[mcphee]

---

You open the bidding 1C and without any interference we proceed as follows. Imps.
1C 1H
2S 3D
3N 4D
4N 5N
?

1. Would you elect to bid 2S?
2. What is 4NT?
3. What is 5NT?
4. Would you bid again over 5NT?


My feelings are this is not a good choice to bid 2S which sets a GF. The S suit is a tad thin even though I have a very good hand the H bid is not a major improvement. I might have elected to bid 3NT passing up showing S, but that could lead to a poor result when partner has 4S. My preference is just 1S which is unlikely to ever cost me.

I'll post the companion hand later.

[whereagles]

My interpretation, which is, of course, debateable:

2♠: obvious, as far as I am concerned. Huge playing strength here.
3NT: misfit warning. You can instead try 4♣ if you're feeling lucky.
4♦: I guess this is natural... 55 or thereabouts.
4NT: MISFIT. PLEASE PASS.
5NT: well, despite the misfit, I think I'll still risk an invitation.

In light of this, I would bid 6♣ now, emphazising the good suit.

[paulg]

• I'd bid 1♠ and hope to survive. I dislike jumping into such a poor suit when I have such a preference for playing in clubs.
  
• 4NT is sign-off
  
• 5NT is pick a slam for me
  
• 6♣ looks a good start but I shall pass 6♦

[mikeh]

2♠ is an overbid. The hand is not strong enough to force to game opposite a normal minimum 1♥ response, and 2♠ grossly overstates the suit quality. I do not think that it is even close: 1♠ seems clear to me.

4N is to play. Once you bid 3N, 4N HAS to be natural

5N is forcing: pick a slam is the usual default expert meaning these days

I am close to 6♦, but it is difficult to construct a hand, consistent with the auction, on which 6♦ is superior to 6♣: partner would have to be insane or extremely powerful to bid this way with a [C] void and if he is 6-6 in the reds, (say x AQJxxx KQxxxx void) he will correct 6♣ to 6♦.

I really hate the auction: partner is entitled to expect more: AQJx x Kx AKJxxx would be a reasonable hand for the jumpshift.

[luke warm]

again, i'm just not sure what 4nt is... 5nt seems invitational to me, and i'd bid 6c now... as for the original 2s, it's close but A,10 4th might be a little thin

[whereagles]

mikeh, on Apr 9 2006, 08:23 PM, said:

1♠ seems clear to me.

Do you play that as forcing?

[Salokin]

whereagles, on Apr 10 2006, 01:48 AM, said:

3NT: misfit warning. You can instead try 4♣ if you're feeling lucky.
4♦: I guess this is natural... 55 or thereabouts.
4NT: MISFIT. PLEASE PASS.
5NT: well, despite the misfit, I think I'll still risk an invitation.

In light of this, I would bid 6♣ now, emphazising the good suit.

i could fully agree with this, only 2♠
is not a must in my opinion and probably 1♠, leaving more room, will
left us in a better position later.

Salokin

[Codo]

mikeh, on Apr 10 2006, 05:23 AM, said:

2♠ is an overbid. The hand is not strong enough to force to game opposite a normal minimum 1♥ response, and 2♠ grossly overstates the suit quality. I do not think that it is even close: 1♠ seems clear to me.

4N is to play. Once you bid 3N, 4N HAS to be natural

5N is forcing: pick a slam is the usual default expert meaning these days

I really hate the auction: partner is entitled to expect more: AQJx x Kx AKJxxx would be a reasonable hand for the jumpshift.

100 % agreed, 6♣ now

[paulg]

whereagles, on Apr 9 2006, 11:17 PM, said:

mikeh, on Apr 9 2006, 08:23 PM, said:

1♠ seems clear to me.

Do you play that as forcing?

No, but I believe the chances of missing game are lower than the chances of playing in a poor 6♠ after an initial 2♠ response.

[mikeh]

whereagles, on Apr 9 2006, 06:17 PM, said:

mikeh, on Apr 9 2006, 08:23 PM, said:

1♠ seems clear to me.

Do you play that as forcing?

Those who overbid on good hands seem to me to be motivated mostly by fear: fear that they will miss a good game or slam if they bid 'conservatively'.

This is usually a beginner's mistake and, in fairness, usually has a good basis in past experience. Most beginners play with other beginners or near-beginners. Thus there will be a number of times when partner misbids over the conservative rebid: and will later claim that it was opener's fault for not having shown a big hand on his second bid.

But good players know that one does not compensate for partner's errors by taking charge: by overbidding.... unless you are in a short-term partnership where you don't care about partner.

You address the problem by discussion, inviting good playes to help the partnership resolve the issue, and by allowing partner to learn to bid better. Or, if partner won't or can't learn, by moving on to a better partner.

