A curious (and annoying) hand

[AL78]

[hv=pc=n&e=sqj9ha9642da94ct4&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=ppp1c(Could%20be%20short)1d1h2dpp]133|200[/hv]

 

A nice little collection after partner opens but what do you do now?

[apollo1201]

The textbook reopening X

 

Not sure if your 1H promised 5+ or 4+

 

Not sure if your pard with 3-cd support will always X (even holding a lousy hand like Kxxx Qxx Qx KQxx, or if X promises some more elegant hand Axxx KJx x KQxxx or Axx Kxx xx AQJxx)

 

But in all cases, you don’t want to sell out at 2D by opps, yet, you can’t bid anything natural

 

That is precisely what X means

[TMorris]

It looks like partner is either

 

4 2 2 5 or perhaps less likely

4 2 1 6

 

as I would expect partner to raise hearts with three even though I have only shown four. Partner is also a minimum given she passed 2 ♦. 2nt is right on values but most likely wrong sides the contract if it is right for us to play there. If I double partner will probably bid 2 ♠ then what do I do.

 

I want to play in a 5 2 fit rather than a 4 3 fit.

 

So I think I double to show values then after 2 ♠ I will bid 3 ♣.

[AL78]

I passed, thinking partner held something like a minimum weak NT e.g. 3325 or 4324 and decided maybe we don't have much on. I am not bidding 2NT as we almost certainly have only one diamond stop and that gets knocked out immediately, and are we any better in a seven card major fit?

 

Turns out we are as we have three possible partscores on but I/we fluked it when the other two tables overbid to game going down whilst we took 2♦ one off:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=skt4hkt5dkt62cj32&w=sa632hj3d8ckq9765&n=s875hq87dqj753ca8&e=sqj9ha9642da94ct4&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=ppp1c1d1h2dppp]399|300[/hv]

 

The traveller:

 

3NTE -1 +100

5♣E -1 +100

2♦N -1 -50

 

This was mildly annoying to me as this was one hand in another session where I only played three hands in 21 boards, and holding values opposite a partner who opened I was expecting one of us to play the hand, but again I get stumped.

[TMorris]

They way to think about it is that you have an 11 count and partner has opened so your side has the majority of the points. Consequently you cannot let them play undoubled at the two level.

 

You have shown four hearts and a 6 count. You have an obligation to partner to tell them what you have so you need to make another bid to more fully describe your hand. You are bidding as if you don't have one of the aces so you need to give partner the good news.

 

both 3nt and 5 ♣ are very poor contracts that should not be reached.

[Cyberyeti]

We would double 2♦ showing 4 spades and not necessarily extra values and play either 2♥ or 2♠ depending on what E decides.

[pescetom]

You don't say what your system is, but you could reasonably open that hand playing 5cM even 2/1 GF.

Then you should end up in spades, with or without XYZ or equivalent.

[Cyberyeti]

You don't say what your system is, but you could reasonably open that hand playing 5cM even 2/1 GF.

Then you should end up in spades, with or without XYZ or equivalent.

 

Not a ridiculous weak NT either, we could easily play 2N/3♣

[AL78]

You don't say what your system is, but you could reasonably open that hand playing 5cM even 2/1 GF.

Then you should end up in spades, with or without XYZ or equivalent.

 

5CM, strong NT.

[pescetom]

5CM, strong NT.

 

So with no other convention:

1♥ - 1♠

1N - 2♣

2♠ - p

 

Or with XYZ:

1♥ - 1♠

1N - 2♣

2♦ - 3♣

3♠- p

 

Or similar.

[AL78]

I'm not a fan of opening eight loser sub minimum balanced hands in second seat vulnerable.

[Gilithin]

5CM, strong NT.

System is not just openings. The critical part here is whether you play Support Doubles or not. If you do then West obviously cannot X and it is essential for East to re-open; if you do not then West should X on this hand competitively despite being minimum.

[Cyberyeti]

I'm not a fan of opening eight loser sub minimum balanced hands in second seat vulnerable.

 

It's only 8 losers if you don't modify your LTC at all 2 aces and a QJ9 which is a trick with a 5 card suit and decent intermediates.

[DavidKok]

I would not have opened the East hand the first time, and like 2♥ the second time. Double might also work, but I think a possible 5-2 heart fit beats a potential 4-3 spade fit as partner might get forced in spades. If partner is 4=1=2=6 we probably belong in clubs but I do not see a way to get there. I would also expect partner to bid 2♠ with that shape most of the time.

[AL78]

System is not just openings. The critical part here is whether you play Support Doubles or not. If you do then West obviously cannot X and it is essential for East to re-open; if you do not then West should X on this hand competitively despite being minimum.

 

No we don't do support doubles.

[Gilithin]

No we don't do support doubles.

In that case, you need to have a chat with your partner about being more assertive in competitive auctions. It is not just this hand, this is the pattern that ties together almost all of the hands that you post. Maybe suggest to them that they err on the side of overbidding for the next few months so that they can work out for themselves where the right line is in time. Or you can work from general rules - supporting to the level of fit; not letting opps play at the 2 level with shortage; etc - and then let them find the exceptions over time. Or some combination - pick whatever works for them. Whichever way you go, they need to gather some experience of competing effectively if they are ever to improve.

[mikeh]

So with no other convention:

1♥ - 1♠

1N - 2♣

2♠ - p

 

Or with XYZ:

1♥ - 1♠

1N - 2♣

2♦ - 3♣

3♠- p

 

Or similar.

You play xyz differently than do I

 

In my partnerships, if vulnerable, our bidding is 1H 1S 1N 2N 3C P

 

2N puppets to 3C, either to play or to show some specific strong hands.

 

It’s possible that east might raise 1S but I think it better to limit this minimum balanced opener asap. 2S will often lead to an uncomfortable 3 level contract.

 

In my main partnership, nv we’d open 1N as east and, because we don’t play transfers but, instead, a complex method wherein 2C begins weak or invitational hands and 2D is a gf, we’d bid 1N 2C 2H 3C, occasionally missing a 4-4 spade fit but only when opener is 4=4 majors, which is possible but not probable.

[pescetom]

You play xyz differently than do I

 

In my partnerships, if vulnerable, our bidding is 1H 1S 1N 2N 3C P

 

2N puppets to 3C, either to play or to show some specific strong hands.

 

It’s possible that east might raise 1S but I think it better to limit this minimum balanced opener asap. 2S will often lead to an uncomfortable 3 level contract.

 

In my main partnership, nv we’d open 1N as east and, because we don’t play transfers but, instead, a complex method wherein 2C begins weak or invitational hands and 2D is a gf, we’d bid 1N 2C 2H 3C, occasionally missing a 4-4 spade fit but only when opener is 4=4 majors, which is possible but not probable.

 

I suspect we do play XYZ differently, but we too play 2N as a puppet to 3C, either to play or to show specific strong hands typically 5-5.

As we play the sequence I cited, it is an invitational hand ready to stop in clubs if necessary, but not yet resigned.

I concede that might be over-optimistic given the vulnerability, passed hand and MP scoring.