[Al_U_Card]

Hmmmmn, if pard can (will) respond with 3 hcp and 5 H cards then maybe 3C is a bit rich? 3D has distinct underbid potential so how about 2C as lead directing.....lol

[mikeh]

Since we were both Kib'ing this hand, Justin already knows that I bid 2♣. This was not even close for me.

[awm]

Well, any of 2♣, 3♦, or 3♣ could be right. I tend to bid 3♣ in part because the diamonds are so long: it seems like a pass of 2♣ is almost inevitably bad (if partner has only three clubs, diamonds will almost surely play better; if partner has four or more clubs we can miss a game). Admittedly this can get us too high opposite the wrong hand, but at least we will be in the right strain.

On the other hand, if I know that partner routinely bids 1♥ on basically any hand with five hearts, 2♣ starts to look a lot more appealing.

[mike777]

2C


Discussing bidding theory here are some non mainstream thoughts, enjoy!




Brings back the issue from other post by Mickyb and Phil. Should the change of suit at the two level show extras after 1 over 1 bid? If so then with minimum opener needs to rebid 2 of suit or 1nt and hide her second suit.

Dr. Roth advocates this:
1) shifting suits concept by opener
2) mark time rebids by responder


..."jump shifts require high cards, not only distribution"....


"...do not shift suits in a hit-and-miss fashion, ....games and slams can be reached, provided the third bid by the opener suits your hand."


...."Weak sounding bids should be made on weak hands."....




..."you do not have to jump every time you like your hand. The mere shifting of suits to the next level will encourage responder to bid again. He must simple be aware that his limited holding might be the exact holding for game or slam, and he will therefore keep the bidding open.".....

[pclayton]

3♣.

If playing with pards that respond on zip, then this perhaps is a dangerous call. But two pointed queens make me gin for 5♦ and the A♦ gives me 6.

How can I do anything less?

[pbleighton]

"3D has distinct underbid potential"

Yes, but you have the wrong void, making you too weak for 3C IMO.

You are also pretty strong for 2C.

3D by default. It's only KJ, but there are 7 of them.

Any of these could be right.

Peter

[P_Marlowe]

3C

ugly, but 3D should promise a better
suit, but then ... 3C promises a stronger
hand.
Take your choice.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: a forcing 2D would be great.

[Gerben42]

2♣. Partner may have a worthless hand for me.

[Kalvan14]

2♣, and I am not agonising on this choice. Nothing easier than finding pard with a nice 6-4 in the majors.
there are 2 "bad" things in this hand: the diamonds lack intermediates, and my chicane is in pard's longest suit.
2♣ might end up loosing a game (IMHO, the only risk is finding pard with a singleton honor in ♦, and 3♣), but if pard cannot rebid I'll take this risk.

[temp3600]

3C.

If partner is non-minimum, my choice likely doesn't matter much.
If he is minimum however and I make a non game-forcing rebid, seeing how little I need to make game, I have the feeling that we will a lot more often stay in a partial when it's wrong than when it's right.

[fred]

My opinon:

The time to consider a "mark time" bid like 2C is when:

1) No other rebid is satisfying

and

2) You hope to be able to better describe you hand on the next round of bidding (if there is one)

or

3) You hope that going slow will tell you what you need to know about partner's hand

Condition 1 is certainly present here, but I don't think conditions 2 or 3 are. This is a freak hand and you are never going to be able describe it no matter how slowly you go or how many mark time bids you make. Furthermore, no matter how you bid, it will often be impossible to find out exactly what you need to know about partner's hand.

In my opinion it is practical to take the position that you are willing to play 5D (because it is cold or at least reasonable opposite so many "worthless" hands).

You can't describe this hand and you can't find out what you need to know regardless of how you bid. A mark time bid won't help - it will just leave you with too much catching up to do.

The best you can hope for is to convey your direction: that you have a hand that is willing to force to 5D and is interested in 6D.

The way to convey this message is to force to game with 3C and then bid diamonds later. Of course you still won't be able to describe all the features of this freak hand, but at least your partner will known that you are close to making 11 tricks all by yourself.

Perhaps I am being overly optimistic, but view is that the 2C (and 3D) bidders are being overly pessimistic

One reason for optimism: on many deals you will be able to make 5D opposite any of the other 3 hands at the table.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[HeartA]

Jlall, on Jan 9 2006, 03:28 PM, said:

imps NV

AT --- KJxxxxx AKQJ.

You open 1D, partner rebids 1H, what is your rebid?

3C, wtp?

[Kalvan14]

There are 6 diamond cards available for the other 3 players at the table: on avge, 2 each, but... I find it a bit ominous that noone has been bidding (considering that there are 11 spades and 13 hearts ) except my partner. In a normal world, the bidding tray would have come back to me at the 3 spades level .

