Awkward hand to deal with

[mr1303_2]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa843hakqj8dak93c&n=s9h54dj542cqjt863&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=2c(I%20didn't%20like%20this%2C%20but%20surely%20the%20hand%20is%20too%20good%20for%201H%3F)p(West%20would%20overcall%202S%20if%20I'd%20started%20with%201H)2dp2hp2n(3C%20would%20be%20a%20second%20negative)p3dp5d(Any%20thoughts%20as%20to%203H%3F)p6d(A%20guess)ppp]266|200[/hv]

 

Just played this hand vs GIB. Standard 2/1, so the alerts are my thoughts about each bid.

 

6D came in, but I wasn't happy with the bidding here. What else would you do differently? If you start with 1H, LHO would overcall 2S (don't know why it didn't over 2C) and it would come back to you.

[bilalz]

In my opinion the bidding from North was quite ok. 3H from North would depend on partnership agreement but I would also bid 5D to show my 4 diamonds and a hand with no help in case opener is searching for slam. The 6d from south was a pure guess and risky but hardly the worst bid ever. I would pass 5D as partner knows about my strength and has chosen this bid (4d was available as any sort of slam try in diamonds).

[Tramticket]

I wouldn't open a strong 2♣ with a marginal three-suited hand. It is difficult to find the best fit when you have three suits to offer, so why waste a whole round of bidding? I would open 1♥.

 

I would double when 2♠ comes back. After partner's 3♣ response, I will bid cue-bid their suit and then over (say) 4♣ I bid 4♦. I think that this shows my values.

[mikeh]

I wouldn't open a strong 2♣ with a marginal three-suited hand. It is difficult to find the best fit when you have three suits to offer, so why waste a whole round of bidding? I would open 1♥.

 

I would double when 2♠ comes back. After partner's 3♣ response, I will bid cue-bid their suit and then over (say) 4♣ I bid 4♦. I think that this shows my values.

After 1H (2S) P (P)

 

double is takeout, catering to partner's possible penalty double (which of course we know he doesn't have). I think double is ill-conceived since partner did not make a negative double, and we have a lot of spade losers, but I can understand the action. Personally, I'd simply bid 3D if this were mps, leaving the double for imps, and probably only when red. Yes, I know I have a big hand, but guess what? This big hand has gone down in value markedly on this auction.

 

After partner's predictable 3C, a cuebid by us is a strong action in support of clubs! If we want to bid diamonds naturally, we have to do it over 3C.

 

After we have bid 3S and partner bids 4C, 4D is a cuebid in support of clubs.

 

This is a matter of bridge logic. To claim that one can double, then cue-bid and then show one's second suit at the 4-level is allowing what you'd like to do to influence what your actions mean. The best way to avoid this is to try to place yourself in partner's shoes, while 'forgetting' what you actually hold. This is very difficult to do with any semblance of objectivity, but not doing so leads one down these fundamentally wrong ways of thinking, where disaster lurks.

[rhm]

I wouldn't open a strong 2♣ with a marginal three-suited hand. It is difficult to find the best fit when you have three suits to offer, so why waste a whole round of bidding? I would open 1♥.

 

I would double when 2♠ comes back. After partner's 3♣ response, I will bid cue-bid their suit and then over (say) 4♣ I bid 4♦. I think that this shows my values.

What is marginal about this hand escapes me.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

In my opinion the bidding from North was quite ok. 3H from North would depend on partnership agreement but I would also bid 5D to show my 4 diamonds and a hand with no help in case opener is searching for slam. The 6d from south was a pure guess and risky but hardly the worst bid ever. I would pass 5D as partner knows about my strength and has chosen this bid (4d was available as any sort of slam try in diamonds).

No help?

What would you call North singleton spade? A liability?

If you think North is too weak to splinter, then he should have made a second negative (2NT looks very dubious) to be able to splinter.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[Vampyr]

Hi Mike!

[GrahamJson]

I have to agree with Rainer on this one; it looks like a more than respectable 2C opener to me.

 

After a 2C-2D-2H start I prefer 3C on the north hand rather than a second negative. Then I suggest 3D-3H, which must show doubleton support. This should enable you to finish in 4H, which looks a good spot to me. Alternatively if north raises diamonds you will probably end up in 5D, although I think a subsequent 4H by south should be passable.

[Vampyr]

I have to agree with Rainer on this one; it looks like a more than respectable 2C opener to me.

 

After a 2C-2D-2H start I prefer 3C on the north hand rather than a second negative. Then I suggest 3D-3H, which must show doubleton support. This should enable you to finish in 4H, which looks a good spot to me. Alternatively if north raises diamonds you will probably end up in 5D, although I think a subsequent 4H by south should be passable.

