[jillybean]

(p) 1♥ {p} 1♠
(2♦) your bid

---

your bid please..
ty
jb

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

in case you play suppX, I would make one,
you have the choice between 3D and 4H.

If you happen to be a nice partner, you will
choose 4H.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Echognome]

I bid 3♦ to show a good hand without clear direction. I raise either major and I sit for 3NT.

[Mr. Dodgy]

double

[HeartA]

3♦.

[pclayton]

I like a support double, followed by a LOT of hearts.

Oh, pard can pass the support double? That may not be too bad, really.

[kenberg]

X, a support double, if you are playing them. Possibly lho is about to bid several diamonds. I'll be offering a choice by bidding hearts later. Hopefully if, say, lho bids 4D, partner passes, and rho bids 5D, my partner will choose correctly over my 5H. Hopefully there will be a correct choice. The hand has a lot of offense.

If you are not playing support doubles, I think 3D is right. There are problems with this call, which is why people play support doubles, but I think it is best.

[jillybean]

I bid 3♥ and my partner passed ...making 5 for a close to bottom board.

---

1♥ (p) 1♠ (2♦)
3♥ all pass

We dont play support doubles, looks like 3♦ was my bid

[cherdano]

jillybean2, on Nov 13 2006, 11:19 PM, said:

I bid 3♥ and my partner passed ...making 5 for a close to bottom board.

---

1♥ (p) 1♠ (2♦)
3♥ all pass

We dont play support doubles, looks like 3♦ was my bid

How good is your hand? You have 19 hcp. Ok, you may want to discount the ♦Q, so you have 17 left. But then, you have
- a huge 6-card suit (with T AND 9 this is a good trump suit opposite a singleton)
- very nice 3-card support for your partner, and
- a single in opponents suit.

This hand is clearly so good that you should force to game.

[whereagles]

jilly, you've been victim of one of the holes in sayc: inexistance of a bid for hands of type "strong 2".

[neilkaz]

whereagles, on Nov 13 2006, 06:31 PM, said:

jilly, you've been victim of one of the holes in sayc: inexistance of a bid for hands of type "strong 2".

I don't think Std American is at fault here. JB's hand is good enough to force to game with 3♦ (although she may have a tough decision to pull to 4♥) if PD bids 3NT.

Also PD's pass of the jump to 3H with 9 HCP is quite weak, IMHO.

That being said is SEF or ACOL, then JB opens 2 and game is trivial to find.

However, in SA(without Gazzilli) with no interference JB has to "invent" the jump shift to 3♣ to force game and get more info from PD and perhaps PD raises to 4♣ and the pair is left guessing as to which game. So in SA the opps 2♦ actually makes game easier to find with these cards.

[Robert]

Hi jillybeans2

What would a double of the 2D overcall be 'if' you do not play support doubles?(promising 3 card support)

I like to play almost all low level doubles as 'card showing' takeout type bids.

If the double of 2D overcall would have been penalty, I would bid 3D as a game force.

Regards,
Robert

[kenberg]

Interesting observation about the 2D bid potentially assisting in a difficult hand. After 1H-1S-?, with no interference, I think 4H is best. It's a real shame to not show the spades, but as noted, 3C can get the train off it's tracks. The 3C bid forces partner to do something, so very little can be deduced from the raise to 4C except that pard has some clubs. So 4H or 4S is still a guess, and the club bids have muddied the picture.

Fortunately opponents can generally be depended upon to help us out.

I can see why, as the bidding went, jb's pard passed the 3H. Give jb a likely xx in diamonds and then surely the defense against hearts will begin with a diamond to the AQ. If this is followed by the ace of clubs and then a third diamond, it could get rough even if the hearts are behaving, which they may not be. Perhaps it was timid, but it wasn't thoughtless.

Final contract:
At least at imps, and very possibly at mps, 3N is a fine contract. Hearts come home if they are 3-3 and they come in one third of the time when they are 4-2. Nine tricks (5+3+1+0, for example) are virtually certain, there is no danger of ruffs or promotions. Of course that's a very nice stiff Q to go with the Kx, a bit tough to uncover in the auction. Whether 3D would get you to 3N is less certain. I think pard will expect some spades from the 3D bid. It's unlikely that opener would start 1H (instead of 2C) and then choose a 3D call without at least some sort of holding in the spade suit, since pard can hold a six count. 3N would be inspired, but I think I, if jb's partner, would move to a spade game. That's how I have convinced myself, anyway.


An interesting hand, particularly in the helpfulness of the 2D bid.

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean2, on Nov 13 2006, 04:19 PM, said:

I bid 3♥ and my partner passed ...making 5 for a close to bottom board.

---

1♥ (p) 1♠ (2♦)
3♥ all pass

We dont play support doubles, looks like 3♦ was my bid

Hi,

Over the 3H bid, which already promises 16-18HCP,
partner should bid 3NT, on power alone.

He has the diamond stopper.

There is not much difference between 3D and 3H, only
that partner has the option to pass, which he should
not do with his given hand.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: As always, it was partners fault

[cherdano]

whereagles, on Nov 14 2006, 02:31 AM, said:

jilly, you've been victim of one of the holes in sayc: inexistance of a bid for hands of type "strong 2".

I hate it when people blame the system when it was really a judgement problem.

[pclayton]

If support doubles aren't available, some strong action (3♦ / 4♥) is warranted.

[brianshark]

TBH, I think 3♥ shows your hand, and though it's unfortunate your p has a hand without a clear bid, he should still make a move with 9pts opposite your 16-19.

[whereagles]

cherdano, on Nov 14 2006, 04:18 PM, said:

whereagles, on Nov 14 2006, 02:31 AM, said:

jilly, you've been victim of one of the holes in sayc: inexistance of a bid for hands of type "strong 2".

I hate it when people blame the system when it was really a judgement problem.

And I hate it when people fail to understand there's a price to pay for mudding 1-level openings.

[jillybean]

whereagles, on Nov 14 2006, 03:49 PM, said:

cherdano, on Nov 14 2006, 04:18 PM, said:

whereagles, on Nov 14 2006, 02:31 AM, said:

jilly, you've been victim of one of the holes in sayc: inexistance of a bid for hands of type "strong 2".

I hate it when people blame the system when it was really a judgement problem.

And I hate it when people fail to understand there's a price to pay for mudding 1-level openings.

Please tell, what is mudding 1-level openings?