[mike777]

 pescetom, on 2026-May-20, 14:57, said:

3NT seemed obliged to me: partner is doing that dance, we are in a game force and have been coy about stops so far.
But interested in other opinions.

Agree

[jillybean]

mike777, on 2026-May-20, 13:13, said:

So 3D invites club slam? Is that an alert?

1057? They way I play it, Neb 2♣ denies 5 diamonds (or in this case 4) unless clubs are longer.

[mike777]

jillybean, on 2026-May-20, 16:34, said:

1057? They way I play it, Neb 2♣ denies 5 diamonds unless clubs are longer.

why not splinter with 7clubs and a heart void?

1c!=3h!

[jillybean]

mike777, on 2026-May-20, 16:38, said:

why not splinter with 7clubs and a heart void?

1c!=3h!

I only jump around with weak gf hands.

[johnu]

pescetom, on 2026-May-19, 14:19, said:

Partner's 2♣ response is a GF which denies a 4 card major but is nebulous about clubs.

Nebulous GF 2♣? After a nebulous 1♣ opener? I don't like it. What is a 1♦ response? After opener's 1 level response to 1♦, you can then use XYZ and get into a well defined auction at a low level.

[jillybean]

The new buzz word

Quote

You are playing 2/1 GF with 15-17 1NT, 1♣ is 2+ cards and 1♦ 4+ cards.
Partner's 2♣ response is a GF which denies a 4 card major but is nebulous about clubs.

[jillybean]

Ok, lets see the hand? Per favore

[pescetom]

 jillybean, on 2026-May-20, 20:06, said:

Ok, lets see the hand? Per favore

ASAP, when I hit a PC and have a moment.
Have a regional tournament to organise in a new venue and Murphy looking over my shoulder

[pescetom]

 mike777, on 2026-May-20, 16:38, said:

why not splinter with 7clubs and a heart void?

1c!=3h!

We don't play direct splinter of Responder over a minor, only over a major.

[pescetom]

 johnu, on 2026-May-20, 16:43, said:

Nebulous GF 2♣? After a nebulous 1♣ opener? I don't like it. What is a 1♦ response? After opener's 1 level response to 1♦, you can then use XYZ and get into a well defined auction at a low level.

Yeah, mikeh thought it was weird too.
If you like, I'll poll our players what they think about better minor, inverted minors and Jacoby
As I wrote above, I too would tend to bid diamonds looking forwards to XYZ. Unfortunately this partner plays has no convention over XYZ or XYN.

[DavidKok]

 pescetom, on 2026-May-20, 14:57, said:

But interested in other opinions.

Shape information is crucial. This 2♣ bid has clarified the lack of a major fit (unless opener has a 5cM, which is very rare) but is completely ambiguous about minor suit length.
Unsurprisingly, this regularly leaves you with insufficient information to find minor suit contracts. You will be faced with impossibly 3NT vs 5m vs 6m decisions with some regularly.

I think this auction is one of them. You neglected to share shape, and are now playing a guessing game. I guess 3NT when in doubt, and do so here. If, additionally, you want to find minor suit fits or slams, change the methods.

[pescetom]

DavidKok, on 2026-May-21, 04:10, said:

Shape information is crucial. This 2♣ bid has clarified the lack of a major fit (unless opener has a 5cM, which is very rare) but is completely ambiguous about minor suit length.
Unsurprisingly, this regularly leaves you with insufficient information to find minor suit contracts. You will be faced with impossibly 3NT vs 5m vs 6m decisions with some regularly.

I think this auction is one of them. You neglected to share shape, and are now playing a guessing game. I guess 3NT when in doubt, and do so here. If, additionally, you want to find minor suit fits or slams, change the methods.

Maybe, but I don't recall an auction where the ambiguity was not resolved satisfactorily in useful time (except as a consequence of aggressive interference).
In this case I think the problem is that the auction is off the rails on partner's side - but I'm willing to hear other opinions, hence the post.
Full hand follows.

[pescetom]

Here is the full board.

MP

---

West felt that East's pass was unhelpful and 3NT an unnecessary gamble.
East felt that West should have responded 1♦ and in any case should have pulled 3NT to investigate slam in clubs.

To make things worse, North found the diamonds switch after I held up hearts.
A bottom, as most of the field was in game or partial of clubs with another 3NT making.
At national level (where we placed 31st, this was the only bottom) at just 6% of tables EW bid and made the slam.

[P_Marlowe]

pescetom, on 2026-May-21, 06:26, said:

Here is the full board.

