[ewj]

Scoring: IMP

---

You're playing 2/1 but with Kaplan Inversion, i.e. 1H-1S shows a forcing NT so when South opens 1H you have to respond 2C.

How do people play 3C here? Do people play it as showing extra values? If so, why and what do you do with minimums...

If 3C doesnt show extra values, then how would you continue as North? 4C? What would you expect partner to bid over that with a minimum...5C?

If North wanted to demand cue bids...would he show values at the 3 level and then bid 4C?

Basically....how would people bid these hands, playing 2/1...try and pretend you play KI or that you start 1H-2C

[cherdano]

Assuming I respond 2♣ (entirely reasonable even without KI) I think
1♥-2♣-2♥-2N-3♣-4N-5♣-P sounds like a reasonable auction.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

unless 1NT shows 5 spades and is nonforcing,
I would say bidding 1NT showing 4+ spades
is superior to bidding 2C.
Opener can still hold 4 spades, and I am interested
in finding out, bidding 2C kills the spade suit.

The raise to 3C by opener does not show add.
strength, how else to you show the fit, by
bidding 4C, by passing 3NT?.

With openers hand I would bid 3D, as a splinter.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Codo]

Whether or not 3 Club should show morethen minimum has been discussed on several similar sequences before. There are pros and cons, but I am a very strong beliver that 3 Club shows a good hand and that all minimum hands from opener must rebid the opened suit or something lower.

So I would too bid:
1 ♥ 2 ♣ 2 ♥ 2 ♠
I would bid 2 ♠, even if this sounds like a distributional hand. The major is too good to forget.Bidding will continue with:

3 ♣ 3 ♦ 3 ♥ 4 ♣

(I play that 4 in the agreed minor is allways RCKB and the first answer is allways showing a bad hand in the contect of the bidding so far.
So the answer will be 4 ♦
I think you should settle for 4 NT now, but if you ask for KCs again with 4 ♥ you will stop in 5 Club, still a good contract at imps.

For the other questions:
IF 3 Club can still be minimum, I would cuebid, I will show my Diamond Control and after 3 NT from pd bid 4 Club, still RCKB for me.
IF I don´t have this tool, I would bid 4 NT, hopefully quantitative.

[SoTired]

It appears you are playing a convention (Kaplan Inversion) that you have not fully discussed with partner. You have 4s and have no idea how to show them.

Most play the 1S response shows 0-4 spades and opener's subsequent 1N rebid shows 4-card spade support. Otherwise, opener rebids as if responder bid 1NF.

[kenberg]

If I were playing a convention that kept me from bidding spades or otherwise showing spades when I have spades, I think my first action would be to dump that convention.

With that off my chest, we move to the auction 1H-2C. Assuming that 3D is a splinter, would that not be the call? If so, then there is a choice to be made. Responder has 12 of his 18 points in spades and diamonds, with his partner bidding hearts and supporting clubs. Still, there are lots of points. Bidding 3N seems a bit chicken but...

I think it would begin 1H-2C-3D and I really don't know what I would do next.

[david_c]

I think a direct raise from opener should show some extra values, so I'd start 1♥ : 2♣ , 2♥ : 2NT , 3♣.

Now you'd love to have a relay available in this situation (you want some way for opener to show his diamond shortage), but without any system available I suppose I'd raise to 4♣ inviting partner to cue-bid. Opener's hand is pretty bad, but still probably worth co-operating given that he's already shown a minimum. So I suppose you'll only stop short of slam if and when you find out how many aces you've got.

[david_c]

Also the inevitable advertisement: playing 2♣ as "natural or balanced" works well with KI (precisely because you can't bid a natural 1♠ on hands like this) and decent continuations will allow North to find out that opener is 5-4 in hearts and clubs with shortage in diamonds, and has a dead minimum in terms of controls. North then knows enough to sign off even without asking for aces.

[skjaeran]

As others have said: you shold not have to bid 2♣ over 1♥ with this hand.

As to the 1♥-2♣ sequence and continuarion, with my previous partner I played that a raise to 3♣ showed a minimum raise, 2NT showed a GF raise and 2♥ was a catch-all for hands with no other natural rebid.

[mikeh]

Jlall, on May 10 2007, 07:05 PM, said:

2C is normal with this hand even without playing KI. How is 1S a sweet bid? If partner bids 2D you get to bid 3C and then have no idea what to do. If partner bids 2H you get to bid 3C and then have another ugly auction. If partner bids 1N you'd be in the same position as 1H-2C-2N-3N. And if partner rebids 2C then responding 2C was a good start. With this shape bidding 2C should be routine, you set up the game force and never miss spades anyways, and you avoid ugly 3rd and 4th suit forcing auctions.

