[luis]

Scoring: IMP

---

You open 1♦ and pd bids 1♠ now what?

2♠ ? 2♦? 3♦? 3♥(spl)? 4♦? 3♠?

Luis

[mike777]

3D

Many choices but at least partner has a fair idea of my good 6D, my good HCP and likely unbalanced hand.
We still have a chance to find spade fit.

[Chamaco]

I dislike this hand type (reverse with 3 card support) and therefore have chosen, playing precision, to use the jumprebid to 2NT for a distributional reverse with 3 card support.

In absence of that I'll jump to 3D

[Kalvan14]

3♦ is the first choice. I will not jump to 3♠ on a 3-card fit (much less splinter ). The counter-indication is that 3♦ might kill the ♠ fit, and in any case consumes a lot of bidding space.
There is my 2nd choice: 2♣. It saves space, is much more flexible and keeps open the possibility of supporting ♠.

[han]

Also 3D for me. Take away as little as the club jack and I would bid 2S, this is very close.

With Ben I also bid 3D but then it shows this hand (i.e. extras, 3 spades and 6+ diamonds).

[hrothgar]

3♦

The hand strikes me as too strong for 2♠
More importantly, I'm very short in hearts.
I suspect that partner will be able to show hearts after my Dimaond call, and I can show my Spades.

[Cascade]

Chamaco, on Nov 3 2005, 10:24 AM, said:

I dislike this hand type (reverse with 3 card support) and therefore have chosen, playing precision, to use the jumprebid to 2NT for a distributional reverse with 3 card support.

In absence of that I'll jump to 3D

I do the opposite ...

I jump to 3♦ with three-card spade support and rebid 2NT without 3-card spade support as this hand is more likely to have side-suit stoppers for NTs.

[Free]

I've said it before and I'll say it again

3♦ = 15+, 6+♦, 3 card support
3NT = 15+, 6+♦, 0-2 card support

It works out great and it backfires as well. But at least you'll find your Major fits

[mikeh]

I hardly speak for all canadians, but out here we use 2♣ as a stall only as a last resort. Not only do I rarely use the bid, but I like to have a hand on which I am reasonably comfortable should partner pass: here I would not be comfortable because of my playing strength and the power of my ♦ as an almost self-sufficient trump suit.

3♦ seems right here. Sure, we may miss our ♠ fit. I think that these hand types can be covered using 'Cole' (which, if memory serves, uses 2♣ as an artificial bid) but that requires a willingness to rebid 1N on semi-balanced hands with a stiff in partner's major, and that has always seemed to me to be too high a cost to pay.

[pclayton]

3♦.

Then you won't be tempted to make any unilateral slam tries later on.

(Sorry Luis - couldn't resist - I know the hand)

[P_Marlowe]

3D. shows the values, the suit where I live.

Marlowe

[bearmum]

3♦ showing a good ♦ suit and more than minimum opening --- P can still rebid a good ♠ suit if he has one

[Chamaco]

Cascade, on Nov 2 2005, 11:19 PM, said:

Chamaco, on Nov 3 2005, 10:24 AM, said:

I dislike this hand type (reverse with 3 card support) and therefore have chosen, playing precision, to use the jumprebid to 2NT for a distributional reverse with 3 card support.

In absence of that I'll jump to 3D

I do the opposite ...

I jump to 3♦ with three-card spade support and rebid 2NT without 3-card spade support as this hand is more likely to have side-suit stoppers for NTs.

In a non-precision context, I agree that the scheme you use seems more efficient ( e.g. there is indeed the chance of having many extra stoppers, because the power of the hand might exceed 15 hcp).


However, I have thought about the 2 ways, and came to the conclusion that, in a precision context, I have the impression that most times, the limited 1D opener (max 15 hcp) worth a distributional reverse has most values concentrated in diamonds and usually, say, 1 honor and a half outside.

Under such conditions, I believe that most times, NT is better played from responder's side, when it's right, not unlike the Gambling-type hands, despite the differences (suit might not be solid, extra outside stoppers, etc etc).

On the other hand, when we do have a a fit in the major, it's undoubtedly better to start low, from the 2NT level, in order to be able to describe the pattern if responder has slam prospects.

============

Of course, playing the way I do, it is necessary to have a way to checkback fo stoppers when bidding (uncontested) goes 1D-1M-3D.

This issue was decsribed in the following past thread:
http://forums.bridge...showtopic=10057

[Fluffy]

3♦, sadly we ain't strong enough for a 2NT rebid

[han]

Very disappointing Fluffy .

[beatrix45]

I always thought this hand was what the 3♦ rebid was intended to show.