MP

---

West felt that East's pass was unhelpful and 3NT an unnecessary gamble.
East felt that West should have responded 1♦ and in any case should have pulled 3NT to investigate slam in clubs.

Hi,

I think 2C is not a good bid, and this is putting it mildly, unless every other bid denies game forcing strength.
If a failure to bid 2C denies game going strength, you need artifical followups. to descripe the shape.
I tried to play such methods for short time, than my p got lost (he discovered dancing and in the process his future wife,
,they are still married after approx. 20y), it was hard to learn, and I have no idea, how well the method holds up, if
they interfere.

In the end West has 2 suits he wants to show, after 2C, he will bid 3D and he still has not send the club suit across, and
this would have happened even without interference.
This is basically similar to open a strong GF 2-suiter with 2C, highly recommendated.
I would have takes 3D as suited hand, maybe semibal, without heart stopper.

I dont think that West should have taken out 3NT, you play MP ( and even at IMP it is dubious ), you have a min GF, facing
wastage in hearts, the delayed 2H more often than not may be based on a ragged suit. Which game contract you want to play
most of the time? 3NT. Hard to get back to 3NT, after it was taken out.

Obv. the alternative to 3D is X, but I am fully onboard, that East does not want to defend 2Hx, nearly regardless of p heart
holding.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mikeh]

pescetom, on 2026-May-21, 01:22, said:

Yeah, mikeh thought it was weird too.
If you like, I'll poll our players what they think about better minor, inverted minors and Jacoby
As I wrote above, I too would tend to bid diamonds looking forwards to XYZ. Unfortunately this partner plays has no convention over XYZ or XYN.

Designing a bidding system based on polling is guaranteed to result in a poor method. Your club may be different from any in which I’ve played but the majority of bridge players have limited and often strange notions of bidding theory.

Plus polling on a narrow range of topics probably won’t help. Complex methods need to be fully integrated to avoid needless systemic gaps and=or duplications.

A simple example: polling on inverted minors. There are a lot of ways to play inverted minors. The ‘standard’ way is, imo, so bad that I won’t play inverted minors if partner can’t play something better. Jacoby 2N response to 1M is similar although I’ll play the standard method if I have to because one needs an immediate gf raise.

Remember the old saying: a camel is a horse designed by a committee….just change it to be ‘designed through polling’.

[mikeh]

pescetom, on 2026-May-21, 06:26, said:

Here is the full board.

MP

---

West felt that East's pass was unhelpful and 3NT an unnecessary gamble.
East felt that West should have responded 1♦ and in any case should have pulled 3NT to investigate slam in clubs.

To make things worse, North found the diamonds switch after I held up hearts.
A bottom, as most of the field was in game or partial of clubs with another 3NT making.
At national level (where we placed 31st, this was the only bottom) at just 6% of tables EW bid and made the slam.

How about

1C (P) 1D (1H) P

Then, opps passing throughout:

West reopens with. 2H

2H 2N. 3C. Responder has shown long diamonds, long clubs, a game force hand and no help for notrump. Opener has shown a minimum with. A heart stopper and no support for diamonds. Weird how natural bidding can be so descriptive, lol. As David says, shape is important.

I’d be surprised if we’d reach slam. Make opener 3=3=2=5 and slam is down, and I don’t see how anyone could tell the difference…although maybe the opps would help out.

[jillybean]

6♣

I do agree 2♣ is unnecessary, 1♦ start is normal. Is your partner worried about someone passing later in the auction?
Congratulations on your finish and good luck with your Regional, how many tables?

[mike777]

 pescetom, on 2026-May-21, 06:26, said:

Here is the full board.

MP

---

West felt that East's pass was unhelpful and 3NT an unnecessary gamble.
East felt that West should have responded 1♦ and in any case should have pulled 3NT to investigate slam in clubs.

To make things worse, North found the diamonds switch after I held up hearts.
A bottom, as most of the field was in game or partial of clubs with another 3NT making.
At national level (where we placed 31st, this was the only bottom) at just 6% of tables EW bid and made the slam.

Impressive national finish.
Congratulations, well done.

Good luck with your partnership discussion on your nebulous 2C response across from your nebulous 1C. 🧐🧐🕵️

[Cyberyeti]

mikeh, on 2026-May-21, 07:31, said:

I’d be surprised if we’d reach slam. Make opener 3=3=2=5 and slam is down, and I don’t see how anyone could tell the difference…although maybe the opps would help out.

Well weak NTers know partner isn't 3325, the N hand doesn't get an initial pass from me either.