[the hog]

Agree with the above. I disagree with bidding 1NT on the hand as well rather than 1S. You risk a 1NT contract with a 4-4 S fit if opener holds a 4522 hand and decides to pass 1NT; playing a fnt you risk playing a 5-3 H fit and losing a 4-4 S fit.

[rhm]

kenrexford, on 2010-November-23, 11:01, said:

The part I find most humorous is the 3NT call in the context of complaining that Opener did not jump shift for a GF. Does Responder fret not making a slam move?

I think the entire sequence by Opener is good.

As to the 2♠ rebid idea, I have a little concern there. After having discussed this very sequence, I am liking a theory of a friend of mine. Suppose that you have Opener with 4513 pattern and extras but not good enough to reverse. There is something to be said for opening 1♥, rebidding 2♣, and then rebidding 2♠ if partner courtesy corrects to 2♥.

This deal actually supports that idea. Responder might well opt a nice 3♠ invite in this sequence:

1♥-P-1NT!-P-
2♣-P-2♥-P-
2♠-P-3♠...

Whether this seems right or not is unclear, but I kind of like the theory.

2♥ is the weakest response responder can make apart from pass.
I can not see how opener can now continue with 2♠ missing the strength for a reverse.
Of course some seem to require for a reverse almost as much as for a 2♣ opener, but this is a silly concept in the first place.

Anyway this sequence

1♥-P-1NT!-P-
2♣-P-2♥-P-
2♠-P-3♠...

makes no sense to me. Without 3 cards in ♥ responder would almost always prefer 1♠ to 1NT. So if he can now raise ♠ he must hold 3 cards in ♥ and must have a hand not strong enough for an immediate ♥ raise. According to your logic opener is too weak for reverse.
Seems to me the partnership is already overboard after the ♠ raise.
The sensible way of playing 2♠ is in deed a good distributional hand with shortage in ♦, but at most 3 cards in ♠.

Rainer Herrmann

[bulovapsb]

the hog, on 2010-November-26, 02:16, said:

Agree with the above. I disagree with bidding 1NT on the hand as well rather than 1S. You risk a 1NT contract with a 4-4 S fit if opener holds a 4522 hand and decides to pass 1NT; playing a fnt you risk playing a 5-3 H fit and losing a 4-4 S fit.

I'm the partner.

To reply directly to the above: With my sub-minimal values, a 1♠ response MIGHT find 4-4, but on the more-likely occurrence of a 1N rebid by partner, my "forced" correction to 2♥ would imply more values than I actually had. With essentially a one-call hand (that call being a weak-♥-raise, going through 1N to slow down the auction) I don't want to over bid before having limited my hand.

A lot has been said that boils down to "send me to the rubber room" but with my balanced 5HCP including an A, any advance by partner after my 2♥ must show extras, and I have about the top of my weak-raise, 1N-2♥ range, so another call BY ME has to be appropriate. 3♥ is still just a simple, weak preference, and can be done with a LOT less than an A (I'm likely to compete with the same sequence with J-4th and K-3rd...nature of my game is to slow down by starting with a forcing 1N and taking the preference...then competing to 3♥ if the opponents come in).

If the continuation over 2♥ had been 2♠, NO WAY would I consider a raise! I know, as responder, that partner has extras, AND I know that we have a fit in ♥. If he really has extra values AND a 4-cd ♠ suit, he could have reversed at his first rebid (which is NOT necessarily game-forcing, as people seem to think a JS to 3♣ would be...). So, now I can decide if my hand WITH 3-cd ♥ support is worth a game (which I think it is) or just a wimpy return to 3♥ (and if I'm not bidding 3♥/2N then I'm not bidding 3-only-♥/2♠ either). AND 2N is an option for me (which partner should correct to 3♥ on his KQJ-6-baggger with a stiff ♦, and he's THEN conveyed his ENTIRE hand).

BUT: MY partner's 2N advance implies a balanced hand with extras. And now I think, maybe 9 tricks is easier than 10. Partner never conveyed his ♦ weakness/shortness. And even if I have Jxxx there, without SOLID ♥ what's the point? If he's not passing 2♥, then I have to find the right game with my A+J. 2N just lead me to the wrong guess.

So call the rubber room on me...I STILL think that when Opener advances showing a balanced hand opposite no more than a weak preference, responder should be bidding game at IMPs. And with a 4x3, that game seems more likely to be in NT.


As may be clear from the above, I also agree with what Mr. Herrmann said.

[mikeh]

bulovapsb, on 2010-November-29, 16:41, said:

I'm the partner.