 

My criterion is that a 2♣ opener is forcing to game unless it is 20-21(22) balanced, so I am not convinced that this is a 2♣ opener.

 

It is a pity the bot plays a second negative, and bizarre because it would be 2NT if available, if I recall correctly from many years ago when these methods were played by humans. Seems like you might as well play Roth; at least you are not showing your second negative at the three level.

[mikeh]

No help?

What would you call North singleton spade? A liability?

If you think North is too weak to splinter, then he should have made a second negative (2NT looks very dubious) to be able to splinter.

 

Rainer Herrmann

Hi Rainer

 

Methods matter.

 

For example, I play 2H immediate negative. I appreciate that there are a lot of players who scoff at this, but I've had my share of successes with it, and better players than I also play it. Fred G. does, as I understand it, and he isn't exactly a weak player:)

 

One of the problem hands for this method is a minimum 2C opening bid with hearts as the primary suit. Kokish allows such hands to be bid very efficiently if partner is kind enough to respond 2D (as will happen most of the time), but over 2H negative one is pretty much forced to use 3H as a gf, and this hand (a) isn't much of a gf opposite a bust and (b) may not time out well in terms of finding a fit.

 

Imo, if one plays 2H immediate negative, when I think that opening 1♥ is a reasonable choice, since one is assured, if the auction continues, of a chance to pattern out while suggesting something close to this strength.

 

One may also find that opening 1H works better than 2C on some hands when one plays control-showing responses to 2C.

 

1H 1N 2S 2N 3D shows ostensibly 4=5=4=0 with gf values opposite a 1N call that is ostensibly 5-12 hcp

 

In addition, if the opps interfere over 2C, one expects that to more likely than not to be in clubs.....we will often find that the auction times out better after 1H (3C) ...(as one example) than if it went 2C (3C), when we have yet to indicate anything about shape.

 

Thus, while I accept a 2C opening bid, I think it unfair to dump on a 1H alternative.

[pescetom]

I wouldn't open a strong 2♣ with a marginal three-suited hand. It is difficult to find the best fit when you have three suits to offer, so why waste a whole round of bidding? I would open 1♥.

 

I would double when 2♠ comes back. After partner's 3♣ response, I will bid cue-bid their suit and then over (say) 4♣ I bid 4♦. I think that this shows my values.

 

 

After 1H (2S) P (P)

 

double is takeout, catering to partner's possible penalty double (which of course we know he doesn't have). I think double is ill-conceived since partner did not make a negative double, and we have a lot of spade losers, but I can understand the action. Personally, I'd simply bid 3D if this were mps, leaving the double for imps, and probably only when red. Yes, I know I have a big hand, but guess what? This big hand has gone down in value markedly on this auction.

 

After partner's predictable 3C, a cuebid by us is a strong action in support of clubs! If we want to bid diamonds naturally, we have to do it over 3C.

 

After we have bid 3S and partner bids 4C, 4D is a cuebid in support of clubs.

 

 

What is marginal about this hand escapes me.

 

I imagine that by marginal @Tramticket intended the risk of partner passing, i.e. whether or not such a hand requires protection of 2♣.

And I can see the meaning that a cue-bid of ♠ would have in his system, although I prefer to play it as a positive show of fit in ♣.

 

For all the rest I quote @mikeh.

[Cyberyeti]

I have to agree with Rainer on this one; it looks like a more than respectable 2C opener to me.

 

After a 2C-2D-2H start I prefer 3C on the north hand rather than a second negative. Then I suggest 3D-3H, which must show doubleton support. This should enable you to finish in 4H, which looks a good spot to me. Alternatively if north raises diamonds you will probably end up in 5D, although I think a subsequent 4H by south should be passable.

 

Will people actually read the comments on the auction, OP states on the 2N bid that 3♣ WOULD BE THE SECOND NEGATIVE

 

The question is what then does 2N mean, is it balanced single negative or does it show clubs, I've played it both ways in different partnerships.

[GrahamJson]

Ok, game is not 100% certain opposite every possible dummy, but if you wait for such hands you will hardly ever open 2C. For example you would want to be in game opposite xxxx xxx xxx xxx.

 

Another reason for opening 2C is that it would be impossible to show your strength if you just opened 1H. Presumably if north responded 1S you would splinter with 4C. Then do you go on over partners inevitable 4S sigh off? At least if you open 2C you can sit back knowing you have shown your values.

[Vampyr]

One may also find that opening 1H works better than 2C on some hands when one plays control-showing responses to 2C.

