[Hanoi5]

X-Imp's
♠KQ
♥QJ97xx
♦
♣AQ9xx

1♥-1♠
2♣-2♦
2♥-3NT
???

[ahydra]

Surely we should do a bit more than 2H? We need very little opposite for slam so passing now is not a good idea, I would have bid 3H the round before and now 4C.

ahydra

[Cyberyeti]

ahydra, on 2013-July-03, 06:03, said:

Surely we should do a bit more than 2H? We need very little opposite for slam so passing now is not a good idea, I would have bid 3H the round before and now 4C.

ahydra

Depends if 2♦ is FG or F1. If FG 2♥ can still be a good hand.

[helene_t]

if fourth suit is a game force then 3NT here is probably 15-17 (2NT being split range). In that case 4♣ is clear.

But I would bid 4♣ anyway even if 3nt for some reason was 12-15 or such. I don't want to play 3nt with a void in a suit in which partner has just shown a stopper.

By the way, maybe 4♠ is an alternative to 4♣?

[mikeh]

This auction shows that it is very difficult to address these problems without a clear understanding of the calls.

Was 2♦ gf? It would be for me, but some would play it as perhaps slightly weaker on the low end. This has a huge impact on the meaning of 3N.

If 2♦ was gf, then imo 3N was more committal to 3N than the alternative, to me stronger/more flexible 2N. However, if 2N was nf, he had to bid 3N with all gf hands wanting to bid notrump.

What did 2♥ show? How would we bid, say, xx AKQxx xx KJxx? Would 2N by us promise/suggest a diamond stopper?

For me, 2♥ is a mark-time bid, denying the ability to make a more descriptive call, but I suspect some would prefer the stopperless 2N to show the balanced hand type.

If 2♥ is mark time, then we haven't yet shown our shape...we could still be 1=5=3=4 or 2=5=2=4. Personally, I would have bid 3♣ over 2♦, showing 5-5 or better, but that isn't always going to work out either.

Ok, all of that suggests that maybe we can't answer the question with any confidence, but maybe we have not discussed any of this with this partner.

I'll assume that 2♦ was gf....I have to assume something, and the inferences from gf/not gf are such that I don't think I can sensibly try to cater to both.

What is he doing? Well, he almost certainly has precisely 5 spades and diamonds at least double-stopped. He didn't bid 2N to invite me to pattern out, so he probably isn't looking at Hx in hearts, since he has no interest in a 6-2 heart fit. If he has Hx in hearts, he has really solid diamonds.

I'd tentatively place him with something like AJxxx x AQJx Jxx. There is a huge margin of error in this sort of card placing, but this seems to me to be a good hand, with controls and the key spade J and is entirely consistent with the auction, based on the notion that 2♦ was gf.

Where do we want to be on this layout? We don't want to be in slam: 3N looks just fine to me.

On my assumptions, which will not be valid even for all who play 2♦ as gf, a better hand for responder should bid 2N, not 3N.

Some might play that the difference between 2N and 3N is hcp: 3N shows, it has been suggested, 15-17, and thus I assume 2N would be either fewer or more hcp (with more, would bid again over a signoff).

I prefer that 2N be simply more flexible and that the space consuming 3N be definitive about wanting to place the contract: could have significant (but not huge) hcp but all of the cards are misfitting.

Make my suggested responder hand something like AJxxx Kx AQxx Kx, and I'd bid 2N in an effort to see if partner can make some useful noise....should he bid 3♥, showing the 6th heart, I would start cuebidding (3♠ has to be a cuebid: I can't be trying to play in spades after my 2N bid).

I thought this was an interesting problem, and highlights the need to have good understandings beyond simply 'do you use FSF?'.

[mike777]

Pass

1) prefer 3c not 2h.
2)assume 2d is art/gf
3)assume 3nt shows minimum gf, 2nt can be stronger.

I will play pard for:

AJxxx..x....AKJx...Jxx

[rhm]

I do not mind playing 2♥ as a mark time bid, but then 2♥ was a serious error.
North should have rebid 3♣ instead of 2♥ anyway. When would you rebid 3♣, if not with this distribution?
Then opener just might have passed 3NT.
Now, while 3NT could be right, it could also be wrong.
As it is I would bid 4♣ now followed by 4♠ if possible.

