Response to partner's opening

[AL78]

♠AT6

♥876

♦AT7652

♣5

 

MPs, playing Benj Acol weak NT, partner opens 1♠, RHO passes. Your bid?

[Tramticket]

2♠

[nullve]

2♦

 

I want to

 

* show 3c support and INV values opposite an unbalanced hand with 5+ S;

* force to game opposite 15 BAL.

[Tramticket]

2♦

 

I want to

 

* show 3c support and INV values opposite an unbalanced hand with 5+ S;

* force to game opposite 15 BAL.

 

Do you really want to force to game opposite a balanced 15?

 

♠KQJ2 ♥AJ2 ♦832 ♣A43

[nullve]

Do you really want to force to game opposite a balanced 15?

 

♠KQJ2 ♥AJ2 ♦832 ♣A43

Yes, I want to force to game opposite 15 BAL.

 

Do I want to be in game opposite this particular 15 count: KQJ2 AJ2 832 A43? Not really.

[StevenG]

♠AT6

♥876

♦AT7652

♣5

 

MPs, playing Benj Acol weak NT, partner opens 1♠, RHO passes. Your bid?

1NT

[Cyberyeti]

Do you really want to force to game opposite a balanced 15?

 

♠KQJ2 ♥AJ2 ♦832 ♣A43

 

4♠ isn't terrible at IMPs, seems to need spades 4-2/3-3 diamonds 2-2, less good at MPs.

 

I also don't want to be in 3♠ (particularly on a trump lead or 3 hearts and a trump) opposite KQJxx, Qxx, x, QJxx which is why I wouldn't bid 2♦ particularly playing the 4 card major style where you open 1♠ with 4♠4m32.

 

I would likely bid 2♠ but can live with 1N.

[DavidKok]

The hand is worth a limit raise facing 5(+) spades, but I don't know how to systemically show this in Benji Acol. Does 1♠ promise only four? Perhaps the following is irrelevant, but I'll share it anyway: in my system I play 2NT 'De Maas' (approx 9-14, 3(+) support). I think when playing that it is wise to make the explicit agreement not to upgrade nice 8-counts with 3-card support and a long side suit. Almost always someone (usually partner) has another bid over 1M-2M, so it tends to not cost games to take the slow route. Meanwhile partner will somewhat often have length in our shortness and a non-minimum, and it can be hard to apply the brakes after we've shown at least a limit raise. I think this hand fits that description, and I would not mind showing this as a maximum simple raise of a 5c♠.

[AL78]

The hand is worth a limit raise facing 5(+) spades, but I don't know how to systemically show this in Benji Acol. Does 1♠ promise only four? Perhaps the following is irrelevant, but I'll share it anyway: in my system I play 2NT 'De Maas' (approx 9-14, 3(+) support). I think when playing that it is wise to make the explicit agreement not to upgrade nice 8-counts with 3-card support and a long side suit. Almost always someone (usually partner) has another bid over 1M-2M, so it tends to not cost games to take the slow route. Meanwhile partner will somewhat often have length in our shortness and a non-minimum, and it can be hard to apply the brakes after we've shown at least a limit raise. I think this hand fits that description, and I would not mind showing this as a maximum simple raise of a 5c♠.

 

Yes the 1♠ opening promises at least four. I was thinking along the same lines, my hand is worth a limit raise opposite a five card suit and I wished we were playing 5CM at the time, but we weren't.

[AL78]

I responded 2♠ which got passed out:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sk954hakqdqj4ct74&w=sj3ht954dk83caj62&n=sat6h876dat7652c5&e=sq872hj32d9ckq983&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1sp2sppp]399|300[/hv]

 

Partner made 10 tricks which was a 50% board (only two other pairs to compare against though). We beat the pair who went off in 3♠ but couldn't beat 1NTS+6 at another table.

[Cyberyeti]

If you do anything else, partner will have K432, AKx, QJx, Qxx and 2♠ will be plenty with ♦K wrong

[blackshoe]

Agree with nullve's 2♦, don't agree with forcing to game opposite a balanced 15.

[Cyberyeti]

Agree with nullve's 2♦, don't agree with forcing to game opposite a balanced 15.

 

Not sure what you're trying to say, 2♦ IS FG opposite a balanced 15 because it's common to play the 2N rebid as 15+ GF in weak NT land