[jillybean]

MP NV
You hold A987643, A54, A4, T you open 1♠ partner responds 1N (2/1) your bid and is it 100% clear?

[mtvesuvius]

2♠, bad suit, not a great hand, and yeah I think it's pretty clear IMO

[Elianna]

I don't play 1NT forcing usually, but I can't imagine what else I would bid after 1NT (forcing or not). Unless 1NT were something highly artificial, that is...

[awm]

There's often a case for bidding 3♠ on light values when holding a seven-card suit as here.

This hand seems borderline to me; I think I would bid 2♠ but slightly better spades (say the jack or even the ten) would be enough for me to bid 3♠.

[the hog]

I would bid 2S. Despite holding a 7 card suit, the suit quality is not great. Agree with Adam - put a little more stuffing in the S suit and it is worth 3.

[kayin801]

2♠, though I think it is close. Yes we will miss game sometimes when partner passes with a doubleton spade, a red king, and just some extra junk, but when partner doesn't have spade support this isn't nearly as good of a hand.

[Phil]

2♠ - This is an odd hand but 3♠ wouldn't occur to me.

[jillybean]

I bid 2♠, partner passed with QT, K7, J853, A7653 and we missed an easy game, we were both at the top for our bids. (A987643, A54, A4, T)

I was talking with a local expert about this hand and he said one "expert" treatment is for you to bid 2♦ to limit the hand (i.e. non-forcing) but hope your partner doesn't pass. Then you bid ♠ again at the minimum level. In 2/1 with forcing NT your 2♦ bid typically only promises 3.

He also added that this isn't mainstream, sounds good on paper but when partner passes 2♦ and you miss your 7-2♠ fit, don't call me.

[ArtK78]

This is a clear 2 1/2♠ bid.



Seriously, a case can be made for bidding 2♠ or 3♠. I would lean slightly to bidding 2♠.

If you bid 2♠ and partner shows signs of life, the question then becomes do you bid 4♠.

[CSGibson]

jillybean, on 2011-January-28, 09:24, said:

I bid 2♠, partner passed with QT, K7, J853, A7653 and we missed an easy game, we were both at the top for our bids. (A987643, A54, A4, T)

Your 2♠ bid was not the reason you missed game. It is perfectly normal in a 2/1 system, and much better than bidding a 2 card diamond suit (imagine partner passing with 1 spade and 3 diamonds...shudder).

In my opinion, your partner should not have passed 2♠. He has 3 cover cards (an A, a K, and the Q of trump), and should evaluate his hand as invitational opposite a 2♠ rebid, bidding 3♠ to show an invite with 2 card spade support.

[nigel_k]

Partner should have raised to 3♠. 9 HCP with a ruffing value and no wastage is enough (disregarding the ♦J).

I don't agree with a 2♦ rebid at all. It will be wrong if partner passes, and if not you are bidding 3♠ next which you could have done directly over 1NT. Though I think 2♠ is enough. It would be ok to bid 2♦ on something like Axxxxx Axx AKx x because then you might make 2♦ but not 3♠ when partner has spade shortage and because you don't want partner to raise 3♠ with a singleton.

[vuroth]

I might almost like the 2♦ idea if we had 3, but never 2. Even then, I'd rather play in a 7-1 than a 5-3.

[the hog]

nigel_k, on 2011-January-28, 14:17, said:

Partner should have raised to 3♠. 9 HCP with a ruffing value and no wastage is enough (disregarding the ♦J).

I don't agree with a 2♦ rebid at all. It will be wrong if partner passes, and if not you are bidding 3♠ next which you could have done directly over 1NT. Though I think 2♠ is enough. It would be ok to bid 2♦ on something like Axxxxx Axx AKx x because then you might make 2♦ but not 3♠ when partner has spade shortage and because you don't want partner to raise 3♠ with a singleton.

I concur with Nigel. Your partner had 3 very fgood cards for you and should have raised to 3S. Bidding 2D is very poor.

[mcphee]

2S with no other bid in mind. Partner could have bid 3S or even 2N, passing is being far too timid.

[ggwhiz]

2♠ for me but I have the luxury of a partner that will bid 2nt over that with any reasonable excuse.

ie. opposite the actual Qx, Kx, Jxxx, Axxxxx 3nt would roll opposite 6 running spades and the Ace of hearts.

I have been convinced by her to bid 2nt in these situations much more often than I used to but it means we don't open nearly as many 11 counts as others do.

Note: Just saw the comment for a raise to 3 spades which works for me too as long as you don't open modest 11's.

[han]

jillybean, on 2011-January-28, 09:24, said:

I was talking with a local expert about this hand and he said one "expert" treatment is for you to bid 2♦ to limit the hand (i.e. non-forcing) but hope your partner doesn't pass. Then you bid ♠ again at the minimum level. In 2/1 with forcing NT your 2♦ bid typically only promises 3.

You might bid this way with Axxxxx KQx x AQx. The hand is quite strong for 2S and 3S doesn't look attractive with such a weak suit. Also, you could easily belong in hearts, and 2C makes it easier for partner to introduce them. If partner passes 2C, you probably haven't missed a game (more relevant at IMPS) and you might make 2C when 2S (or 3S) goes down.

Suggesting this idea with A987643, A54, A4, T is truly horrible.

[pooltuna]

Bandwagon...as others have noted your partner had a 2-card limit raise