I have seen reisig, for one, espouse this appraoch, with 4=4 blacks and gf values, bid 2♣ gf over 1♥. It struck me, initially, as counter to everything I thought I had learned about constructive bidding, in that it offended my sense that one should bid the cheaper suit first, as responder. But, as Justin points out (and As Richie then argued) 1♠ sets up horrific problems over common rebids by opener.


That is not to say that 2♣ is free of cost: even if you have the agreement that you might bid this way on 4=4, you still have some hands on which being able to show 4=5 or 4=6 in the blacks would be useful. I have not yet suggested to any of my partners that we use this approach.. but I will next time I set up a serious partnership... I am not in one right now, being semi-retired again (bridge-wise, not work-wise, unfortunately)

[jdonn]

mikeh, on May 10 2007, 07:23 PM, said:

That is not to say that 2♣ is free of cost: even if you have the agreement that you might bid this way on 4=4, you still have some hands on which being able to show 4=5 or 4=6 in the blacks would be useful.

If you bid this way, it still shows 4-5+ to bid clubs then spades, if you are 4-4 your rebid will either be a raise of something or notrump. The only time you can't distinguish is when partner rebids 2♠ and you raise, but the difference between 4 and 5 clubs then seems negligible.

So given that, I think the cost is all but nonexistant, and the benefits obvious.

I actually think the posted hand is pretty difficult. Seeing the hands I would probably want to play 4♥, but 3NT and 5♣ are both still very good. 4NT is getting quite high for comfort. My first observation is that I definitely do not think south should splinter. Even though it doesn't show more than a minimum, it should show a more slam suitable hand than this. So 1♥ 2♣ 3♣ I think it is reasonable for north just to bid 4NT natural now. Yes I know most will take it as keycard, but they shouldn't. Then south would probably pull to 5♣ and there you are. I admit this end result does not satisfy me very much, even though I find each individual decision reasonable.

[Chamaco]

Hi,
I do play KI and 2/1.

In the sequence 1M-2C, I play that opener's raise to 3C shows a non-minimum hand, usually a good opening bid.

When the opening is not good, then the club support is not shown. Basically a crappy opning bid will never rebid at level 3 (unless opps stick in).

The idea is that we do not want to encourage slam in a minor (one of the main benefits of the 3C raise) when opener is subminimum.

So a realistic sequence could be: 1H-2C-2H-2S-3C- followed by a keycard ask by responder with clubs agreed (whichever way u play it).

Being at IMPS, stopping in 5C should be quite acceptable

[foo]

ewj, on May 9 2007, 07:22 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

---

You're playing 2/1 but with Kaplan Inversion, i.e. 1H-1S shows a forcing NT so when South opens 1H you have to respond 2C.

How do people play 3C here? Do people play it as showing extra values? If so, why and what do you do with minimums...

If 3C doesnt show extra values, then how would you continue as North? 4C? What would you expect partner to bid over that with a minimum...5C?

If North wanted to demand cue bids...would he show values at the 3 level and then bid 4C?

Basically....how would people bid these hands, playing 2/1...try and pretend you play KI or that you start 1H-2C

1st, why are you hiding your 4+S's? KI is not as borken as you seem to think.

Playing KI, Opener "raises" 1N to 2S with Spades and bids Something Else w/o 4 S's.

So,
1H-1N!;2C-2D! (FSF GF)
2S-3C; (I do not have 5 S's. I have 4+C and a GF hand)

..and we are off to the races. 3N, 4S, and 5C all look like reasonable spots.

[whereagles]

If the black 44 has heart support, you're better off bidding 2♣. Otherwise you'll be in a heck of a trouble trying to convey support after

1♥ 1♠
2♦ 3♣ <-- what else if you're strong?
3NT ..?

If you don't have support, 1♠ is ok, though 2♣ is probably better.

[foo]

whereagles, on May 19 2007, 08:25 AM, said:

If the black 44 has heart support, you're better off bidding 2♣. Otherwise you'll be in a heck of a trouble trying to convey support after

1♥ 1♠
2♦ 3♣ <-- what else if you're strong?
3NT ..?

If you don't have support, 1♠ is ok, though 2♣ is probably better.

Ummm, playing KI your example auction has to start 1H-1N! if you want to show your S's.

Decent continuations when Responder holds a GF 43(24) hand could go something like these:
1H-1N!;2C-2D!;3N-4H
or
1H-1N!;2D-3C!;3N-4H

Does not either of these show 43xx?

IMHO, the potential problem with these auctions holding these hands is not in the Majors. It's clarifying whether we have a double fit in a Major + a minor.

