Problem of bidding

[FelicityR]

I would love to know how an expert bidding panel or a top pair would approach this hand. The results could prove interesting (!)

 

I'll put my pension on most expert pairs stopping in 3♦ or 4♦ whatever bidding system they use. Yes, there will be some in a 3NT or 5♦ but I am sure they will be in the minority.

 

Opener has a good hand but no fit for partner; responder has a poor hand. That's it. Between them they should be able to pull the safety brake before ending in game.

 

4♦ could possibly go down, but there are various chances that it will make, too.

[Cyberyeti]

What would you use the sequence 1D-1H-2S for? Given that this nine-playing-trick hand makes game opposite 109XX XXXXX X XXX or AX XXXXX X XXXXX, it looks like a game force to me. Or do you have some other use for this sequence?

 

As an aside, I see that your second auction demonstrates an example of 4th suit forcing by opener. :)

 

Yup, because diamonds have been at least reluctantly agreed, so 3♣ is just a forcing noise

 

We use a jump rebid as 2 good suits but not a massive point count hand, so KQJxx/AKxxxxx the huge hand goes thru a GF art unbal 2N rebid..

[Povratnik]

How was that non-natural? It showed spades, and that's what he had.

 

It may have been an underbid, but that's not the same thing.

I agree that 1♠ is not non-natural, but I don't agree it's only an underbid. It unnecessary obscures the distribution. In most natural systems, 2♠ suggests a strong, unbalanced hand, with 5+ diamonds. In many systems, 1♠ could be ♠AKJ9, ♥72, ♦KQ85, ♣532.

 

I really disagree with those ones who assume that 2♠ is GF. It is, if there is an explicit agreement. If not, it's only a forcing for a round. Even that isn't in 210% of cases...

[Stephen Tu]

I really disagree with those ones who assume that 2♠ is GF. It is, if there is an explicit agreement. If not, it's only a forcing for a round. Even that isn't in 210% of cases...

 

That may be a regional distinction. In America jump shifts by opener are definitely GF without explicit agreements otherwise.

[bluenikki]

What would you use the sequence 1D-1H-2S for? Given that this nine-playing-trick hand makes game opposite 109XX XXXXX X XXX or AX XXXXX X XXXXX, it looks like a game force to me. Or do you have some other use for this sequence?

 

As an aside, I see that your second auction demonstrates an example of 4th suit forcing by opener. :)

 

It's 4th suit and it's forcing in some sense but it's not the convention 4th-suit-forcing.

[Povratnik]

That may be a regional distinction. In America jump shifts by opener are definitely GF without explicit agreements otherwise.

Even in SAYC? I didn't know that. Somehow assumed that SAYC is very similar to what I play...

 

EDIT:

I should ask, but forgot... So the auction: 1♥-1♠-3♥ - is also GF?

[bluenikki]

Even in SAYC? I didn't know that. Somehow assumed that SAYC is very similar to what I play...

 

EDIT:

I should ask, but forgot... So the auction: 1♥-1♠-3♥ - is also GF?

 

Not even forcing for one round. However, any further bid is GF.

 

But 1♥ - 2♣ ; 3♥ is forcing, because responder promised a 2nd bid if opener rebid below game. The jump rebid *should* be GF, but the SAYC definition document doesn't say so.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&w=skqj8h3dakqjt83c9&e=s95hkjt64d62c7653&d=w&v=e&a=1dp1hp1sp2hp3cppp]200|300| 120248 "bidding problem. It was a disaster. 3♣ was a way to find a stopper. I thought it was forcing. What went wrong?"

 

+++++++++++++++++++

Hands rotated E-W. Hard hands to bid. IMO

- 1♦ = OK.

- 1♥ = OK but Pass works better.

- 1♠ = Reasonable, given the apparent misfit.

- 2♥ = Exaggeration, 2♦ or even pass would be better.

- 3♣ = Prefer 3♦ but many play 3♣ as forcing (4th suit/new suit at the 3-level).[/hv]

[thepossum]

Certainly no expert but I would on some days open 2C, then its 2D-3D - who knows what next, and who decides to stop and realises theres no hope

 

Maybe 2C-2D-3D-3H-3S-4D-Pass

 

Or 2C-2D-3D-3H-4D-Pass

 

Or 2C-2D-3D-Pass

[AL78]

If indeed the opener wishes to play in a D/S game or any other game for that matter he would open 2♣ as I have already pointed out.

 

Not in my neck of the woods. I play a 2♣ opening as showing a game going hand even if partner holds a bust. The hand in question is not strong enough to force to game from the opening bid, but is strong enough to force to game if partner has the values to respond to a 1-suit opening (5+ HCP). The key point being partner has shown values with their 1♥ response.

 

The hand in question most closely resembles an Acol strong two in a minor, and with a couple of my partners I would treat it as that and open a multi 2♦, bidding 3♦ after the 2♥ relay. On this deal I would luck out as partner may well pass with that potentially useless 4 count contributing no more than one trick.

[Cyberyeti]

Not in my neck of the woods. I play a 2♣ opening as showing a game going hand even if partner holds a bust. The hand in question is not strong enough to force to game from the opening bid, but is strong enough to force to game if partner has the values to respond to a 1-suit opening (5+ HCP). The key point being partner has shown values with their 1♥ response.

 

The hand in question most closely resembles an Acol strong two in a minor, and with a couple of my partners I would treat it as that and open a multi 2♦, bidding 3♦ after the 2♥ relay. On this deal I would luck out as partner may well pass with that potentially useless 4 count contributing no more than one trick.

 

It's relatively common here to play 2♣ followed by anything other than 2N as GF

 

If you pass 3♦ after 2♦-2♥ you'll find partner has ♥AQxx rather than ♠KQJx, you may get to play 4♦.