Rainer Herrmann

[mikeh]

rhm, on 2013-July-03, 10:29, said:

I do not mind playing 2♥ as a mark time bid, but then 2♥ was a serious error.
North should have rebid 3♣ instead of 2♥ anyway. When would you rebid 3♣, if not with this distribution?
Then opener just might have passed 3NT.
Now, while 3NT could be right, it could also be wrong.
<snipped>

Rainer Herrmann

I agree with this: the current problem is that we have reduced ourselves to a pure guess because we have misled partner as to our shape to a huge degree. However, I have an additional worry, beyond the obvious fact that 3N might well be the only making game, and that is that I don't know how we can expect partner to work out what's going on.

4♣ should be 6=5, I suppose (tho he'd be entitled to wonder why I didn't rebid 3♣), but we don't know what he'll do over that. He might well bid a regressive 4N, which we'd be obliged to pass and playing 4N rather than 3N is a tough way to make a living.

If he bid 4♥, are we passing? I'd think so, since I can't picture him with Hx for his 3N bid, so slam seems impossible.

If he bids 4♦, isn't that logically slamming in clubs? If so, how can 4♠ by us be passable, and if it isn't passable, how can we go slam hunting on this auction? Can he really have the spade A, good diamonds including the A (he has at least one other honour in diamonds for 3N), at least Kxx in clubs (and Kxx still leaves us in jeopardy) and a stiff heart? Even if he has all of that, slam may not be good. We have serious entry problems and a profound shortage of tricks on many layouts.

[gwnn]

I would have bid 3C before, now I would bid 4C anyway in an effort to recover.

[Winstonm]

Rightly or wrongly, I would bid:
1H-1S
2C-2D
3C-3N
4H

[Hanoi5]

2♦ is effectively GF (or a hand you'd open). I thought 2♥ was a good way to start showing the shape of the hand, leaving space for partner's 2♠ or 2NT and being able to rebid clubs at the 3 level. But when partner bids 3NT I wasn't sure whether to continue or not. I did bid 4♣ and passed partner's 4♥. He held:

♠A87xx
♥A
♦QJTxx
♣Tx

But this discussion will lead us to clear the meaning of 2NT (which I guess is what he should have bid? Or 3♦? Or 3♦ over 2♣?

[Fluffy]

As long as 2♥ simply shows 6 of them or a very strong 5 this is the correct bid, We want to play in hearts not in clubs, because QJxxxx is good as trumps but dreadful as side suit. Reaching a slam where partner has singleton heart and 3 clubs is doomed to fail from the start for lack of comunication. This isn't even taking into account that partner canm rebid 2♠ over 2♥ but not over 3♣, allowing us to fit spades 1 level lower.

[mike777]

Hanoi5, on 2013-July-03, 12:01, said:

2♦ is effectively GF (or a hand you'd open). I thought 2♥ was a good way to start showing the shape of the hand, leaving space for partner's 2♠ or 2NT and being able to rebid clubs at the 3 level. But when partner bids 3NT I wasn't sure whether to continue or not. I did bid 4♣ and passed partner's 4♥. He held:

♠A87xx
♥A
♦QJTxx
♣Tx

But this discussion will lead us to clear the meaning of 2NT (which I guess is what he should have bid? Or 3♦? Or 3♦ over 2♣?

strongly prefer 2nt(inv) not 2d(art/gf).I don't think this hand is worth a gf.

[MrAce]

Put me down for 3♣ previous round as well.

[Free]

2♥ is an awful call imo, it basically says nothing about distribution (with 5422 or 5431 without stopper you just rebid 2♥).

[gnasher]

Free, on 2013-July-04, 03:59, said:

2♥ is an awful call imo, it basically says nothing about distribution (with 5422 or 5431 without stopper you just rebid 2♥).

That sounds like a way of saying that 2♥ is an awful call if you play awful methods.

[cherdano]

And I thought it's standard that a jump to 3N in a game-forcing auction shows extras... The minimum hand with a strong opinion on NT can just bid 2N then 3N.

[wank]

1) no fast arrival in no-trumps. 3nt should show extras, in which case i'd bid on.
2) 2♥ was fine - it shows a 6th heart. 2524 bids 2s.

[PhilKing]

wank, on 2013-July-04, 06:15, said:

1) no fast arrival in no-trumps. 3nt should show extras, in which case i'd bid on.
2) 2♥ was fine - it shows a 6th heart. 2524 bids 2s.

With five good hearts, 2♥ is pretty normal. I would suggest that with 2524 all three minimum bids are possible, with texture dictating which.

Having said that, 2♥ then 3♣ over 2NT or 4♣ over 3NT shows 6-5.

[rhm]

PhilKing, on 2013-July-04, 06:19, said:

Having said that, 2♥ then 3♣ over 2NT or 4♣ over 3NT shows 6-5.

This begs the question what a direct 3♣ over 2♦ is supposed to show.

Rainer Herrmann