[sceptic]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     Pass  1♦    Pass
 1♠    Pass  1NT   Pass
 3NT   Pass  Pass  Pass
 

I bid one spade, I did not want to bid 3NT direct and 2NT could be passed

any alternatives ?

[EricK]

I'm not a big fan of manufacturing suits to bid, but if you are going to bid a suit you don't have, why not bid 2♣? It might discourage a ♣ lead and if partner vigorously supports ♣ then you can always put him back into ♦ without raising the level.

[whereagles]

Jlall, on Apr 25 2007, 09:37 PM, said:

1. If you have forcing diamond raise your system is seriously flawed.

2. I would probably bid 2C if that was the case.

1. Flawed, yes. Seriously flawed... well, that's probably an overstatement. Many people in Europe still play without forcing minor raises.

2. And this is how they solve it: bid a 3-card minor if necessary (1C-1D or 1D-2C).

[mike777]

I got a game force raise in D bid...but admit I would have just bid 3nt direct on this one. 4333 shape with 16 hcp and hcp in both majors.

Wayne why did you reject 3nt direct?

[glen]

whereagles, on Apr 25 2007, 06:03 PM, said:

Jlall, on Apr 25 2007, 09:37 PM, said:

1. If you have forcing diamond raise your system is seriously flawed.

1. Flawed, yes. Seriously flawed... well, that's probably an overstatement. Many people in Europe still play without forcing minor raises.

Well he does say (until he edits it), that the system is flawed if you have a forcing diamond raise, so the many people in Europe are bidding flawlessly. However you need to have a forcing minor raise, which you would use here, and if not, then you post here.

[the hog]

Yes, I think he means flawed if you DON'T have a D raise. I really don't like 1S at all. I don't like 2C either, so I would definitely change the system ot incorporate a forcing raise. Without one, I would just bid 3N here. (Mind you, I don't like that bid much either.)

[mike777]

Sure you can miss a d slam but I would think just bidding 3nt and not messing up actual bidding sequences makes you a winner in the long run.

Surprised how many prefer to just make a g/f d raise on this balanced 4333 16 hcp hand. Perhaps they expect opener to have a good hand?

[the hog]

mike777, on Apr 26 2007, 09:34 AM, said:

Sure you can miss a d slam but I would think just bidding 3nt and not messing up actual bidding sequences makes you a winner in the long run.

Surprised how many prefer to just make a g/f d raise on this balanced 4333 16 hcp hand. Perhaps they expect opener to have a good hand?

Not necessarily Mike, but there are many nice minimums opposite where slam has a good play, also where you make 5/6 D and 3NT has no play.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

3NT, if available you can of course bid 2D.

3NT is only a slight underbid, it shows 13-15 bal.,
I have 16, but on the other hand I ama 4-3-3-3.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Gerben42]

Quote

Many people in Europe still play without forcing minor raises.

Where? Not here...

Just a question from a confused European.

If I cannot bid a forcing 2♦ or 2NT I prefer bidding where I live, i.e. 1♠ and not 2♣. Thanks.

[MFA]

Not having a forcing raise is very bad.

[whereagles]

Gerben42, on Apr 26 2007, 08:41 AM, said:

Quote

Many people in Europe still play without forcing minor raises.

Where? Not here... Just a question from a confused European.

France, Spain, Portugal.

[Fluffy]

Good job, perfect bidding, 2♣ Might be safer, but if you don't bid 3NT is becasue you want to investigate on slam if partenr is strong, then 1♠ is your best descriptive forcing bid.

About inverted minors:

In my opinion, before learning a convention that solves a problem, you should better face the problem before and try to solve it with natural & logic bidding.

If you don't know why you use a convention nor how it helps you, you will most likelly missuse the convention

[gwnn]

whereagles, on Apr 26 2007, 01:03 AM, said:

Jlall, on Apr 25 2007, 09:37 PM, said:

1. If you have forcing diamond raise your system is seriously flawed.

2. I would probably bid 2C if that was the case.

1. Flawed, yes. Seriously flawed... well, that's probably an overstatement. Many people in Europe still play without forcing minor raises.

