOT

4!H tastes TOO COOL

5!H feels juuuuuuuuust right (implies !S control, obviously)

 

Your fault, dear partner :(

[Phil]

I don't see why 3N needs to be 18-19. I can buy it being a trick source or the offshape 15-17. I'm glad no one has suggested 2N is forcing. That is needed for misfits.

 

To show 18-19, clearly cuebidding is better but with 18 and the trick source, 4N is possible,

 

BTW, these issues illustrate why Switch is so effective.

[Winstonm]

Why does everyone think 3NT shows such a strong hand? 2NT wouldn't be forcing here, so 3NT doesn't guarantee extras beyond a hand worth forcing game.

 

It seems to me that partner is likely to have either (1) a spade stop and a long running club suit or (2) a semi-balanced hand with a stiff heart and 15-17 or so:

 

1. Kx xx xx AKQJxxx

or

2. KQxx x Kxx AKJxx

 

With a really good hand, I would hope partner would start with 2S (unspecified good hand) and then clarify things with his next bid (NT, H, or C). Otherwise, you have no way to distinguish a 15 HCP hand from a 19 HCP hand at opener's second turn.

 

With partner opening 1C, it's not likely you belong in diamonds (he would generally open 1D with four of them, and if he has reverse strength, he probably would bid 3D, not 3NT). So the question is whether he can cover 4 losers in a H contract. That means Ac, KQd, and either (x) As or (y) a spade stop and the Kh. Way too much specific stuff to ask for.

 

So maybe I'm daft here, but it seems to me like the prudent course is a 4H signoff.

 

I'm in no position to question your bridge knowledge but I'm curious - it seems to me that a 2NT rebid would show a weak NT hand (as the op states 15-17 nt range). Within this range would be weak misfits, I assume. With game-forcing hands in this sequence, I don't see why normal bidding wouldn't apply, trying to reach the best contract, so there is no rush to jump to 3NT unless to show a big NT range, or so it seems to me.

 

As usual, I could be dead wrong. :P

[MrAce]

Perhaps we are all barking at the wrong tree on this problem and methods in hand.

 

When we open and they overcall, our 2 level new suit responses are F1 like most play. For example

 

 

1♠-(2♣)-2♥ = 9+ is reasonable because opener has a default rebid available.

1♦-(2♣)-2♥ = same because DBL would not show hearts necessarily .

 

But when they overcall 1♠ things change, as in our OP. I think we can make a good case about 2♥ response to be made by hands that are GF. Because

• Opener does not have a default rebid available other than 2 NT which really screws up things
• Double of 1♠ shows 4+ hearts with hands that are less than GF values. Of course you can hold a GF hand with only 4 card ♥
• We can always use 3♥ for 6+ ♥ suit and game invitation hands.

What I suggest is to play these auctions GF.

 

1m-(1♠)-2♥

 

So with hands like xx KJxxx Axx QJx it is better to start DBL instead of 2♥, it is better to start 3♥ with xx AQTxxx Ax xxx and GF hands start 2♥.

This is not something I really thought deep about it, just came as an idea. What do you all think?

[Winstonm]

Perhaps we are all barking at the wrong tree on this problem and methods in hand.

 

When we open and they overcall, our 2 level new suit responses are F1 like most play. For example

 

 

1♠-(2♣)-2♥ = 9+ is reasonable because opener has a default rebid available.

1♦-(2♣)-2♥ = same because DBL would not show hearts necessarily .

 

But when they overcall 1♠ things change, as in our OP. I think we can make a good case about 2♥ response to be made by hands that are GF. Because

• Opener does not have a default rebid available other than 2 NT which really screws up things
• Double of 1♠ shows 4+ hearts with hands that are less than GF values. Of course you can hold a GF hand with only 4 card ♥
• We can always use 3♥ for 6+ ♥ suit and game invitation hands.

What I suggest is to play these auctions GF.

 

1m-(1♠)-2♥

 

So with hands like xx KJxxx Axx QJx it is better to start DBL instead of 2♥, it is better to start 3♥ with xx AQTxxx Ax xxx and GF hands start 2♥.

