[kgr]

Scoring: IMP

1C-1H
??

---

Opps Silent. Do you bid 2H or 3H now?

[pbleighton]

Depends on my mood

3H, I'm feeling good.

Peter

[P_Marlowe]

3H, wtp?

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Apollo81]

3♥

[cjames]

3♥ for me as well.

[whereagles]

There's a modern tendency to upgrade these shapely mins into 3♥. I consider this one borderline, and the club dubious holding of KJ swings me towards 2♥ only.

Incidently, playing weak NTs, 2♥ is quite ok, as it tends to show precisely this sort of hand.

[skjaeran]

3♥ for me. It's near a minimum for jump raising.

[FrancesHinden]

2H. And it's not the absolute maximum for the bid either.
3H shows the same playing strength as 18-19 balanced with 4 trumps, and I don't beleive this hand is so good.

We have the right type of hand to raise to two only, because partner will look at cards such as controls, and good trumps, and fitting club honours to decide whether to make a game try or not, and those are all cards that will help make game.

[whereagles]

FrancesHinden, on Apr 30 2007, 08:01 PM, said:

3H shows the same playing strength as 18-19 balanced with 4 trumps, and I don't beleive this hand is so good.

Maybe in England it does. But elsewhere not necessarily... in a strong NT system, it's usual to bid

1m 1M
2M = 12-14 bal or unbal
3M = 15-17 unbal (15-17 bal opens 1NT)
4M = 18-19 bal or unbal

I guess under a weak NT it goes more like

1m 1M
2M = 12-14 unbal or 15-17 bal
3M = 18-19 bal
4M = 18-19 unbal

Am I right?

[cherdano]

3♥ for me. As I would bid 2♥ on xx Qxx A9xx KQ8xx, it seems to me the range for 2♥ would otherwise get too wide.

Arend

[FrancesHinden]

whereagles, on Apr 30 2007, 09:48 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Apr 30 2007, 08:01 PM, said:

3H shows the same playing strength as 18-19 balanced with 4 trumps, and I don't beleive this hand is so good.

Maybe in England it does. But elsewhere not necessarily... in a strong NT system, it's usual to bid

1m 1M
2M = 12-14 bal or unbal
3M = 15-17 unbal (15-17 bal opens 1NT)
4M = 18-19 bal or unbal

I guess under a weak NT it goes more like

1m 1M
2M = 12-14 unbal or 15-17 bal
3M = 18-19 bal
4M = 18-19 unbal

Am I right?

I play a strong NT system.
If you are going to raise 1H to 4H on 18-19 balanced you'd better keep your 1-level responses (more than) up to strength.

Quote

3♥ for me. As I would bid 2♥ on xx Qxx A9xx KQ8xx, it seems to me the range for 2♥ would otherwise get too wide.

Arend

Make it a 13-card hand, and that still doesn't look like an opening bid.

But to some extent the principle is correct: the simple raise to 2H should be the widest range of the three raises.

[awm]

I'd bid 3♥. For those bidding 2♥, keep in mind that the following hand produces an excellent game:

xxx
Axxxx
xx
Qxx

Do you make a game try with this hand? Really? What if opener had a very nice weak NT opening like Qxx KQxx xxx AKx opposite, where even 3♥ is not safe? Keep in mind that partner's hand could be ever so much worse than this, such as Kx Qxxx KJx Kxxx.

Even if we switch the club and diamond holding, game is pretty decent at IMPs. Now there's not even the fitting honor for partner's club "suit" to justify a game try.

Yes, I will force to game with a balanced 19. This can get me in trouble if partner has only four trumps and very minimum values. But if 3♥ is defined as "please bid game unless you are completely balanced with only four cards in your major and have 6 or fewer hcp" then the range of hands for 2♥ is simply too wide.

[awm]

The example hand (x KQxx AJx KJxxx) has 6 losers (and LTC doesn't count jacks). It has a ZAR point total of at least 31. It is more than a king better than an opening bid once a heart fit has been established. Counting 3 points for a singleton in a 4-trump hand, it is 17 hcp.

Opposite this hand, many holdings for partner which include Axxxx of hearts will make game good at IMPs, regardless of the rest of the hand. I just don't think making the same 2♥ bid with:

x
KQxx
AJx
KJxxx

and

xxx
KQxx
QJx
KJx

is particularly good bridge, nor do I see what partner is supposed to do on the many hands where game is routine opposite the first opener and 3♥ has little play opposite the second opener.

As for complaining about "where are the opponents spades" would this hand be worth a 3♥ bid?

AJx
KQxx
x
KJxxx

It's certainly more likely that opponents have a bunch of diamonds and never bid, or that partner has diamond length he never showed, than the same in spades. Does this "upgrade" an effectively identical hand?

[jdonn]

awm, on Apr 30 2007, 05:08 PM, said:

I just don't think making the same 2♥ bid with:

x
KQxx
AJx
KJxxx

and

xxx
KQxx
QJx
KJx

is particularly good bridge, nor do I see what partner is supposed to do on the many hands where game is routine opposite the first opener and 3♥ has little play opposite the second opener.

You are right, opening the second hand is terrible bridge. It forces you to have to overbid 3♥ on these hands just to keep your ranges feasible.

2♥ for me, 3♥ doesn't help partner evaluate anyway, so he will almost always be accepting. And 18-19 balanced should be bidding 3♥ most of the time (though lots of people err and always bid 4 with that) and that hand is much better than this.

I would only bid 3♥ if I had methods to let me show spade shortness on the way.

[kgr]

Thanks all for the answers.
I only bid 2H and wondered if it was enough. So I'm mostly surprised by Frances' and and Justins answers that this hand is not even a maximum for 3H. Maybe these answers are influenced by using responses that are weaker then standard (less then 6 HCP)?
Only for completeness:

Scoring: IMP

1C-1H
2H-4H

---

Making 4H+2 (do you want to be in 6 only seeing NS cards?)

[jdonn]

Unless you can pinpoint spade shortness somehow, I don't think you can reach slam on correct bidding after 3♥ either since it's ridiculous to cooperate after bidding 3♥. Missing this slam is hardly a crime anyway.

[han]

jdonn said:

Opening the second hand is terrible bridge.

jdonn said:

It's ridiculous to cooperate...

Thank you Master Donn.