As for why 1♠ rather than 2♠: would we respond 1♥ on Jxx KQxxx xxxx x?

I would, and I suspect that the majority of the field would. Just how are we going to land on our feet after 2♠?

Now, 1♠, which is where I'd play, is not the contract of my dreams but I am willing to bet that I make it... and even more willing to bet that I don't go down doubled.

I suppose that, if we really work at it, we can come up with a hand on which we can make some game contract where partner passes 1♠, but so what? Designing a bidding system so that you attain perfection on every hand is a fool's quest.

[joshs]

1. I think 2S is a slight overbid. I would have bid only 1S
2. 4N was natural
3. 5N was pick a slam. I can't pass it.
4. I would pick 6C

[whereagles]

mikeh: huh.. I take it you play it as non-forcing thus?

[keylime]

I rebid 1♠.

The J♥ is worthless. I have slightly too much strength outside my reverse, and my reverse suit being K-t-x-x is not that appealing to me.

I like 3/4♣ followup afterwards.

[pclayton]

1. I rebid 1♠, but I have partners that would rebid 2♠ (read into this what you wish).

2. Since 4♦ is forward going, 4N is a signoff. I think the subject hand's pattern is appropriate for a 4N call, albeit a Q light for the initial jump shift.

3. 5N is pick a slam, although its a little illogical, since it implies tolerance for all strains.

4. I'd try 6♣ now, and wouldn't be surprised if 6N was the winner.

There aren't any angst-inducing calls (except maybe 2♠) in this auction; the title of the post implies there is. I'd be curious to see the companion hand.

[han]

I agree with most mainstream opinions:

1. I would bid 1S, not 2S.

2. 4D is natural, 4NT is a clear sign-off.

3. I prefer to play 5NT as pick-a-slam in such auctions (i.e. unclear auctions), and I think that it is better than any alternative I know.

4. I would bid 6C, I haven't shown my solid clubs yet. I don't agree with Phil that partner implies tolerance for all suits. Partner certainly won't expect me to bid 6S, and he may remove 6C to 6D with the hand that mikeh suggests. I would guess (if I had to) that partner is 2-5-5-1.

[mikeh]

whereagles, on Apr 10 2006, 12:59 PM, said:

mikeh: huh.. I take it you play it as non-forcing thus?

I would have thought that my answer had come through loud and clear: I and just about everyone else choses a non-forcing 1♠.

I believe that the mainstream expert approach is (absent use of gadgets such as rotng, gazzilli, cole etc) to have responder strive to keep a change of suit auction alive. Thus, while 1♣ 1♥ 1♠ is not forcing, responder will rarely pass, and, should he do so, it will usually be right.

But if your experience is that responder will drop 1♠ on hands on which game is a good bet, then that explains your obsession with taking control. In that case, my respectful suggestion is that your treatment only aggravates the problem.

When one partner habitually overbids, the other, underbidding partner, is conditioned to continue underbidding. The correct treatment for the problem is for you to become more conservative, not more aggressive. Partner will learn that he or she is expected to contribute: rather than to be the passive player in a one-sided partnership.

I do not wish to sound condescending, but I am driven to wonder whether you have ever been part of a truly strong partnership: I don't mean a partnership that does well at the local club or wins the odd minor tournament event. It's just that I don't see how a partnership can function at a high level with a member who espouses the take-charge attitude reflected in your posts.

[whereagles]

mikeh:

You do sound very condescending, at least from my point of view. I understand you're proud of your experience and skill and that you're anxious to share your knowledge with others. But that doesn't come for free. If you want others to listen to you, you must also listen to them, in this case, me. I know I have some off-mainstream ideas about bidding, but I got to them on my own, through reading, playing and analysing. I do not have the style I have because of bad partners. (Though I confess I hog the hand and mastermind with a bad pard - I want to win, and so does HE! )

Anyway, back to the technical points. I asked you if you played 1♠ as forcing because where I live, most people play like this:

1m-1♥-1♠ = 11-17, non-forcing, may be balanced 12-14. Pard may pass with semi-fit and 5-7 points.

1m-1♥-1♠ = 18-21, game-forcing. Spades may be xxxx.

Within these definitions, the hand fits a 2♠ rebid. If your 1♠ is wider (I know some that play it as forcing), then you have an option I usually don't have. I think this clears it up. US/Europe differences, I guess.

Oh, and about I not having played with a strong pard, well, I can tell you this. I played for the national junior team some years ago, in partnership with country's strongest junior at the time. For professional reasons, I only had the opportunity to run for the national open team once and got to the quarter-finals on that occasion.

Now cheers and cya in a week (off to the beach.. ehehehhe)