[whereagles]

2NT, regardless of this being artificial or not

[jtfanclub]

Jlall, on Mar 2 2007, 04:44 PM, said:

You hold xx Kxxx x Qxxxxx. Partner opens 1D, you respond 1H, LHO bids 2H, and partner bids 2S. Imps. Your call?

Wrong forum for answers from me, just questions...

1. What is the meaning of 2♥?

2. Given that 2♥ is natural, what would an X have meant by P?

[jikl]

Interesting auction, partner has volunteered a bid where there was no need since you had another bid from an unpassed hand (I am guessing this since you would have mentioned otherwise) I think your partner has a strong 64 in ♦♠ with a void or singleton ♥ which means the only fit you have is in ♣, but I would bid 3♦, you can never find the ♣ fit. If partner moves again slow it down.

Sean

[inquiry]

You can not pass. You can not raise spades. As much as you like, you can not make a takeout double of your partners 2♠ bid.

That leaves three equally unattractive alternatives.

• 2NT - is this natural or inbergman? I would guess this is natural now even if you think 2♠ is a reverse
  
• 3♣ has to be clubs, and presumably forcing, or should it be?
  
• 3♦ - partner better have a lot of diamonds on this auction

The real question here is does 3♣ scream weakness? With clubs and hearts, you can bid 2NT or 3NT, depending upon your strength when you misfit, and you can raise with a fit, or even cue-bid with great hand and a fit. The logic of 3♣ being non-forcing and 2NT being natural seems sound, but i would not spring this on partner out of the blue, so i will bid 2NT at the table.

[mikeh]

Why can't I pass? Just kidding, in a sense. Partner sure doesn't expect a pass. Bidding over the opps' 2♥ bid is a relatively undiscussed area of bidding theory: do YOU have an agreement with all of your partners, he asked? I sure don't, he said.

Partner could be almost any 5=6, in which case pass rates to be best unless he is huge.

Partner could be a good hand with 4=5 or 4=6, in which case getting to and stopping in 3♦ is best, or least bad.

I THINK, and will now discuss with all my partners, that 2N should be ambiguous (now, that's a nice agreement: Alert! What does that mean? Ambiguous!) I think it should be Ingberman, prepatory to correcting to a passable 3♦, hoping not to get doubled.

I think this is a logical extension of reverse theory: given that 2♠ should, in my view, be of reverse strength: not as strong (at the low end) as 2♠ over my 1♥, but as strong as 2♥ would be had I bid 1♠.

This permits 3♦/3♠ to be gf.

[Winstonm]

I do not think this sequence is forcing, only highly encouraging...I'm not encouraged...I pass.

[temp3600]

2NT. Without clear agreements, I think it's a relatively safe bid. It doesn't sound very strong. If partner thinks it's natural, I have a stopper. If partner thinks he has to bid 3♣, I have that too.
We might end up in a 5-2 spade fit or a 6-1 diamond fit instead of a 6-2 club fit though.

[Fluffy]

2NT but I don't know how will partner take it. If he bids 3♦ next I'll be in trtouble not knowing if its forcing.

[pclayton]

2N. No different if LHO hadn't intervened, although I don't expect quite as good a hand.

Pard should bid 3♣ with any kind of tolerance.

[dake50]

When you bid 1H, you must have expected an overheating MAY occur. You were certainly prepared to escape to your 6cC.
What has changed? --except a particularly virulent overheated auction. Having other strong bids, 3C must be at best 'partner, only proceed with C-fit'.

[cherdano]

dake50, on Mar 4 2007, 08:50 AM, said:

When you bid 1H, you must have expected an overheating MAY occur. You were certainly prepared to escape to your 6cC.
What has changed? --except a particularly virulent overheated auction. Having other strong bids, 3C must be at best 'partner, only proceed with C-fit'.

Undiscussed, I would expect 3♣ to be forcing. What do you want to bid with xx Axxxx xx KQxx (which IMO is a game force opposite partner's 2♠ bid - if you disagree, just make it a little stronger).

[Winstonm]

What would the 2N bidders have done if the auction had been:
1D-P-1H-P-1S-P-?

Would you try to escape into the bad 6-card club suit at the 3-level?

My experience has taught me that when the auction takes a nasty turn and you are weak, the best thing to do is stop bidding as soon as possible. I can't imagine that 2S in the given auction should be forcing as X, cue bid, and jumps are open for use. As for double, it seems silly to be penalty when at least 9 cards in the suit are accounted for between pard and opp, and more likely 10-11.