This is not something I really thought deep about it, just came as an idea. What do you all think?

 

I believe this is good thinking. IMO, with interference the 2-level bids are usually conceded to be played similar to SAYC - for me, promising a second bid unless partner makes a minimum rebid of some sort. The problem with SAYC is that it is somewhat of a blunderbuss as you have to do a lot of jumping around to show strength - here 4H over 2H.

 

If you assign a forcing meaning to 2H, you are back to 2/1 accuracy. The question is as always: adopting this what bids and hands do we lose?

 

One caveat: if you double with xx, KJxxx, Axx, QJx, should opener make a support double if 4th seat bids 2S?

[MrAce]

 

 

One caveat: if you double with xx, KJxxx, Axx, QJx, should opener make a support double if 4th seat bids 2S?

 

could be but supp-X usually played where it allows us to play at 2 level and not having to end up at 3 level with a 4-3 fit. So I do not think it is a good idea to play this a support double unless it requires some extras.

[broze]

 

What I suggest is to play these auctions GF.

 

...

 

What do you all think?

 

Not bad but I think it is better to simply play transfers when they overcall 1S. Works vey well and is not really very memory heavy.

[CodeByJim]

The ♣ opener indicates 13+ hcp and looking for a major. The ♠ bid indicates 8+ hcp. Tells S that opener is 3-3 or more likely 4-2 in majors. The South bid of 2♥ tells the opener that you have 9+ hcp and that our team can play at the 3 level. It is up to the opener to show more about his hand. Opener's 3nt is a close out bid, limiting his hand to 13- hcp. Bad Bid!

Openers 2nd bid must define his strong Minor which is, in all likelihood, the ♦ since the ♣ were opened. Therefor N should say 3 ♦. If ♣ is his suit, he rebids them and south can set the contract at 4♥. If N bids 3♦, S knows immediately that they have slam potential. All he has to do is find the other two aces. I would do this with a 4♣ Gerber bid. If N holds both Aces, South sets the contract at 6♥. If N has less than 2, South can query the Kings using Sliding Gerber (4nt). Since S has no Kings, this response is critical. In my world, if Gerber didn't yield 2 Aces, I would close out the bidding at 4♥. If the finesses are successfully run thru E, 6♥ might be made with N having only 1 Ace.

 

Have fun! Be Happy!

[Zelandakh]

Hi Jim - welcome to the BBO forums. You have some interesting ideas here but I think you are confused as to the system in play.

The ♣ opener indicates 13+ hcp and looking for a major.

Actually not. North would open 1♣ with any weak NT hand or indeed with 7 clubs.

 

The ♠ bid indicates 8+ hcp.

Many pairs routinely overcall lighter than this, particularly at these colours.

 

 

Tells S that opener is 3-3 or more likely 4-2 in majors.

Why is this? Opener could easily be 2137 for example. This goes back to your original assertion that Opener has shown interest in the majors.

 

 

The South bid of 2♥ tells the opener that you have 9+ hcp and that our team can play at the 3 level. It is up to the opener to show more about his hand. Opener's 3nt is a close out bid, limiting his hand to 13- hcp. Bad Bid!

Here you show a remarkable inconsistency within a single passage. If South is showing 9+hcp, why would Opener jump to 3NT with 13hcp? Is it your habit voluntarily to reach 3NT with any shared 22hcp? A more mainstream approach is for Opener to rebid 2NT with a weak NT and for the jump in NT to show a better hand.

 

 

Openers 2nd bid must define his strong Minor which is, in all likelihood, the ♦ since the ♣ were opened. Therefor N should say 3 ♦.

If this is the meaning of 3♦, what would Opener do with 5+♣4♦ and extras?

 

 

If ♣ is his suit, he rebids them and south can set the contract at 4♥. If N bids 3♦, S knows immediately that they have slam potential. All he has to do is find the other two aces. I would do this with a 4♣ Gerber bid.

1♣ - (1♠) - 2♥; 3♦ - 4♣ is Gerber? Good luck with that!

 

 

In my world,

You certainly live in a weird and wonderful world!