[cherdano]

jillybean2, on Oct 15 2007, 12:12 PM, said:

And if you want to know why I didn’t post the 3♦ bid originally, Im sick and tired of the smart ass, sarcastic comments that get posted on here and I thought 2♦ may get less criticism. Unless you happen to be close to one of the geniuses who get the bid right 100% of the time, posting bad bidding, play is not much fun.

Not suprising we dont see more B/I's posting bad hands in here or maybe its just me making these bids

Kathryn, posting stuff like this only helps if we say when a bid is bad, and it is also important to say when a bid was very bad.
I guess I was being a bit sarcastic about your partner's pass, and I apologize for that, but it is really hard to be fair to a pass of a game-forcing bid when he has Q9xxx support, another working queen and a king. North is closer to a slam try than a pass of 3♦.

[jillybean]

And I agree 3♦ was (very) bad, I was trying to force my very cautious partner to bid

edit Arend, It is not your replies that I'm referring to as sarcastic, your posts are helpful and constructive. Bad timing in the order of posts perhaps

[neilkaz]

jillybean2, on Oct 15 2007, 01:12 PM, said:

And if you want to know why I didn’t post the 3♦ bid originally, Im sick and tired of the smart ass, sarcastic comments that get posted on here and I thought 2♦ may get less criticism. Unless you happen to be close to one of the geniuses who get the bid right 100% of the time, posting bad bidding, play is not much fun.

Not suprising we dont see more B/I's posting bad hands in here or maybe its just me making these bids

Kathryn, I'll let you know that your PD bid this hand lots worse than you did !

In SAYC or 2/1 the one good thing about your 3♦ jump shift is that it is GF !!

How on earth does your PD pass a Game Forcing bid with his hand ? (or any hand for that matter) I remain amazed at the number of B/I that pass GF bids.

With PD's hand I'd raise to 4♦ and you can respond 4♥. If PD pulls to 5♦ hope that you don't loose 2 red suit tricks. If PD thinks 4♥ is now a Q in pursuit of slam and Q bids 4♠ (showing 2nd rd control) just s/off in 5♦ not showing your 2nd round ♣ control.

However, you belong in 4♥ here and after 3♦ there may be no keeping a good PD out of slam. At least if he calls 4NT RKCB for ♦ you have only 1 and can pray that PD doesn't go beyond 5♦.

You see some of the pitfalls that can occur when you really don't have a jump shift, but having PD pass the GF bid should certainly NOT be one of them. However, like most here, I wouldn't bid 3♦ either.

Just my opinion .. neilkaz ..

[neilkaz]

jillybean2, on Oct 15 2007, 01:54 PM, said:

And I agree 3♦ was bad, I was trying to force my very cautious partner to bid

edit Arend, It is not your replies that I'm referring to as sarcastic, I don’t mind at all if people think the bid is bad.

If PD passed my GF 3♦ jump shift, I go out and walk my dog !

Wait a minute...I don't have a dog. OK I'll walk the guinea pig.

Kathryn, you deserve somewhat better PD's than you seem to get stuck with.

.. neilkaz ..

[helene_t]

With this hand you want to play in hearts. So you should treat it as a 1-suiter. I.e. rebid 2, 3 or 4♥. One-suiters sometimes rebid a new suit but that is when they are too strong for 3 of the opening suit and don't want to bypass 3NT. But that is not the case here. If you want to GF, you can rebid 4♥.

[jillybean]

Let me say here that this was only our 3rd time playing together and I enjoyed playing with my partner. We had a fun and relaxed weekend, just lacked some basic agreements.

[neilkaz]

jillybean2, on Oct 15 2007, 02:12 PM, said:

Let me say here that this was only our 3rd time playing together and I enjoyed playing with my partner. We had a fun and relaxed weekend, just lacked some basic agreements.

But passing a GF Jump Shift is not something requiring a basic agreement. That fact that you must rebid would be covered in any basic book on bidding or any basic bidding lesson.

It seems you and this PD are compatible. But you'll play better bridge togther if you just sit down and discuss bidding for a few minutes

.. neilkaz ..

[awm]

I actually like 3♦ a lot more than 2♦. There are a fair number of hands where slam in diamonds is a good proposition (especially noting that the hearts are ace-empty) and the 3♦ rebid will tend to find these whereas rebidding hearts will not. For example:

KQxxx
-
KQxxx
xxx

I'm sure we'd all pass a 4♥ rebid, but 6♦ is quite good and 4♥ might not even make.

Obviously there will also be hands where partner gets us overboard opposite the 3♦ rebid holding a hand with a lot of points (but in the wrong places). For example, a hand like this probably forces slam over a 3♦ rebid (15 hcp opposite what's supposedly at least a good 18) but there's not much play for any slam and even 4♥ might fail (curiously, 6♦ is a better slam than 6♥ but it's still odds-against):

AQJxx
x
Kxx
KQxx

[whereagles]

A 5-loser hand deserves some kind of strong bid. I'd try 4♥ because I'd hate to see pard pass 3.