[Winstonm]

dake50, on Mar 4 2007, 09:50 AM, said:

When you bid 1H, you must have expected an overheating MAY occur. You were certainly prepared to escape to your 6cC.
What has changed? --except a particularly virulent overheated auction. Having other strong bids, 3C must be at best 'partner, only proceed with C-fit'.

When I bid 1H I was prepared to pass a lot of rebids and only planning to escape to my lousy 6-bagger over a 1N rebid. Nothing has changed.

[helene_t]

Playing Precision I have an easy pass

Agree with Whereagles and Ben. 2NT is probably an acceptable bid no matter what it is supposed to mean. If Fred's Law (if a bid can be natural it is natural) applies here it's ok allthough Ingberman would be even better. But whether partner alerts my 2NT bid or not (lol) I'll pass his next bid unless it's 3♥.

I prefer Winston's approach, though, and even if 2♠ is intended as forcing, pass could be the percentage choice. But as a matter of principle (partnership harmony is more important than results) I never pass a forcing bid, and I think most of my semi-regular partners would assume 2♠ to be forcing.

[Winstonm]

Jlall, on Mar 4 2007, 01:19 PM, said:

I had a bad feeling on this one. LHO obviously had long hearts, so that meant RHO probably had partners suits. Combine that with the fact that if I bid it's not obvious what to bid, I chose to pass before things got worse.

The bad news was partner was 4-7 in the pointed suits and we went down 4.

The good news was that RHO had 5 good diamonds and was going to X 3D (as they did at the other table) for a number.

edit: btw I think 2S is clearly forcing.

I think this - if rarely used - is what seperates the good player from the great player: knowing when to do the wrong thing for the right reason and not being a 100% total slave to convention: 99.9% slave is O.K.

I don't see why 2S would be forcing, still. What else would you do with a hand such as: AKxx, x, AKJ10xx, xx? If partner is on Qxx, Kxxxx, x, xxxx 2S looks as good as 3D.

It would seem more logical in this sequence to use double as the stronger hand, allowing a convert by pard if opp has "stepped into it" with a pretty good heart suit while we have no good fit.

So I think a better definition of 2S would be forcing opposite most normal responses but not 100% forcing - maybe call it a 90% force.

[pclayton]

Winstonm, on Mar 4 2007, 10:07 AM, said:

What would the 2N bidders have done if the auction had been:
1D-P-1H-P-1S-P-?

Would you try to escape into the bad 6-card club suit at the 3-level?

My experience has taught me that when the auction takes a nasty turn and you are weak, the best thing to do is stop bidding as soon as possible. I can't imagine that 2S in the given auction should be forcing as X, cue bid, and jumps are open for use. As for double, it seems silly to be penalty when at least 9 cards in the suit are accounted for between pard and opp, and more likely 10-11.

Hopefully we play walsh jumps; where I can bid 3♣. Not perfect, but it gives us a chance of playing in our 6 bagger.

[pclayton]

Winstonm, on Mar 4 2007, 12:35 PM, said:

Jlall, on Mar 4 2007, 01:19 PM, said:

I had a bad feeling on this one. LHO obviously had long hearts, so that meant RHO probably had partners suits. Combine that with the fact that if I bid it's not obvious what to bid, I chose to pass before things got worse.

The bad news was partner was 4-7 in the pointed suits and we went down 4.

The good news was that RHO had 5 good diamonds and was going to X 3D (as they did at the other table) for a number.

edit: btw I think 2S is clearly forcing.

I think this - if rarely used - is what seperates the good player from the great player: knowing when to do the wrong thing for the right reason and not being a 100% total slave to convention: 99.9% slave is O.K.

I don't see why 2S would be forcing, still. What else would you do with a hand such as: AKxx, x, AKJ10xx, xx? If partner is on Qxx, Kxxxx, x, xxxx 2S looks as good as 3D.

It would seem more logical in this sequence to use double as the stronger hand, allowing a convert by pard if opp has "stepped into it" with a pretty good heart suit while we have no good fit.

So I think a better definition of 2S would be forcing opposite most normal responses but not 100% forcing - maybe call it a 90% force.

Its very convenient to use 2♠ to be able to show AKxx, x, AKJTxx, xx. Frankly, there are even weaker hands where it would be nice to get the spades in.

2♠ also needs to be able to show: AKQx, x, AKJxxx, Ax, so it can't be '90%' forcing.

I can't see having to 'double' with the 2nd hand to create a force. What is pard supposed to do with: xxx, Axxxx, Qxx, xx?