To reply directly to the above: With my sub-minimal values, a 1♠ response MIGHT find 4-4, but on the more-likely occurrence of a 1N rebid by partner, my "forced" correction to 2♥ would imply more values than I actually had. With essentially a one-call hand (that call being a weak-♥-raise, going through 1N to slow down the auction) I don't want to over bid before having limited my hand.

A lot has been said that boils down to "send me to the rubber room" but with my balanced 5HCP including an A, any advance by partner after my 2♥ must show extras, and I have about the top of my weak-raise, 1N-2♥ range, so another call BY ME has to be appropriate. 3♥ is still just a simple, weak preference, and can be done with a LOT less than an A (I'm likely to compete with the same sequence with J-4th and K-3rd...nature of my game is to slow down by starting with a forcing 1N and taking the preference...then competing to 3♥ if the opponents come in).

If the continuation over 2♥ had been 2♠, NO WAY would I consider a raise! I know, as responder, that partner has extras, AND I know that we have a fit in ♥. If he really has extra values AND a 4-cd ♠ suit, he could have reversed at his first rebid (which is NOT necessarily game-forcing, as people seem to think a JS to 3♣ would be...). So, now I can decide if my hand WITH 3-cd ♥ support is worth a game (which I think it is) or just a wimpy return to 3♥ (and if I'm not bidding 3♥/2N then I'm not bidding 3-only-♥/2♠ either). AND 2N is an option for me (which partner should correct to 3♥ on his KQJ-6-baggger with a stiff ♦, and he's THEN conveyed his ENTIRE hand).

BUT: MY partner's 2N advance implies a balanced hand with extras. And now I think, maybe 9 tricks is easier than 10. Partner never conveyed his ♦ weakness/shortness. And even if I have Jxxx there, without SOLID ♥ what's the point? If he's not passing 2♥, then I have to find the right game with my A+J. 2N just lead me to the wrong guess.

So call the rubber room on me...I STILL think that when Opener advances showing a balanced hand opposite no more than a weak preference, responder should be bidding game at IMPs. And with a 4x3, that game seems more likely to be in NT.


As may be clear from the above, I also agree with what Mr. Herrmann said.

Sorry, but I reamin unconvinced.

The central flaw in your reasoning is the (frankly absurd) notion that your 5 count represented a near maximum for your sequence to 2♥.

As it is, you started your post on the right foot when you described your initial response as being based on sub-minimal values.

I think your problem is that you seem to think that 2♥ showed 3 card support, and that therefore, having bid 1N, you had 'top of your range'.

But that is nonsensical. You would and should bid as you did with, say, KQx xx KJxx xxx: that is a hand that should respond 1N and then take a preference back to 2♥ and then happily raise 2N to 3N.

indeed, it is precisely because you may have this hand-type that your partner was correct to rebid 2N. 2N didn't ask whether you had 4-5 hcp...it asked whether you held 8-10!

At the risk of being repetitive: your sequence to 2♥ did not promise a heart raise. It didn't deny a horrible, horrible raise (in which case partner would play in 3♥, perhaps too high) but neither did it deny a useful hand with 2 hearts and an inability to do more than take a preference.

Sorry, but if you don't 'get it' after this post, I would indeed vote you off to the rubber room.

[the hog]

bulovapsb, on 2010-November-29, 16:41, said:

I'm the partner.

To reply directly to the above: With my sub-minimal values, a 1♠ response MIGHT find 4-4, but on the more-likely occurrence of a 1N rebid by partner, my "forced" correction to 2♥ would imply more values than I actually had. With essentially a one-call hand (that call being a weak-♥-raise, going through 1N to slow down the auction) I don't want to over bid before having limited my hand.

A lot has been said that boils down to "send me to the rubber room" but with my balanced 5HCP including an A, any advance by partner after my 2♥ must show extras, and I have about the top of my weak-raise, 1N-2♥ range, so another call BY ME has to be appropriate. 3♥ is still just a simple, weak preference, and can be done with a LOT less than an A (I'm likely to compete with the same sequence with J-4th and K-3rd...nature of my game is to slow down by starting with a forcing 1N and taking the preference...then competing to 3♥ if the opponents come in).

If the continuation over 2♥ had been 2♠, NO WAY would I consider a raise! I know, as responder, that partner has extras, AND I know that we have a fit in ♥. If he really has extra values AND a 4-cd ♠ suit, he could have reversed at his first rebid (which is NOT necessarily game-forcing, as people seem to think a JS to 3♣ would be...). So, now I can decide if my hand WITH 3-cd ♥ support is worth a game (which I think it is) or just a wimpy return to 3♥ (and if I'm not bidding 3♥/2N then I'm not bidding 3-only-♥/2♠ either). AND 2N is an option for me (which partner should correct to 3♥ on his KQJ-6-baggger with a stiff ♦, and he's THEN conveyed his ENTIRE hand).

