3217 progressive

[nullve]

If I reverse into 2H and get raised, we have at least a 5-3 spade fit and my 3S bid tells that loud and clear.

 

If partner cuebids, I can keycard and, believe me, will know what to bid. If partner ever keycards, then if he announces we have them all, once again I know what to do.

 

And both of us know spades are trump. I can’t imagine any competent player feeling any confusion at all. While having only 2 hearts is very unusual, having 3 is fairly normal with a 3=3=1=6 too strong for a 3C rebid. So when I bid 3S over the feared 3H, no player beyond a novice should be confused.

 

Let me first say that I really like the idea that

 

1♣-1♠

2♥-3♥

3♠

 

cancels hearts as trumps. But I doubt that is equally obvious everywhere in the world.

 

In Norwegian 2/1, the strong 2♣ opening is not actually borrowed from American 2/1, but has evolved from an opening called Halle's 2♣ that originally showed something like 19-21 hcp with any shape OR a Culbertson 2♣ opening. (The 2♦, 2♥ and 2♠ openings were the same as in Culbertson.) Today it is almost indistinguishable from its American counterpart but even very strong players still use it on Acol Two-strength one-suiters to solve rebid problems. I believe this is true of Brogeland-Lindqvist, for instance, so I'd be (mildly) shocked if they had this auction (or the T-Walsh equivalent) and 3♠ were not intended as a cuebid with hearts as trumps.

[fromageGB]

Minimal 2♣ open. If partner has a trick I am happy to go at least 5♣, if not I can subside in 3♣. I would certainly not be happy with a NT rebid after a 1-open!

[LBengtsson]

Cyberyeti says: The problem auction is that you could be facing 1♣-1♠-2♥-4♥ and now for us 4♠ is kickback (what else does partner bid with Kxxxx, Jxxxx, Qx, x).

 

We are fortunate to have the artificial 2N rebid, but without it I wonder if 3♦ is better than 2♥ ? a 4-3 spade fit might well not be too bad if partner's suit is decent and we may be able to bail back into the club slam if partner shows ♠KQ and an ace or ♠K no Q and the ♥A.

 

Nullve says: Let me first say that I really like the idea that

 

1♣-1♠

2♥-3♥

3♠

 

cancels hearts as trumps. But I doubt that is equally obvious everywhere in the world.

 

In Norwegian 2/1, the strong 2♣ opening is not actually borrowed from American 2/1, but has evolved from an opening called Halle's 2♣ that originally showed something like 19-21 hcp with any shape OR a Culbertson 2♣ opening. (The 2♦, 2♥ and 2♠ openings were the same as in Culbertson.) Today it is almost indistinguishable from its American counterpart but even very strong players still use it on Acol Two-strength one-suiters to solve rebid problems. I believe this is true of Brogeland-Lindqvist, for instance, so I'd be (mildly) shocked if they had this auction (or the T-Walsh equivalent) and 3♠ were not intended as a cuebid with hearts as trumps.

 

Lars says: this is why I feel a fake reverse can go wrong. on nullve's auction, it is not obvious except if you have a specific agreement with partner, that 3♠ is preferred 3 card support and cancels ♥ as trump. (I had not thought of cyberyeti's kickback auction but valid also)

[mikeh]

I agree, it IS an offer to play there , but would it be better to reserve the jump to 3nt for these gambling+ hands?

A hand that would bid 3nt over a l level response from partner can use a reverse to force game, it's going to be less of a distortion and it permits you to show this type of hand with the 3nt rebid.

Why do you want to offer to play in 3N with A109 in partner’s spade suit, AKQJxxx in your club suit and a stiff diamond?

 

I simply don’t understand the logic even if it were possible that partner may have bypassed a diamond suit to bid 1S, as is common for many (but by no means all) 2/1 players. You said earlier that partner won’t do that.

 

That has 2 implications. One is that partner will have 5+ spades much of the time. The other is that, when he has only 4 spades, the opponents hold a lot of diamonds. Both implications make 3N a huge gamble, likely an unnecessary one.

