[jillybean]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     -     Pass  1♦
 Pass  1♥    Pass  3NT
 Pass  6NT   Pass  Pass
 Pass  

6nt-1 who is to blame?

[EricK]

To me, the South hand is not a 3NT rebid.

[badderzboy]

3NT is a little too hot for me , 3♦s seems a reasonable alternative.

North bidding 6N facing an expected monster seems fair enough.

Steve

[paulg]

This is a problem of hand valuation and understanding the standard meaning of rebidding notrumps.

Generally, playing a 15-17 1NT,

1♦-1♥-1NT shows a balanced 12-14 HCP
1♦-1♥-2NT shows a balanced 18-19 HCP
1♦-1♥-3NT shows a good hand with a 0-1-loser running minor

I would rebid 2NT with the South hand as the diamond suit is not quite good enough for 3NT. An additional high diamond (say, ♦KQJxxxx) would be better for a 3NT bid.

So I think South is right to upgrade this hand but has probably overdone it a bit this time. North's 6NT appears the practical bid in this auction.

Perhaps the South hand is not as good as I thought as I still get to 6NT! As I said, it is really a question of valuation

Cheers

Paul

[HeartA]

I might open 1NT with South's hand.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

the 3NT bid by South.

However you play it, South does not have the bid.
He does not have a 16-18 count with an running minor,
... at least I do not treat KQ10xxx as running,
nor does he hold a 19-20 bal. count.

The 6NT bid is also problematic, but one can understand
the bid, if North thought 3NT promised +19.

As always, there the main problem was to a large degree
a missing partnership understanding.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Walddk]

South could have opened his hand 1NT. Then you would stop in 3NT after a Stayman enquiry. Once he decided to open 1♦ (fine with me), this hand is not a 3NT rebid. It shows a strong hand with solid diamonds and nice values outside, often with a singleton heart (I agree with cardsharp).

3♦ rebid seems normal, and looking at a misfit North will sign off again. South didn't bid his hand very well and must take the blame for reaching the appalling slam. It takes a miracle layout to make 6NT.

Roland

[pclayton]

As others have said, a 3N rebid isn't a good description. An old-fashioned 3♦ looks fine, even if its a tad heavy. I think this is a much tougher problem if you add a little to the hand; a 7th ♦, or the ♦J.

I don't mind a 1N opening on a 6 card minor, but I wouldn't do it here, in spite of the strong doubletons. IMO, the hand has 2 flaws; it evaluates to stronger than a 15-17, and it has no tenaces to protect.

[mikeh]

I disagree with Roland re the advisability of opening 1N. I will (rarely) open 1N with a 6 card minor, but only if I have all the side suits stopped and (therefore) the minor is often not as strong as this suit.

This hand seems to be a textbook 1♦ then 3♦ bid. I know that the current tendency is to rebid 3♦ with ever weaker hands, but this hand is still within everyone's range (I would hope).

The hand is close to an upgrade to 2N, but I really dislike suppressing 6 card suits in constructive auctions. However 2N is not a crime and should not result in reaching slam. Responder should anticipate combined assets of 31-33 hcp (playing opener to have a 17 count with 5♦s as the worst holding), which is close to the slam zone, but North has sterile distribution: in fact, on this auction 4=4=1=4 is the absolute worst shape imaginable. At the very most North is worth 4N over 2N, and that will get South passing.

So the error was, as the others have suggested, the 3N rebid.

BTW, I am strongly of the (perhaps old-fashioned) view that the best usage for 3N here is solid, running ♦s with black stoppers and (usually) short ♥s. I see NO reason to use 3N as 19-20. Those hands can be handled by opening 2N or by a fake jumpshift into 3♣ if shape prevents a 2N opening bid. Using 3N as a descriptive call allows responder to place the contract with assurance.

[Walddk]

mikeh, on Dec 1 2006, 07:48 PM, said:

I disagree with Roland re the advisability of opening 1N

<snip>

BTW, I am strongly of the (perhaps old-fashioned) view that the best usage for 3N here is solid, running ♦s with black stoppers and (usually) short ♥s.

I prefer 1♦ myself, but I wouldn't be critical of 1NT. I could have expressed my view clearer I confess.

<snip>

Why is that old-fashioned? It seems modern enough for me and is the method I suspect virtually all experts play. Treating 3NT as 19 or so balanced, however, is a method of the past. I think it's an old Acol thingy.

Another reason why I think Acol is hopelessly beyond the sell-by date.

Roland

[HeartA]

pclayton, on Dec 1 2006, 11:58 AM, said:

I don't mind a 1N opening on a 6 card minor, but I wouldn't do it here, in spite of the strong doubletons. IMO, the hand has 2 flaws; it evaluates to stronger than a 15-17, and it has no tenaces to protect.

It is on the upper limit for 1NT opening. I don't mind opening 1D (I said I "might" open 1NT). After 1D opening you would have a rebid problem. I don't like 3D which would show longer/better D, and I don't like 2N which would be a little too strong.

Sure, the 3NT rebid is very bad, but 6NT is as bad if not worse. In my method 3N rebid shows a self sufficient 7+ suit (D), but less HCP, with no interest in pd's suit.

[neilkaz]

Again I agree almost 100% with mike777. To me this is a textbook 3♦ rebid. 16 HCP and a good enough suit. However, I'd need 1 HCP more of playing strength to consider a 2NT rebid.

After 3♦ responder can pass if he has a junkie 1♥ response and no ♦ support and it is quite unlikely that game has been missed.