IMHO, pard is likely to have 9 or 10 cards in the majors. How many diamonds do you think he may have?

Once you bid 3♣, you are committed to game; and this game can only be in diamonds, don't you think? I'd feel very nervous playing 5 clubs, even if I were sure that pard has 4 cards (in which case he's chicane in diamonds, wanna bet?)
While opener's hand is very good, it need a minimum fit in diamonds for game.
Qx would be ok, but facing a small singleton (if not a chicane) it can be 2 or 3 down (certainly doubled).
Is anyone willing to play 5♦ facing a partner who would pass a rebid of 2♣?
Mind, if I get a preference for diamonds, I'll not stop before game at least.

[cherdano]

Also a 3♣ rebid for me (and yes, I already thought so before reading Fred's post ). One out of 3 (♠K, ♦A, ♦Q) needed for 5♦ is good enough for me. (And ♠Q or ♥A or 3 diamonds are still good enough on the right lead.)

By the way, to the 2♣ bidders plan to jump to 4♦ or 5♦ over partner's hoped for preference to 2♦?

Arend

[mike777]

cherdano, on Jan 9 2006, 08:07 PM, said:

Also a 3♣ rebid for me (and yes, I already thought so before reading Fred's post ). One out of 3 (♠K, ♦A, ♦Q) needed for 5♦ is good enough for me. (And ♠Q or ♥A or 3 diamonds are still good enough on the right lead.)

By the way, to the 2♣ bidders plan to jump to 4♦ or 5♦ over partner's hoped for preference to 2♦?

Arend

That is possible another choice is 2s over 2d and then 4 or 5d over partner's prepared third bid. Very tough hand....but with partner showing 2d cards at least we should be ok, do not want to give up on slam just yet. At some point bidding 4h by partner is also possible which would be kickback for D. I will not show heart void. In any case nasty problem. Note 2clubs showed extras not minimum 13-14 pt hand in this style.

Of course if partner does not rebid 2d we have a whole set of other issues.

[Kalvan14]

2♠ is a nice bid over a 2♦ preference. 4♦ would also be forcing, IMHO.

Now the question is what the 3♣ers would rebid over 3♥

[pclayton]

Kalvan14, on Jan 9 2006, 06:06 PM, said:

2♠ is a nice bid over a 2♦ preference. 4♦ would also be forcing, IMHO.

Now the question is what the 3♣ers would rebid over 3♥

Easy; 4♦. Shows at least a 6-4 and is forcing.

[Kalvan14]

pclayton, on Jan 9 2006, 10:52 PM, said:

Kalvan14, on Jan 9 2006, 06:06 PM, said:

2♠ is a nice bid over a 2♦ preference. 4♦ would also be forcing, IMHO.

Now the question is what the 3♣ers would rebid over 3♥

Easy; 4♦. Shows at least a 6-4 and is forcing.

Very good: pity, there is still no indication of a fit (or tolerance) for diamonds.
Now I give you three choices (really two, ):

• pard rebids 4H
  
• pard gives preference to 5C
  
• (unlikely) pard rebids 4NT

Are you still sure the hand is worth a GF without even the hint of a fit in diamonds?

[pclayton]

Kalvan14, on Jan 9 2006, 09:07 PM, said:

pclayton, on Jan 9 2006, 10:52 PM, said:

Kalvan14, on Jan 9 2006, 06:06 PM, said:

2♠ is a nice bid over a 2♦ preference. 4♦ would also be forcing, IMHO.

Now the question is what the 3♣ers would rebid over 3♥

Easy; 4♦. Shows at least a 6-4 and is forcing.

Very good: pity, there is still no indication of a fit (or tolerance) for diamonds.
Now I give you three choices (really two, ):

• pard rebids 4H
  
• pard gives preference to 5C
  
• (unlikely) pard rebids 4NT

Are you still sure the hand is worth a GF without even the hint of a fit in diamonds?

If pard persists with 4♥ in the face of my massive 2 suiter, he must a fistful of them. Why? Over 3♣ - He could have given me preference (real or false) in diamonds, raised clubs, or punted with 3♠. And over 4♦ he could have gone back to clubs. I expect at least 6 real good ones, and probably 7, sometimes 8. So I pass 4♥

Over 5♣, I expect very short diamonds, so I will try 6♣ hoping he has a cover for my spade loser .

Fred's comment about making 5♦ across from any hand at the table is intriguing. I'm sure those that opt for 2♣ have a prepared excuse for their teammates why they missed 6♣ opposite: xxxx, Qxxx, A, 10xxx and were +170.

This hand is actually real good for a version of Cole I have in development, where 2♣ is forcing.