[jillybean]

Why do you want to offer to play in 3N with A109 in partner’s spade suit, AKQJxxx in your club suit and a stiff diamond?

 

I simply don’t understand the logic even if it were possible that partner may have bypassed a diamond suit to bid 1S, as is common for many (but by no means all) 2/1 players. You said earlier that partner won’t do that.

 

That has 2 implications. One is that partner will have 5+ spades much of the time. The other is that, when he has only 4 spades, the opponents hold a lot of diamonds. Both implications make 3N a huge gamble, likely an unnecessary one.

 

Mike, I agree that how I, and most others would play, 1m 1M 3nt is an offer to play in 3nt and I do not want to offer to play in 3nt with this hand.

 

I am discussing 3nt here being used to show this gambling+ hand, as in David's post, and a hand that would bid 3nt after 1m 1M could go via a reverse, it will be less of a distortion.

 

I have all kinds of widgets and gadgets over 1♣, but in a natural system I think 1X-1Y-3NT should 'always' show a solid 7-card suit with too much outside values for Gambling NT, if you play that. This hand is about a king too strong for that, but it might be the least of all evils.

[jillybean]

[hv=pc=n&s=sk873ha5daj9ct932&w=sq64ht9876dq752c5&n=sat9hkqdtcakqj876&e=sj52hj432dk8643c4&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1cp1sp3cp3np4np]399|300[/hv]

 

Here is the full hand, I am not sure how the bidding continued after 4nt but the auction ended in 5nt.

4♣, even if it is Gerber, is obviously a better route than 3nt.

[Cyberyeti]

[hv=pc=n&s=sk873ha5daj9ct932&w=sq64ht9876dq752c5&n=saj9hkqdkcakqj876&e=st52hj432dt8643c4&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1cp1sp3cp3np4np]399|300[/hv]

 

Here is the full hand, I am not sure how the bidding continued after 4nt but the auction ended in 5nt.

4♣, even if it is Gerber, is obviously a better route than 3nt.

 

Do you have stiff K or stiff 10 of diamonds ? the OP has one, the full hand has the other

[nullve]

North's hand has changed from

 

AT9

KQ

T

AKQJ876

 

to

 

AJ9

KQ

K

AKQJ876

 

.

[mikeh]

The problem auction is that you could be facing 1♣-1♠-2♥-4♥ and now for us 4♠ is kickback (what else does partner bid with Kxxxx, Jxxxx, Qx, x).

 

We are fortunate to have the artificial 2N rebid, but without it I wonder if 3♦ is better than 2♥ ? a 4-3 spade fit might well not be too bad if partner's suit is decent and we may be able to bail back into the club slam if partner shows ♠KQ and an ace or ♠K no Q and the ♥A.

If one plays in a partnership wherein ‘fake’ reverses are an acceptable means of bidding strong, otherwise unbiddable (within the system parameters) hands, then either a jump to 4H is disallowed (my preference) or 4S is excluded from kickback.

 

In the second case, I’d be ok with that. Whatever 4H means, it should deny slam interest opposite a reverse. There’s no need to jump anyway.

 

Playing lebensohl or ingberman (which operate identically in this auction) responder can show a weak hand with 4+ heart support by bidding 2N then 3H and all gf heart raises bid 3H directly.

 

One could also show the weak 5-5 via 2N then 4H.

 

Plus, finally, if one plays Meckwell jumpshifts in response to 1C, wherein a bid of 2H in reply to 1C shows 5+ spades, 4+ hearts and a weak hand, the pressure is off with weak responding hands anyway. As it happens, I play another form of Meckwell, in which we use 2D, by responder, to show that hand, but that doesn’t change the point, which is that one ought not to fear dealing with a 4H raise of one’s 2H reverse.

 

Note how having system agreements, such as permitting fake reverses and/or using lebensohl/ingberman, influences how one sees superficially unrelated auctions proceeding. If one didn’t have lebensohl/ ingberman and also didn’t play Meckwell, then one might need 4H over 2H to show a very different raise than would be shown by 3H. Maybe 4H should be a weak 5-5 hand, as Cyber suggests. However, my strong preference would be for going through lebensohl/ingberman and any serious partnership should employ these or similar gadgets over reverses.