Curiously, for some strange reason the problem does not seem to come up as often when not playing KI (although objectively that makes little sense.).

[jdonn]

foo, on May 19 2007, 09:34 AM, said:

whereagles, on May 19 2007, 08:25 AM, said:

If the black 44 has heart support, you're better off bidding 2♣. Otherwise you'll be in a heck of a trouble trying to convey support after

1♥ 1♠
2♦ 3♣ <-- what else if you're strong?
3NT ..?

If you don't have support, 1♠ is ok, though 2♣ is probably better.

Decent continuations when Responder holds a GF 43(24) hand could go something like these:

1H-1N!;2D-3C!;3N-4H

Does not either of these show 43xx?

You have lost 2 (count them, 2!) levels of bidding when the auction goes

1♥ 1♠(or 1NT) 2♦ 3♣ 3NT 4♥
as opposed to
1♥ 2♣ 2♦ 2♥

Surely you can see how this is a problem? Responder may have 13, 15, 17, and on the first auction has no way to distinguish that or ellicit cooperation.

I know you haven't been posting for a while until recently, but I feel like I have this very conversation with someone every week or two. I am baffled every time that someone disagrees with responder starting with 2♣ over 1♥ holding a shape like 4324.

[foo]

Josh, I can empathize with your POV, but there are at least 2 problems with your "solution" from my POV

1= We've all been taught "Majors above all else, NT next, and minors last" since bridge babyhood.
While I have some sympathy for ignoring S's xxxx in an otherwise suitable hand (like a 4333), I have considerably less sympathy for ignoring them when they are AKT8.

2= Like Fred and some others here on BBO, I like my 2/1's to show real suits or significant extras. An 18 count is certainly significant extras, but you are not going to be holding that as Responder very often.

Nothing is perfect in Bridge, but in general I'd rather make as many bids at the one level as my hand allows.


SIDE NOTE: The =BIGGEST= problem with the bidding on this board is that the wrong hand opened!. With a 6 1/2 or 6 3/4 loser moderately soft (no A's, 5/11 of your HCP are Q+J's) 11 count w/o 2 defensive tricks, S does not have an opening bid by most POVs playing SA or 2/1.

Things are considerably easier if the bidding starts ..-pa;1C-1H;2S-3D!;3N-4C;...
Oh look. We know
1= that Opener has 18+ and Responder has 10-11 with slam interest.
2= that there is no 44 S fit nor 53 H fit.
3= that there is a 44 or 54 C fit.
In this case Opener will either sign off in 4N or show 2 keycards w/ the CQ if 4C is 1430 in C's by agreement here.

Either way we'll end up playing 4N this time and having a good chance of finding slam when it is right.

Figuring out what contortions the 18 HCP hand should go through as Responder is a minor issue compared to the fact that
THIS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN THE ISSUE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

[jdonn]

Your reason 1 is not a reason at all. If you have either been taught wrong your whole life, or spent it relying on general principles and slogans instead of thinking about the individual problem, that aint my problem.

As for your reason 2, AQ9x is plenty good enough of a suit. Fred has even recently posted his willingness to bid such suits on balanced hands in response even though he didn't used to do so in the past. In any case, even using some method where you need a 5 card suit to reply 2/1 the response would be 2NT, still saving you room. If partner rebids a minor you get to support hearts on the 3 level. If partner rebids 3NT at least responder can split up his ranges by bidding 4♥ on a minimum, or a minor (clearly a cuebid) with something extra. If partner rebids 3♠ responder can cuebid all the same, reaching the 4-4 if he wants instead of the 5-3. I have yet to ever be told a single bridge reason why responding 1♠ is right, beyond that people are used to doing it.

As for whether south has an opening hand, it's a red herring. For one thing over 90% of people reading this will open it all day (by all means post a poll if you don't believe me.) This would apply both to newer players, since we meet the rule of 20 and have no rebid problem, and to experienced players who know KQJTx is not peanuts. For another thing, that has nothing to do with the issue at hand, just add the black jacks to make it QJx KQJTx x KJxx and the problems remain the same.

As for the auction you suggest, notice
1: 4NT is dangerously high, going down on a diamond lead any time both red aces lay over the holding with the king.
2: Rebidding 2♠ is laughable. Post that in another poll on adv/exp forum, you will find 85% rebidding 2NT, 14% rebidding 1♠, and you rebidding 2♠. I know of not one expert who would fail to rebid 2NT on a balanced 18-19 even with four spades and challenge you to name a single one, and this hand is simply not good enough to insist upon game opposite what may be a minimum response.