[johnallen]

Regarding the sequence 1♠ - (P) - 2♦ for example:

1. Kantar, in "Bridge for Dummies" 2nd Ed says on page 191 that the 2♦ bid promises a minimum of 11 HCP (maybe 10 with a strong 6-card suit) and promises to bid again..."That promise written in blood, allows you to relax knowing that your next bid cannot be passed."

2. Downey and Pomer in "Standard Bidding with SAYC" say on page 72 "...unless opener rebids game, the responder in a two over one auction always promises another bid."

My question is whether this is common practice, or whether responder might pass in a sequence like 1♠ - (P) - 2♦ - (P) - 3♦ - (P) - ?

I was faced with this problem holding:

Scoring: MP

---

and felt bound to bid a reluctant 3♠. This is where we played it, in a 5-2 fit with partner holding Q6432 in spades. Not great. The hand played somewhat better in 3♦, but is still not terrific. My partner's full hand was Q6432 64 KQJ AT4.

Is this a "Sometimes things don't work out" situation, or is there a better way to bid this?

[Elianna]

Your partner should have rebid 2♠, which doesn't necessarily show extra spade length (more like a waiting bid).

The reason he can wait to raise your diamonds is because you're forced to rebid, so he knows that he can bid diamonds later.

I think that the auction should go:

1♠ - 2♦
2♠ - 3♦ (or 2NT depending what you think of Qx of hearts)
pass (or 3♦ over 2NT)

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

according to both of your references
responder cant pass.
This does not mean that 3D did create
a game force, although it simplifies a lot,
because some partnerships allow 4D to be
a final contract, but 3D.

Playing with a stranger, I would not assume
that a 2/1 promises another bid, but it would
be one of the few question I would like to ask
if given the chance.

Besides: Your partner should not bid 3D, this
does show support, and 2D just pomises a 4
card suit, and unless I miscounted, you partner
has only 3 cards.
He should either bid 2S or 2NT.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[helene_t]

While it's clear that 3♦ is forcing in SAYC (and therefore not the correct bid, see Elianna's post), I'm sure a lot of people (even some reasonably good players) play it as NF. Something to discuss with your partner.