[mikeh]

[hv=pc=n&s=sk873ha5daj9ct932&w=sq64ht9876dq752c5&n=saj9hkqdkcakqj876&e=st52hj432dt8643c4&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1cp1sp3cp3np4np]399|300[/hv]

 

Here is the full hand, I am not sure how the bidding continued after 4nt but the auction ended in 5nt.

4♣, even if it is Gerber, is obviously a better route than 3nt.

Even I open 2C with that new hand. And surely nobody opens 1C then rebids 3C with 23 hcp, unless playing a forcing club method?

[jillybean]

Do you have stiff K or stiff 10 of diamonds ? the OP has one, the full hand has the other

Sorry ♦K is in East's hand - North holds ♦10

[jillybean]

North's hand has changed from

 

AT9

KQ

T

AKQJ876

 

to

 

AJ9

KQ

K

AKQJ876

 

.

Yep, I messed up, posting the hand at 5am. Fixed

[jillybean]

[hv=pc=n&s=sk873ha5daj9ct932&w=sq64ht9876dq752c5&n=sat9hkqdtcakqj876&e=sj52hj432dk8643c4&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1cp1sp3cp3np4np]399|300[/hv]

[smerriman]

Mike, I agree that how I, and most others would play, 1m 1M 3nt is an offer to play in 3nt and I do not want to offer to play in 3nt with this hand.

 

I am discussing 3nt here being used to show this gambling+ hand, as in David's post...

I'm confused. The standard definition of 3NT is a hand with a long running minor - it certainly can't be showing a balanced hand, since you would use a normal 1NT/2NT bid/rebid sequence. If you and "most others" don't play it as this, what do you play it as?

[Cyberyeti]

OK, we'd actually have a completely different auction starting 1♣-2♣ leading to an issue where N can't tell whether S has Kxxx, Axx, Ax, xxxx which is 13 tricks or what he actually has so will settle for 6N.

[mikeh]

I'm confused. The standard definition of 3NT is a hand with a long running minor - it certainly can't be showing a balanced hand, since you would use a normal 1NT/2NT bid/rebid sequence. If you and "most others" don't play it as this, what do you play it as?

An offer to play in 3N, after 1m 1M, doesn’t show a balanced hand, and I don’t think JB was suggesting it does.

[smerriman]

An offer to play in 3N, after 1m 1M, doesn’t show a balanced hand, and I don’t think JB was suggesting it does.

Exactly; but she was implying she played it as something other than a long running minor, having contrasted her approach with that in the next sentence. So having ruled out balanced hands and a long minor, I was wondering what she did play it as..

 

[he->she, sorry!]

[jillybean]

Ok, one more try at describing what I mean.

[hv=pc=n&n=s98h6dtcakqj8765]133|100[/hv]

This is a hand where those playing a gambling 3nt would open 3nt.

 

[hv=pc=n&n=saqhj4dak76ckqt97]133|100[/hv]

With this hand, after opening 1♣ and hearing 1♥, you will likely bid 3nt

 

[hv=pc=n&n=sat9hkqdtcakqj876]133|100[/hv]

This hand is difficult to bid after opening 1♣, one suggestion was to use 3nt to show this type of gambling+ hand, another was to make a false reverse into hearts. 1C 1S 2H

 

I like the concept of rebidding 3nt here to show this gambling+ hand, and having a hand2 type make a reverse.

 

 

(Smerriman - I'm a she not a he.)

[smerriman]

[hv=pc=n&n=saqhj4dak76ckqt97]133|100[/hv]

With this hand, after opening 1♣ and hearing 1♥, you will likely bid 3nt

Would strongly disagree with this :)

[jillybean]

Would strongly disagree with this :)

OK, this could be a reverse or 2nt I'm terrible at constructing hands but do you understand what I'm trying to convey here?