BUT: MY partner's 2N advance implies a balanced hand with extras. And now I think, maybe 9 tricks is easier than 10. Partner never conveyed his ♦ weakness/shortness. And even if I have Jxxx there, without SOLID ♥ what's the point? If he's not passing 2♥, then I have to find the right game with my A+J. 2N just lead me to the wrong guess.

So call the rubber room on me...I STILL think that when Opener advances showing a balanced hand opposite no more than a weak preference, responder should be bidding game at IMPs. And with a 4x3, that game seems more likely to be in NT.


As may be clear from the above, I also agree with what Mr. Herrmann said.

I disagree totally with the above. Using your logic xxxxx xx Ax Jx should respond 1NTY to 1H. This is clearly absurd. I disagree that a 1S bid followed by a preference to 2H shows any extra values at all and I wonder from where you are getting this idea.

[losercover]

We had a hand almost exactly like this is a recent sectional. I opened one 1H, pass , my partner passed and the opponent bid 2d, passed around to my partner who bid 2H. The 2d bidder bid 3D, I bid 3H and was doubled, making 3.

[bulovapsb]

the hog, on 2010-November-29, 18:05, said:

I disagree totally with the above. Using your logic xxxxx xx Ax Jx should respond 1NTY to 1H. This is clearly absurd. I disagree that a 1S bid followed by a preference to 2H shows any extra values at all and I wonder from where you are getting this idea.

I would be happy to entertain this argument, if the hand you presented for me to bypass 1♠ holding xxxxx did not consist of only 6 other cards. Give me a 6th ♠ and I'm prepared to bid 2♠/a 1N rebid, or pass a 2♥ rebid. Or pass any 2-minor call in which I hold another card (or two...hard to tell when I'm given only 11).

I am reconsidering, based on other discussion, what was being probed by the advance after my 2♥ preference. But I remain unconvinced that 2N is the correct call in any case with 3-5-1-4 shape.

So I'm willing to concede ...2♠-3♥ pass. I've been advised that even 2N-pass isn't egregious, but 2N-3♥ is superior (since I have 3 card support).

I still tend to try and bid games at IMPs on the basis of the risk-reward. Getting to the RIGHT strain, however, is important.

[bulovapsb]

mikeh, on 2010-November-29, 17:06, said:

indeed, it is precisely because you may have this hand-type that your partner was correct to rebid 2N. 2N didn't ask whether you had 4-5 hcp...it asked whether you held 8-10!

With most 10-11s, I'd rebid 2N myself with a balanced hand and ♥xx. So let's agree that I was being asked for 7+-to-9 (X+ is a good X with spots and/or no evident wastage).

The biggest problem with the 2N advance, is that if I'm the same 5-ct with 4-2-4-3 shape, then we're playing 2N. If I'm 4-2-3-4, then I've probably passed 2♣.

But I do "get it". Hence my above-mentioned reconsideration of the purpose of the advancing call.

[the hog]

bulovapsb, on 2010-November-30, 00:04, said:

I would be happy to entertain this argument, if the hand you presented for me to bypass 1♠ holding xxxxx did not consist of only 6 other cards. Give me a 6th ♠ and I'm prepared to bid 2♠/a 1N rebid, or pass a 2♥ rebid. Or pass any 2-minor call in which I hold another card (or two...hard to tell when I'm given only 11).

I am reconsidering, based on other discussion, what was being probed by the advance after my 2♥ preference. But I remain unconvinced that 2N is the correct call in any case with 3-5-1-4 shape.

So I'm willing to concede ...2♠-3♥ pass. I've been advised that even 2N-pass isn't egregious, but 2N-3♥ is superior (since I have 3 card support).

I still tend to try and bid games at IMPs on the basis of the risk-reward. Getting to the RIGHT strain, however, is important.

Sorry meant
xxxxx xx Axxx Jx

[bulovapsb]

the hog, on 2010-November-30, 02:55, said:

Sorry meant
xxxxx xx Axxx Jx

I look at this hand and seriously consider passing at my first call. Let the opponents come in... I don't mind defending ♠ (unless partner is void, in which case we have at least a minor-suit fit) and I can take a competitive push to 2♥ if they stop in 2-minor.

My fear is that, should I choose to respond 1♠, even after I take a simple preference back to ♥ over opener's rebid, partner will put me on more values than I actually hold (sort of what happened in the original, given, auction).