[PhantomSac]

I like easts pass of 2C, the range is just too wide/impossible for partner if we are raising with this.

[akwoo]

If you are really concerned about this hand, you can adopt the K-S treatment where, after a 1♦ opening, a 3♣ rebid shows a weak 5-5 (usually) hand, and the 2♣ rebid shows reverse strength. That probably works better with a weak NT, but I don't think it's terrible with a strong NT.

I don't see any other solution.

[mikestar13]

I would have bid 3♣ with either East or West, both a shade under strength, but reasonable because this hand probably won't play in 3NT anyway--the question is how we get to 6♣ (examples given upthread). If we don't have the stuff for six we play 5♣, no disaster here even at match points as 3NT is very unlikely to make an overtrick if it makes at all.

[rmnka447]

I've been pondering over this hand for a while and haven't posted 'til now because of it.

My first and continuing impression is that this hand is a tough one.

West has a big hand -- 16 HCP, 4 QTs, 4 unadjusted losers. But the ♣ suit is a bit anemic -- K high and no spots. I suppose you might adjust the losers for the actual honors held and make it a 5 loser hand (1 1/2 in ♦ and 2 1/2 in ♣). Is the hand good enough to make a jump to 3 ♣? I'm not sure it is. But 2 ♣ looks like an underbid. OTOH, 3 ♣ is forcing on partner and may get you too high especially opposite a non fitting minimum response. If responder has something like xxx KQxxx xx xxx, then 3 ♣ may be the limit of the hand.

East barely has a response. IMO, the stiff ♠ Q isn't worth much more than its singleton value unless opener shows something in ♠. So, I'd be bidding 1 ♥ more as protection against ending up in a 4-2 or 3-2 ♦ fit than anything else. When opener rebids 2 ♣, the hand does improve quite a bit. The doubleton ♦ is a plus opposite opener's known length. So is the extra length in ♣. But the value, if any, for the stiff ♠ Q beyond being a singleton is still in doubt. If you reevaluate solely on the ♣ A and distribution points -- 3 for the stiff and 1 for the doubleton, you're at about an 8 value hand. Maybe you make it an 8+ to reflect the possible value for the ♠ Q if opener has something in ♠. I think that puts the hand on the cusp of a 3 ♣ raise. Opposite a minimum opener like Ax xx AJxxx Kxxx, 3 or 4 ♣ might be the limit of the hand.

Part of the decisions that either player makes have to do with how forcing 2 ♣ is also. Here in the US, quite a few players will play the 2 ♣ rebid as non-forcing especially at matchpoints. Then a raise to 3 ♣ has to be invitational. OTOH, if the 2 ♣ rebid is absolutely forcing, then opener has to allow for the occasional hand such as East's hand where the raise might be made on less than invitational values.

What either player does depends both on their agreements and each player's knowledge of their partner's bidding tendencies.

[gnasher]

One reason for East to raise is the fact that nobody has bid spades. If the opponents had ten spades, one of them would probably have bid them, so partner is likely to be 3154 or 3055. Opposite those shapes we don't need that much for game. A hand like KJx x AQxxx KQxx makes 5♣ good.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2015-December-06, 10:41

[all loomis]

Fluffy, on 2015-December-01, 03:07, said:

I asked some international players/teachers in my area, they as me expect a 3♣ raise to be 9-11, perhaps with a good 8, but never to be heard with a 6 count. Seems that all players in my area are away from standard

opposite a real c suit, this hand is worth 3 tricks or more. at 2.9 points per trick, raise and hum the internationale as you do.