[gwnn]

p-1♣
1♦-1♥
1♠(natural obv.)-?

Q
AQ52
T32
AKJ92

Up-the-line bidding.

[Codo]

2 ♦ as long as this is not passable.
If Pd can pass 2 Diamond I try 3 ♦

[hrothgar]

I would have opened 1N from the get go (you really don't have a good rebid over 1NT)

It would be useful to understand you're agreement about the meaning of 1♠. In particular, does this establish a 1 round force or is it forcing to game.

If you are playing up the line bidding, your 1♥ rebid doesn't clarify the number of clubs that you hold. I would rebid 2♣ (partner's 1♠ bid means that 2♣ should be forcing). I plan to pattern out and show Diamond support at my next opportunity.

(For what its worth, a 2♦ rebid certainly suggests a 1=4=3=5 hand, especially if you open 1♦ with 4-4 in the minors. Even so, I prefer to emphasize my strong club suit rather than showing Txx in Diamonds)

[the hog]

Again no explanation. What is 1S? Fwiw we play this as 4th suit forrcing, seeing no reason to play it as natural. The 2S bid which some would play as 4SF is a mini splinter for us. (Love is a mini splintered thing).
Anyway, I bid 3D here.

[whereagles]

2♦ now and follow-up with 2NT if pard moves on.

[vang]

whereagles, on Sep 11 2007, 02:33 PM, said:

2♦ now and follow-up with 2NT if pard moves on.

me too.

3♦ second choice (with that spade Q in diamonds).

[gwnn]

Up the line bidding, 1♦ and 1♠ were both natural. What more of an explanation would have been necessary?

[hrothgar]

gwnn, on Sep 11 2007, 03:49 PM, said:

Up the line bidding, 1♦ and 1♠ were both natural. What more of an explanation would have been necessary?

Comment 1: I am currently floating on a mixture of synthetic heroin and amphetamines. So even the blatantly obvious might not be that obvious at the moment. (Had minor surgery to remove a cyst on my shoulder yesterday)

Comment 2: Even if 1♠ is natural, it typically carries additional information regarding strength, whether or not the bid promises a rebid (or establishes a force to 2NT or whatever).

Let's assume that responder is sitting on a 4=2=4=3 hand or some such... Would responder automatically rebid 1♠ with this pattern? Are there any hands where he might chose to rebid 1NT (or 2NT instead)?

[gwnn]

Fair enough, there are of course lots of unanswered question about that 1♠ call. But all I knew is that it was natural and up the line. Froms a passed hand I don't think it can be forcing, though.

[jtfanclub]

Codo, on Sep 11 2007, 06:17 AM, said:

2 ♦ as long as this is not passable.

If partner passes it, you would be upset? I sure wouldn't.

I'm honestly not sure I'm strong enough for 2♦. But I'd probably bid it anyways.

The other choice is 2 clubs.

[han]

I don't understand the questions about 1♠, natural and NF is the only possible meaning.

2D would not show extras, I'd bid 3D here. I'm quite minimal for this bid imo, but I hope that I have barely enough if partner bids game.

The 1NT and 2NT rebids are both wrong on strength.

[han]

jtfanclub, on Sep 11 2007, 09:02 AM, said:

I'm honestly not sure I'm strong enough for 2♦.

Funny, I thought we were too weak. What's the minimal number of HCP with which you are willing to show diamond support?

[jtfanclub]

Hannie, on Sep 11 2007, 11:03 AM, said:

jtfanclub, on Sep 11 2007, 09:02 AM, said:

I'm honestly not sure I'm strong enough for 2♦.

Funny, I thought we were too weak. What's the minimal number of HCP with which you are willing to show diamond support?

Let me put it this way...considering that your partner is a passed hand, can you design a hand for him where 5♦ is the right place to play?

I just don't like this hand in support of diamonds. If partner has, say, an ordinary 4-2-4-3 six count, 2♣ was about as high as I'd want to go. If he has 4-2-5-2, he may bid a lot more. Of course, if the auction as listed showed extra count, wonderful. But I think it's more likely that partner was just trying for 'strong hand up' and was betting that I'd bid 1NT, and there we'd get to play it with me declaring.

I'm going to bid 2♦. But I really don't feel comfortable about it. And as for 3♦, fugettaboutit. I'm not sure what some people's partner's have on this auction, but a lot of mine have absolute junk.

[jdonn]

Hannie, on Sep 11 2007, 11:02 AM, said:

I don't understand the questions about 1♠, natural and NF is the only possible meaning.

I would always assume natural and F1 without discussion, being bid on any hand at all with four spades (2♠ = Art. GF denying four spades).

[the hog]

JT, a 3D bid is not a suggestion to play 5D. Your pd heard the auction as well as you did. This is why I asked about the 1S bid. Is it forcing? I assume so....Would pd have bid 1NT with a weaker hand? I assume so.

I bid 3D to give her a chance to bid 3NT with a 10-11 count, (which I would assume she has.) The reason I don't bid it myself is that I don't know what your 1S is. Playing with my pd's I would bid 3NT here without a qualm, as none of my pd's would have less than 10-11.

[cherdano]

Did all those who asked about 1S miss that partner is a passed hand? Otherwise I can't think why anyone would get the idea that it is F1, or artificial forcing, etc.

[mikeh]

cherdano, on Sep 11 2007, 08:18 PM, said:

Did all those who asked about 1S miss that partner is a passed hand? Otherwise I can't think why anyone would get the idea that it is F1, or artificial forcing, etc.

I always play 1♠ as 4SF whether by ph or unpassed hand... obviously this works best only in a walsh structure There are many, many hands on which it is useful to have a one round force available as a passed hand. I think that most experts (not all, by any means) use 4SF as one round by a ph. I may be mistaken on this

[han]

The OP clearly stated that they do not play Walsh. I can not imagine playing 1S as artificial for a passed hand with up-the-line bidding.

[P_Marlowe]

2D, and I dont care if partner
can pass.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[gwnn]

The_Hog, if you don't read my clarifications, why did you ask for any? I don't mean to be rude, I am only curious. Already in the first post I have written "natural" and "up-the-line bidding". Then I wrote that it's prolly non-forcing by a passed p.