[smerriman]

Yes and no - my point was that you *always* have better alternatives when holding a (semi)balanced hand, which why the only thing left for 3NT is a long running minor.

[Winstonm]

Ok, one more try at describing what I mean.

[hv=pc=n&n=s98h6dtcakqj8765]133|100[/hv]

This is a hand where those playing a gambling 3nt would open 3nt.

 

[hv=pc=n&n=saqhj4dak76ckqt97]133|100[/hv]

With this hand, after opening 1♣ and hearing 1♥, you will likely bid 3nt

 

[hv=pc=n&n=sat9hkqdtcakqj876]133|100[/hv]

This hand is difficult to bid after opening 1♣, one suggestion was to use 3nt to show this type of gambling+ hand, another was to make a false reverse into hearts. 1C 1S 2H

 

I like the concept of rebidding 3nt here to show this gambling+ hand, and having a hand2 type make a reverse.

 

 

(Smerriman - I'm a she not a he.)

 

Bob and I had an agreement that major-suit 2C openings showed 9 or more tricks or compensating high card strength. He liked minor 1 suiters to have 10 tricks. Personally, I like the 9-trick idea for either majors or minors, as 3NT is a 9-trick contract often bid with a running minor.

Due to the nature of this hand, I have decided that this hand justifies a 2C opening - it simply is too difficult to show any other way and it fits the criteria of being a 9-trick hand.

 

So, you have successfully helped me consolidate my thinking (thank you). That said, I agree with your first hand, the gambling 3NT, but I strongly disagree with the last two.

 

2C looks now to me to be the best start.

[mikeh]

Ok, one more try at describing what I mean.

 

 

[hv=pc=n&n=sat9hkqdtcakqj876]133|100[/hv]

This hand is difficult to bid after opening 1♣, one suggestion was to use 3nt to show this type of gambling+ hand, another was to make a false reverse into hearts. 1C 1S 2H

 

I like the concept of rebidding 3nt here to show this gambling+ hand, and having a hand2 type make a reverse.

 

 

(Smerriman - I'm a she not a he.)

This is, tbh, nuts.

 

If you were foolish enough to want to jump to 3N with a stiff x in an unbid suit, you had better alert the bid. Good luck now, since the opps won’t often err on defence, beating you in 3N while probably cold for at least one game elsewhere, and maybe some slams

 

Plus, if you do this, then wtf do you rebid on x Axx Kx AKQJxxx?

 

That’s what a 3N rebid looks like.

 

And if you say...why don’t we include both hand types?

 

Give your partner say KQxxxx Axx Qxx and opposite your 3217 hand you’re cold for two slams and down in 3N. Nice bidding.

 

But opposite my 3N rebid, we’re cold for 3N on any lead and make no slams.

 

How on earth do you expect partner to know when to bid and when to pass?

 

Look, I’m not at all sure that David, whose post got you on this track, really meant rebidding 3N on the original hand. If he did, then I respectfully suggest that he has no clue of how to bid😀

[nullve]

jillybean, are you still interested in T-Walsh?

 

T-Walsh doesn't solve Opener's rebid problem over 1♣-1♥ all by itself, but almost every T-Walsh pair has a way to bid these hands that doesn't require faking a reverse over 1♣-1♥(= 4+ S).

[DavidKok]

Look, I’m not at all sure that David, whose post got you on this track, really meant rebidding 3N on the original hand. If he did, then I respectfully suggest that he has no clue of how to bid��

Going for the jugular?

 

This hand hits a seam in my methods, because we have never discussed reverses on shorter suits. So 1♣-1♠; 2♥(*)-3♥; 3♠ would, without any discussion, unfortunately be a spade control for a heart slam (by meta-agreements). I agree that this is a poor treatment and reversing on this hand is a lot better if you can show delayed spade preference. Unfortunately I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place, and I wanted to add 3NT to the list of awkward options.

 

At the table I have no idea what I'd bid. I open 1♣, and might try either 3NT, 3♦ (splinter) or 4♣ (strong 6+ suit with 4-card spade support) over 1♠. Or maybe smile and rebid 1♣, hoping the director will save me.