[jillybean]

Scoring: IMP

---

Hi,
Playing sayc with a pickup partner

(p) 1♣ (p) 1♥) (p)

how do you bid now, 1♠ is not forcing.

[G_R__E_G]

I'll try 3♣. If partner comes back with 3♦ I've got an easy 3NT. If they come back with ♥'s or ♠'s I'll show my ♥ support.

[inquiry]

In SAYC, no choice but 2♠ if 1♠ is not forcing (even if 1♠ was forcing, with heart support, I would not bid it, I would bid 2♠, then raise hearts.

Now, if you join the dark side and play 3♣ rebid here as six plus good clubs, and nice three card support (but non-forcing), you would be very well placed. But this requires a system overhall to deal with strong hands with clubs and no fit for partners major and is beyond the scope of this thread. But this is the type of hand that treatment is created to deal with. Note, if you reverse to 2♠, you will never get out in 3 ♣s when it is right.

[keylime]

3♣, happily, showing the 3-x-x-6 hand (since I use Mexican 2♦ to show the 18-19 balanced hand).

[Chamaco]

inquiry, on Nov 8 2005, 04:34 PM, said:

Now, if you join the dark side and play 3♣ rebid here as six plus good clubs, and nice three card support (but non-forcing), you would be very well placed.

The even darker side would be to play that 2D shows any type of reverse (regardless of diamonds), to be clarified later, but that goes beyond the scope of this thread I think.

[jillybean]

thanks,

another rule (never lie about your major suit) I need to forget.

What is a moysian?

jb

whoops I replied to this befiore seeing the other replies
3♣ is also not forcing?

[david_c]

inquiry, on Nov 8 2005, 05:34 PM, said:

Now, if you join the dark side and play 3♣ rebid here as six plus good clubs, and nice three card support (but non-forcing), you would be very well placed.

Interesting - don't you think the hand is a little too strong for that?

(Sorry to add to the "beyond the scope of this thread" theme. Playing SAYC, I like the suggestion of bidding 2♠.)

[inquiry]

No, this hand is fine.

[cherdano]

This hand is too difficult for me. So if this is a B/I thread, maybe I should adjust my profile to Novice?
I would have just bid 3♣, hoping to survive this round, and show my heart support next round whatever partner does (ok, maybe except when he rebids 3NT). But I like Justin's suggestion better.

Arend

[Chamaco]

cherdano, on Nov 8 2005, 05:03 PM, said:

This hand is too difficult for me. So if this is a B/I thread, maybe I should adjust my profile to Novice?

Sure Arend, but then be sure to avoid using the Ireland flag and to call certain TDs for adjustment

[mike777]

Playing sayc with p/u partner I just bid 3clubs and hope I get past this round.
If nothing else partner will assume I have full values for my bids the rest of the evening.

[luis]

I agree with 2♠, then hearts and I'm lying about only 1 card, to my standards that is close to a record :-)

[han]

2S seems best, I'm not comfortable bidding 3C with this monster.

Ben, it is interesting to me that you think 1C-1H-3C shows this hand in your system, I think the hand it too good. How many Zar's is this, 37? And that's before fit adjustments.

[cherdano]

Hannie, on Nov 8 2005, 10:09 PM, said:

Ben, it is interesting to me that you think 1C-1H-3C shows this hand in your system, I think the hand it too good. How many Zar's is this, 37? And that's before fit adjustments.

So many, that even Han can't count them: 39. (And that doesn't even count the upgrade for ♦10! (Or ♣T9.) )
I think this hand looks like a GF, Zar-points like a GF, even HCP+length-points as a GF, so it probably is a GF.

Btw, where is Fluffy when we need him?

Arend

[inquiry]

Hannie, on Nov 8 2005, 03:09 PM, said:

2S seems best, I'm not comfortable bidding 3C with this monster.

Ben, it is interesting to me that you think 1C-1H-3C shows this hand in your system, I think the hand it too good. How many Zar's is this, 37? And that's before fit adjustments.

If partner has only four hearts and a yucky hand, where are you going? Sure this hand is a monster is support of hearts, so much so that if partner corrects 3♣ to a paltry 3♥, I will carry on to game. But if we can't play 4♥, where does this hand belong? Maybe 5♣, but if you bid spades, and then raise hearts, how is your partner to know about the extra long ♣'s?

If your partner responded with a hand along the lines of

♠ 1087x
♥ 976xxx
♦ x
♣ xx

Where do you want to be? 4♥ really has no play, as there is no entry to dummy even if H's are 2-2 with king on side (this is one of hannie 1♥ bids over 1C from an earlier thread).

I will admit 3♣ is a tad heavy, but it can not be too much worse. Good suit, good three card support. The question becomes not if this one is too strong, but what would be too weak. If I wanted to show "strong" support for hearts (and insist on hearts), I would bid 2♦ (artificial reverse, can be short) and then raise hearts. I like 3♣ here better.

[Robert]

Hello everyone

Even with 'so many' Zar points that opposite a possible weak four card heart suit(without extra values) you aren't likely to make ten tricks in hearts.

Mike777 hit the nail on the head. Partner will trust your bids 'until' he finds out something different in another auction.

Do not make 50 cent bids with a penny partner. S. J. Simon would be proud of a 3C bid here 'with' a pick up partner.

Hello Chamaco If you were a novice, you would not know that a 3C bid was the book bid here.

A bunch of 'instructors' have decided to visit and comment. Chamaco, you are doing just fine. Enjoy.

I cannot scroll back that far. No, 3Cs is not forcing. It shows about 16-18HCP and a 6+ card suit in standard methods.

Regards,
Robert