2. And this is how they solve it: bid a 3-card minor if necessary (1C-1D or 1D-2C).

actual hand I held

AKx
Qxx
x
KQxxxx

1♣-p-?

[P_Marlowe]

gwnn, on Apr 26 2007, 06:42 AM, said:

whereagles, on Apr 26 2007, 01:03 AM, said:

Jlall, on Apr 25 2007, 09:37 PM, said:

1. If you have forcing diamond raise your system is seriously flawed.

2. I would probably bid 2C if that was the case.

1. Flawed, yes. Seriously flawed... well, that's probably an overstatement. Many people in Europe still play without forcing minor raises.

2. And this is how they solve it: bid a 3-card minor if necessary (1C-1D or 1D-2C).

actual hand I held

AKx
Qxx
x
KQxxxx

1♣-p-?

Hi

3D, a splinter.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[glen]

What we often see, if bidding the hand above without a forcing raise available, is
- puzzled look
- 40 second pause for thinking
- 1♠ response (they are not certain if 3♦ would be a splinter or would be weak and a long suit)

If 3-3-2-5 shape, one gets the first two (puzzled look, 40 second pause), then 3NT.

As to inverted minors, I prefer not to play them, using instead:
2m: single raise, can be just 4 in m
3m: invite raise
jump in om: forcing raise

There are all sorts of versons of "criss-cross" approaches, including:
2m: constructive raise, can be just 4 in m
3m: weak raise
jump in om: limit+ raise

[whereagles]

gwnn, on Apr 26 2007, 11:42 AM, said:

actual hand I held

AKx
Qxx
x
KQxxxx

1♣-p-?

Well, with this one you can, as said above, splinter.

But let's change it to

AKx
Qxx
xx
KQxxx

or, worse, have pard open 1♦ and you have

AKx
Qxx
KQxxx
xx

Without forcing minor raises you'd have to invent a major or bid 1♦/2♣ on a 2-card suit, respectively. Ok so that's bad, I agree. But many don't bother to include inverted minor raise because

1. inverted raises have problems of their own
2. problematic hands like those above are rare anyway

[mike777]

whereagles, on Apr 26 2007, 09:21 AM, said:

gwnn, on Apr 26 2007, 11:42 AM, said:

actual hand I held

AKx
Qxx
x
KQxxxx

1♣-p-?

Well, with this one you can, as said above, splinter.

But let's change it to

AKx
Qxx
xx
KQxxx

or, worse, have pard open 1♦ and you have

AKx
Qxx
KQxxx
xx

Without forcing minor raises you'd have to invent a major or bid 1♦/2♣ on a 2-card suit, respectively. Ok so that's bad, I agree. But many don't bother to include inverted minor raise because

1. inverted raises have problems of their own
2. problematic hands like those above are rare anyway

With both those hands it seems I have an easy 3nt bid. My hands are balanced, I have hcp in the majors. At MP I am going to ingnore 5 of a minor and at imps 3nt still has a chance when 5 of a minor might go down. The have not lead or overcalled the open suit yet. I lose for alot of silly reasons this is not one.

[jdonn]

mike777, on Apr 26 2007, 03:14 PM, said:

whereagles, on Apr 26 2007, 09:21 AM, said:

gwnn, on Apr 26 2007, 11:42 AM, said:

actual hand I held

AKx
Qxx
x
KQxxxx

1♣-p-?

Well, with this one you can, as said above, splinter.

But let's change it to

AKx
Qxx
xx
KQxxx

or, worse, have pard open 1♦ and you have

AKx
Qxx
KQxxx
xx

Without forcing minor raises you'd have to invent a major or bid 1♦/2♣ on a 2-card suit, respectively. Ok so that's bad, I agree. But many don't bother to include inverted minor raise because

1. inverted raises have problems of their own
2. problematic hands like those above are rare anyway

With both those hands it seems I have an easy 3nt bid. My hands are balanced, I have hcp in the majors. At MP I am going to ingnore 5 of a minor and at imps 3nt still has a chance when 5 of a minor might go down. The have not lead or overcalled the open suit yet. I lose for alot of silly reasons this is not one.

How about two unstopped suits?

Partner opens 1♦

KQx
xx
AKxxxx
xx


How about three?

xx
Qx
AKQxxxx
Jx