 

LOL I thought Roth was old-fashioned; surely no one plays this anymore!

 

What I have is major suit negatives, also minor suit and mm negatives, to play opposite 20-21 balanced. Super fun if it ever came up.

 

Of course the thing that is tempting about Roth is that you can open 2♣ on suit-oriented hands that aren’t necessarily game opposite a a suitable Yarb. Having dabbled with this and most methods years ago, I must have once known how you establish a GF after the 2♥ response? And are there problems when you have a secondary suit, as you may be dropped in your first one?

 

EDIT: Crossed post above.

[dsLawsd]

Looks like once again we are trying robot bridge which can affect games with real partners.

While 2 clubs is permissible it makes more sense with a 3 suited hand to open 1 Heart. And really 5 diamonds looks fine instead of 6 where in reality we are shooting to win an individual tourn instead.

 

As is often the case robots cannot bid these hands = 2 nt as a second negative just makes life worse.

[mikeh]

Ok, game is not 100% certain opposite every possible dummy, but if you wait for such hands you will hardly ever open 2C. For example you would want to be in game opposite xxxx xxx xxx xxx.

 

Another reason for opening 2C is that it would be impossible to show your strength if you just opened 1H. Presumably if north responded 1S you would splinter with 4C. Then do you go on over partners inevitable 4S sigh off? At least if you open 2C you can sit back knowing you have shown your values.

LOL

 

Do I want to be in 4S opposite xxxx xxx xxx xxx?

 

Yes I do

 

Do I think I have a hope in hell of reaching 4S after opening 2C?

 

Not a chance

 

Do I want to be in 4H opposite that hand?

 

No I don't. A club lead seems almost assured, and now how am I building 10 tricks, even if I can hold my diamond losers to 1 and trump break 3-2?

 

Ok, it is 'possible' but requires that the diamond Q come down stiff or doubleton, and that both majors break 3-2. Not my idea of a good contract even red at imps.

 

Now, I won't be the least bit surprised to read posts where players who have never won anything significant claim that they and their partner would be able to reach 4S after opening 2C. I just won't believe them.

 

Back in the real world for a moment, obviously opening 1H is not risk-free. However, my experience has been that the hand is rarely passed out when one holds a void. Meanwhile it is naïve to suggest that on the one hand 1H is risky because we may miss a game and on the other that there are no downsides to opening 2C and then trying to show one's shape starting a level (or more) higher.

 

I happen to think that 2C is marginally the better call on this hand. I just happen to disagree with those who think it to be clear-cut and, especially, with those whose arguments make no sense.

[Stephen Tu]

Uh, what's so hard about reaching 4s?

 

Kokish:

 

2c 2d

2h 2s

3s 4s

 

Or not playing Kokish, just bid 2nd neg, opener bids 3s for the same thing.

[rhm]

Hi Rainer

 

Methods matter.

 

For example, I play 2H immediate negative. I appreciate that there are a lot of players who scoff at this, but I've had my share of successes with it, and better players than I also play it. Fred G. does, as I understand it, and he isn't exactly a weak player:)

 

One of the problem hands for this method is a minimum 2C opening bid with hearts as the primary suit. Kokish allows such hands to be bid very efficiently if partner is kind enough to respond 2D (as will happen most of the time), but over 2H negative one is pretty much forced to use 3H as a gf, and this hand (a) isn't much of a gf opposite a bust and (b) may not time out well in terms of finding a fit.

 

Imo, if one plays 2H immediate negative, when I think that opening 1♥ is a reasonable choice, since one is assured, if the auction continues, of a chance to pattern out while suggesting something close to this strength.

 

One may also find that opening 1H works better than 2C on some hands when one plays control-showing responses to 2C.

 

1H 1N 2S 2N 3D shows ostensibly 4=5=4=0 with gf values opposite a 1N call that is ostensibly 5-12 hcp

 

In addition, if the opps interfere over 2C, one expects that to more likely than not to be in clubs.....we will often find that the auction times out better after 1H (3C) ...(as one example) than if it went 2C (3C), when we have yet to indicate anything about shape.

 

Thus, while I accept a 2C opening bid, I think it unfair to dump on a 1H alternative.

Mikeh,

 

I understand if you do open 1♥ instead of 2♣.

There are wins and losses either way.

But do not claim this to be a marginal hand for opening 2♣. This is a very strong hand and a fit is a priory likely somewhere, which of course finding is also the problem.

The only risk is not only that you languish at the one-level if you open 1♥.

It will often be very hard to convince partner with a weak hand that his meager values are sufficient not for game but slam.

The guesswork will continue after the one level opening and the strong hand will get little cooperation in many cases.