[hrothgar]

Few quick comments:

1. I would have opened the hand 4♥. This hand is all about hearts. As you note, you don't have a great rebid after a 1♠ or 1NT response. I don't think that you have any great choices with this hand, however, I think that auctions like

1♥ - 1♠
4♥

are less descriptive than the immediate 4♥ opening. Where the 1♥ opening works well is when partner can raise (not too likely) or scrape up a 2/1. Given my spade shortness, I think that a 1♠ advance is far to likely, so I'll open at the four level.

2. If I did choose to open 1♥, I'd stick to the low road and rebid 2♥ over 1♥. I think that a 3♥ or 4♥ rebid is apt to lead to a bad slam. A diamond rebid would never cross my mind.

[cherdano]

Jlall, on Oct 14 2007, 10:24 PM, said:

1H is fine, very strange rebid problem. I am really scared if I bid 3H that partner will go crazy with a bunch of HCP when slam is very bad, but not sure if I have the heart for 2H with 8-4. It looks like partner has a good hand given the opps silence. I guess I'd go 2H.

Justin, what does 1H-1S-4H show for you?

[Stephen Tu]

[regarding my assertion that 1h -1x - 4h shows a distributional freak, not a HCP powerhouse]

Quote

This is a different approach and if you play the style where you can invent a jump shift with this hand to force to game, then it is a good way to handle this hand, but if you play
what I believe is "standard" then PD will think that you have something just short of a strong 2♣ bid in ♥

I think my way is the standard way, not yours. At least that's how I learned from the books of Root, Goren, Sheinwold, Truscott, Kantar when I started out, most mentioned the need to jump shift in non-suits with powerhouse 1 suiters, and rebidding 4M showed weaker freak hands. Do you have a source that says otherwise?

Edit:
--Hmm I found one myself, Fred's LTPB program takes this approach. Great, yet another place in "standard" where there is no standard. I'll look in more places after I get home.

[han]

I think this is a very interesting hand, difficult to know what's best. I'll explain why all bids are wrong:

1H followed by 2H: This hand has so much playing strength, I'd be really afraid of missing game. If partner bids again then you should be ok.

1H followed by 2D: As Ralph said, with an 8-card suit you should generally play in that suit. I don't think this was sarcastic, it's actually very good advice (Look for instance at Fluffy's reluctance to introduce a 5-carc side suit when 8-5 or even 7-5 in recent threads).

1H followed by 3D: This shows a powerhouse. If you don't have a good fit you will certainly get overboard (when playing with an experienced partner).

1H followed by 3H: This doesn't overstate your playing strength in hearts but it does overstate your playing strength in any other strain. Partner doesn't know this and will expect a very different hand.

1H followed by 4H: Do you have an agreement about this? Probably not. Does it show a hand close to a 2C opener or a minimal HCP hand with a very long suit? If you don't know then you'd better not try. This is what I would bid when playing with Arend.

4H opening: Yuck! This is so gross yet it can easily be a winner. What makes it somewhat reasonable is that no other auction is remotely descriptive either.

When playing bridge you have to make a pick in a fairly short time, yet even after thinking about it for a day I'm not sure what's best, this is a very difficult hand. So don't feel bad about making a bad call (I agree with that), bridge is about making few mistakes but nobody is perfect. And thanks for posting, thinking about it was certainly educational for me as well.

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean2, on Oct 15 2007, 02:12 PM, said:

... <snip>
and I enjoyed playing with my partner.  We had a fun and relaxed weekend... <snip>

Thats what counts most and is the most important thing.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

vuroth, on Oct 15 2007, 01:34 PM, said:

Definitely not just you making these bids, jb.

I had a 6-4 last night, and opted to rebid the 4, and got criticized after the hand. Weak two-suiters always seem (to me) to be a bit of guesswork, because you can't truly bid your shape without overbidding.

V

You can ignore the critic, in case of a 6-4 hand,
it is a matter of style, and you usually will find
guys bidding the 4 card suit.
The only exception being, if the rebid of your suit
really shows 6 and if we are talking about AKQxxx
vs. 5432, and even than you may find some support.

But there is a line, for some 7-4 wont be it, but 8-4
surely will.
The simple reason ebing, that the 7-4 will better play
in case the 7 card suit is trumps.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[cherdano]

Jlall, on Oct 15 2007, 04:55 PM, said:

I would rebid 4H with Axx AKT9xxx Ax x and consider that standard. My roommates have informed me I am a donk and 4H is standard here...

I agree with your roommates.



(On the rebid issue, that is.)

[jillybean]

I’d like to apologize for the outburst.
This was my first tournament with an experienced player and I guess I was overly optimistic. I enjoyed playing in the tournament and the weekend was fun. However, reviewing the hands afterwards was ghastly and the “humor” did not go down well at all.