[deep]

]

---

What can bid now south?
East play 5 major Diamond 4° and clubs can was 2 cards.
Thanks to everyone for the help I apologize for disturbing but I need experts.

2° hand

---

What bid South now 3♥ or what is better?

3° hand

---

What better bid for South?
2♥ transfer for ♠

[ahydra]

I'm no expert, but...

1) I would X. If partner bids spades, great - otherwise I bid 1NT next. Alternatively you could bid 1NT straight off - a little off-shape, but at least you have a good club stop

2) This is a tough one :/ I would bid 3H. Partner will likely bid 3NT in which case we can bid 4NT (quantitative invite). The only alternative I see is blasting 6NT, which you may well have to if partner comes back with 3S.

3) Why not super-accept with this 17-count with ♠AKxx? Anyway, South didn't, so now it comes down to what 3C means. I play it NAT GF and would bid 4C here. Some pairs have a gadget for "fit with one or both" and this is the perfect place to use it.

Don't be afraid to ask for help here - it's what these forums are for I have a feeling some of these would be better suited to the int/adv forum, but I may well be wrong on that.

ahydra

[mcphee]

Hand 1 gives us some choices, pass, 1S and 1N, I will go with 1N

hand 2 it would be nice to know what the methods are. If 2/1 I would rebid 2N and hear partner complete their hand.
with sayc i would be a 3NT bidder.

Hand 3 3C is normally a second suit and game forcing. 3S lets responder tell us what is going on. I would love to show C support, but usually this denies 3 S. Life would have been so easy if we could have bid 3D show a maximum for S with D losers over the transfer or some other super accept.

[rhm]

Hand 1:

1NT

Hand 2:

2NT if forcing by agreement. If 2NT is not forcing 3♥.

Hand 3:

This depends a bit on agreement. I will assume 3♣ was natural and forcing to game. The fact that you did not superaccept (you should have) has worked to your advantage.
A good agreement when responder bids a second suit is to agree that a preference to responders first suit (3♠) shows support for responders second suit (♣ support in this case) while bidding a new suit is a control bid in support of responders first suit.
With no specific agreement I would still bid 3♥. I am interested, whether this will induce partner to bid 3NT.
If he does the hand has lost much of its value, because partner's shortage will not be in diamonds, and I will correct 3NT to 4♠.
From this sequence of bids (3♥ followed by 4♠ over 3NT) partner should deduce that I have still a good hand for him.
If he bids anything else but 3NT, I will make further slam tries, depending on partner's next bid. Over 3♠, 4♣, over anything else probably 5♠ (no diamond control).

Rainer Herrmann

[JLOGIC]

I hate 1N at this vul, I would always pass. Conversely, I'd always bid 1N r/w.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

3rd hand:

Sure, I agree with the others about the super-accept, but let's take it from where you are now.
3C should be natural, GF... usually a 2nd 5 card suit.

Now, bidding either of the red suits will look like a probe for 3NT.

So, since I'm interested in either back suit slam, I'll initially agree Spades with 3S.
Partner has plenty of room to initiate cuebidding.
If he fails to do this and just bids 4S, I'm strong enough to bid 5C ( ostensibly just a Ctrl cue ).
....... If he next cues 5D , then 6S by me.
....... If instead he cues 5H, denying a Diam-Ctrl, I'll sign-off in 5S.

[kgr]

deep, on 2012-April-29, 04:38, said:

2° hand

---

mcphee, on 2012-April-29, 05:58, said:

hand 2 it would be nice to know what the methods are. If 2/1 I would rebid 2N and hear partner complete their hand.
with sayc i would be a 3NT bidder.

rhm, on 2012-April-29, 08:11, said:

Hand 2:
2NT if forcing by agreement. If 2NT is not forcing 3♥.

I don't see difference between SAYC and 2/1 or how 2NT can be not forcing. You don't need an agreement to have it forcing?

[kgr]

JLOGIC, on 2012-April-29, 08:21, said:

I hate 1N at this vul, I would always pass. Conversely, I'd always bid 1N r/w.

Why different bid at different vulnerability?
Is it because you don't really expect to make game, but really don't want to miss it when vulnerable & at the given vulnerability you don't mind to defend and try to defeat opps? Would it then even be a more clear pass at MP's?

[lowerline]

1. I only consider passing in imps. I prefer 1nt over double because it better shows my strength and we can still find a major suit fit.

2. 3nt. This should show a stronger hand than 2nt and you're not strong enough to bid 2nt first and 4nt later. With 17 you would be strong enough to take control, therefor I think 3nt should show around 14-16 and that is what you have.

3. 3♠, but I would have bid it one turn earlier

Steven