 

Of course there are different methods showing very weak hands after 2♣.

But given the actual methods used I still think 3♣ is a better rebid than 2NT.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[Cyberyeti]

Uh, what's so hard about reaching 4s?

 

Kokish:

 

2c 2d

2h 2s

3s 4s

 

Or not playing Kokish, just bid 2nd neg, opener bids 3s for the same thing.

 

Then partner will have a diamond fit, you rebid 3♦ over 2♠, then when partner bids 3♥ you bid 3♠ which should be natural here as 3♥ can be very false preference.

[msjennifer]

We do not open this hand 2C.We open 1H and if LHO bids 2S and it goes pass pass we bid 3D and will quietly settle in 5D.4H can go into difficulties on a club lead if hearts do not behave.Personally speaking ,I will prefer playing in 4H at match points.

[rmnka447]

I have absolutely no problem with a 2 ♣ opening on this hand as it is a 3 loser hand.

 

Under the agreements in place, where a second negative is available, it's worthwhile to use 2 NT as an undefined positive showing 5-20 value and no other particular better bid/feature to show. Since 3 ♣ in this context is the second negative, then opener should take into account that the 2 NT bid might include a positive hand with a ♣ suit. Using 2 NT in this manner provides a way to confirm that game and possibly slam are still targets while saving bidding space and letting the strong hand to continue telling its story.

 

Opener knows several things about responder's hand. Responder doesn't have a decent 5+ ♠ suit else 2 ♠ would be bid. Responder probably doesn't have a ♥ fit else some raise could have been made. Responder doesn't have a decent 5+ ♦ suit else 3 ♦ was a possibility.

 

5 ♦ by responder is a signoff showing no slam interest. 4 ♦ would be forward going slam positive. The alternative bid to 5 ♦ might be 3 ♥ which would be made presumably with a doubleton. Then the issue would be what would 3 ♠ by opener show? Would it be the exact hand shown here? Or, might it be something like ♠ AQx ♥ AKQJx ♠ AKxx ♣ x looking for 3 NT? I'm not sure I'd have good answers to those questions.

 

Anyhow, 6 ♦ is a shot that luckily finds responder with a stiff ♠.

 

I'm not sure that I wouldn't bid 3 ♣ negative with the responding hand and make a more forward going over opener's next bid.

[mr1303_2]

If you start with 1H, would you not bid 3D with a good looking 14/15 count with 5-5 in the reds?

 

Something like x AKxxx KQxxx Kx

 

In which case after 1H (2S) P P 3D P I think the North hand has an easy pass?

[Vampyr]

Then partner will have a diamond fit, you rebid 3♦ over 2♠, then when partner bids 3♥ you bid 3♠ which should be natural here as 3♥ can be very false preference.

 

I like this. You can show all three suits at a low level. I respect mikeh as a player but will never switch from Kokish.

[mikeh]

I like this. You can show all three suits at a low level. I respect mikeh as a player but will never switch from Kokish.

I ought to have specified that I was writing within the context of my earlier posts where, iirc, I said that I use 2H immediate 2nd negative. In that context, opposite the proposed xxxx xxx xxx xxx, I have to bid 3H over the 2H response. Now it is impossible to find 4S

 

Btw, I am a big beleiver in kokish, but feel it works best in the context of 2H negative. For those who play cheaper minor second negative, and thus respond 2D with a wide range of hands, including very weak ones, when do you slow down after opener rebids 2H?

 

I think it very poor bridge to have a kokish sequence to, say, 3S and never have had responder say anything at all about size or shape. When I have a kokish sequence, responder has already promised game force responding values

[Tramticket]

My post yesterday was not very well thought out.

 

What is marginal about this hand escapes me.

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

Yes, of course this is a very strong hand. I don't disagree.

 

My point was that it can often be difficult to find your best fit on three-suited hands if you start at the two level. A 1♥ opening runs a small risk that you will be left to play the this contract. Holding a 21-point hand, there are 19 points available and if partner doesn't have the values to respond there is a good chance that an opponent will keep the auction alive, making a 1♥ opening relatively safe. If the hand contained more HCP, there would be a greater risk that the auction would be passed out, since it is more likely that partner and the opponents would not have the values to compete. When I said "marginal" I should probably have uased the term "low HCP".

 

After partner's predictable 3C, a cuebid by us is a strong action in support of clubs! If we want to bid diamonds naturally, we have to do it over 3C.

 

After we have bid 3S and partner bids 4C, 4D is a cuebid in support of clubs.

 

 

You are clearly correct Mike. A re-opening double followed by 3♦ over the predictable 3♣ is more sensible.