Opener's 3NT rebid is far off the mark. These ♦'s have little expectation of running and, if playing 3NT as old fashioned bidding to make there's a top honor missing from the hand.

.. neilkaz ..

[the hog]

As others have stated, this is nowhere near a 3NT rebid. A 1NT opening is fine; a perfectly reasonable alternative is 1D followed by 3D.

[Echognome]

Walddk, on Dec 1 2006, 05:58 PM, said:

Why is that old-fashioned? It seems modern enough for me and is the method I suspect virtually all experts play. Treating 3NT as 19 or so balanced, however, is a method of the past. I think it's an old Acol thingy.

Another reason why I think Acol is hopelessly beyond the sell-by date.

I think this is from old fashioned Acol where a 1NT rebid showed 15-16, a 2NT rebid showed 17-18 and a 3NT rebid showed 19 exactly.

Most players nowadays play 1NT rebid as 15-17 or 15-18 and 2N as either 18-19 or 19-20, depending on their tastes.

So as other systems have changed, so has Acol. I think 4 card majors and light 2/1s isn't all bad. Just a different way of doing things.

[neilkaz]

As someone who has played SAYC or 2/1 for years (both with the normal 15-17 NT) this hand doesn't look like a 1NT opening to me, it has NT opening strength, but a good 6 card ♦ suit. I do not care for unstopped ♥ when some other sequence describes perfectly what I hold. .. ie 1♦ followed by 3♦

I realize that more and more players like to open 1NT with anything close, but for me..I need a hand like below to open 1NT with 6 ♦'s.

♠ KJx ♥ AQ ♦ Q9xxxx ♣ Axx

With this hand, I have little fear of an unstopped dblton and don't mind anything but a ♣ lead. More importantly, I have no way to describe this hand if I just open 1♦ since it is too strong to rebid 2♦ and while it is the right strength to rebid 3♦ I really should have a better suit for that.

Just my style .. neilkaz ..

[pclayton]

Didn't ACOL at one time or another use a 21-22 or 22-24 2N opening that neccesitated a 3N call on a balanced 19-20 / 20-21?

Goren did as well, I think. I remember a long, long time ago when a 2N opening was 22-24, so a 3N rebid would be needed to fill in the wide 18-21 gap.

[neilkaz]

pclayton, on Dec 2 2006, 10:53 AM, said:

Didn't ACOL at one time or another use a 21-22 or 22-24 2N opening that neccesitated a 3N call on a balanced 19-20 / 20-21?

Goren did as well, I think. I remember a long, long time ago when a 2N opening was 22-24, so a 3N rebid would be needed to fill in the wide 18-21 gap.

I don't know about ACOL...but long long ago when you and I were small children rather standard in the US was a 1NT opening on 16-18 and 2NT on 22-24. Strong 2's were played so there was no 2♣ followed by a 2N rebid.

What I cannot recall is whether a balanced hand jump rebid 2NT to show 19 and 3NT to show 20-21 or 3NT to show 19-21 hoping to make with 19, or maybe 2NT GF to show the entire 19-21 range since responses were rarely made on less than 6 HCP.

Anyhow..I clearly prefer today's more "modern" HCP ranges

.. neilkaz ..

[pclayton]

neilkaz, on Dec 2 2006, 10:30 AM, said:

pclayton, on Dec 2 2006, 10:53 AM, said:

Didn't ACOL at one time or another use a 21-22 or 22-24 2N opening that neccesitated a 3N call on a balanced 19-20 / 20-21?

Goren did as well, I think. I remember a long, long time ago when a 2N opening was 22-24, so a 3N rebid would be needed to fill in the wide 18-21 gap.

I don't know about ACOL...but long long ago when you and were small children rather standard in the US was a 1NT opening on 16-18 and 2NT on 22-24. Strong 2's were played so there was no 2♣ followed by a 2N rebid.

What I cannot recall is whether a balanced hand jump rebid 2NT to show 19 and 3NT to show 20-21 or 3NT to show 19-21 hoping to make with 19, or maybe 2NT GF to show the entire 19-21 range since responses were rarely made on less than 6 HCP.

Anyhow..I clearly prefer today's more "modern" HCP ranges

.. neilkaz ..

Neil; our grandparents needed a combined 28 points to make 3N, instead of the modern 22 LOL.

[neilkaz]

[quote name='pclayton' date='Dec 2 2006, 12:42 PM'] [/QUOTE]
Neil; our grandparents needed a combined 28 points to make 3N, instead of the modern 22 LOL.[/QUOTE]

Phil, our children need a combined 28 HCP to play 6NT, relying on 2 suits splitting 3-3 and a winning finesse somewhere .. neilkaz ..

[kenberg]

1D 1H
3D 3N

This is a reasonable auction and would be successful on the hands. Piggybacking on others: Opening 1N on a six card minor is ok at times but there are way too many flaws here. Rebidding 3N is an overstatement opposite a 1H response. The opponents may well have three shots, including the opening lead, to establish five tricks. You cannot hold up in spades, and that nice Q of spades could well be in the opponent's hand. Nor is it clear S will be able to establish 9 tricks opposite a minimal 1H bid even if he is given some time. Opening a diamond and rebidding 3D is a nice descriptive bid. Partner needs to hold some useful cards for 3N to make, if he has something useful he will bid 3N, and he won't get excited and bid 6NT. If the hand belongs in six of something then 3D will set him on the right road.

Also, letting partner in on some of the decision making is good for morale.