[kenrexford]

♠x ♥QJxx ♦Jx ♣AKQxxx

1♣-(1♠)-2♣-(2♠)-?

(1♠/2♠ are overcalls)

I believe that the colors were all white.

[han]

I don't think this is clear at all. It is very unlikely that partner has 4 hearts but I'm going to compete in clubs and might bid hearts to get partner involved. I'd like to know the vulnerability and form of scoring before I say more.


And just because I like nitpicking: 2S is not an overcall.

[655321]

Probably just 3♣, but it would be nice to know vulnerability, at least.
5♣ at favorable is plausible, but is obviously crazy at unfavorable.

[pclayton]

5♣ w/r
3♣ r/w
4♣ w/w, probably r/r too.

[cherdano]

I would bid 3♥.

[brianshark]

3♣ at all colours.

[pclayton]

To those that are bidding 3♣ at equal - are you planning on competing to 4♣ later?

[rogerclee]

5♣ w/r. I might just pass at all other colors, but if I bid something, it'll be 4♣. Bidding more and more clubs helps the defenders evalulate their hands better, and I have little doubt that their ~20HCP game is making. Might as well make them think they're stealing.

[655321]

pclayton, on Feb 13 2008, 07:36 PM, said:

To those that are bidding 3♣ at equal - are you planning on competing to 4♣ later?

No

[matmat]

3♣

[kenrexford]

Interesting so far.

I am curious that no one has mentioned whether they would use a good-bad 2NT in this sequence, or whether that would affect their bidding. I suppose that the 3♥, 4♣, and 5♣ bidders probably would not change their decision by adding that nuance.

[Cascade]

We play that in a competive auction a new suit shows a second suit helping partner to judge subsequent competition.

So 3♥ is possible.

Having said that I don't think we have ever had the auction where we show a higher ranking suit they always seem to be when we have a major and introduce a minor (or occasionally hearts when our primary fit is spades). I will have to check whether partner thinks the agreement applies here.

[gnasher]

kenrexford, on Feb 14 2008, 04:23 AM, said:

I am curious that no one has mentioned whether they would use a good-bad 2NT in this sequence, or whether that would affect their bidding.

If I were to bid 2NT here it would show a balanced 18-count with a spade stop. Does anyone use good-bad when a suit has already been agreed?

I'd bid 3H, partly to help partner to judge what to do over 4S, partly to make a show of strength, and partly to take away their 3D game try.

[mike777]

kenrexford, on Feb 13 2008, 10:23 PM, said:

Interesting so far.

I am curious that no one has mentioned whether they would use a good-bad 2NT in this sequence, or whether that would affect their bidding.  I suppose that the 3♥, 4♣, and 5♣ bidders probably would not change their decision by adding that nuance.

good/bad does not apply after a raise....

I grant you.....good/bad 2nt is confusing and many are confused

[pclayton]

I use G/B a lot but never when we have an established fit.

[kenrexford]

I hear that a lot of people do not use G/B when there is a fit.

Why not?

What's the functional difference between 1♣-1♠-2♣-2♠-2NT/3♣ and 1♠-2♦-2♠-3♦-3♥? Simply the desire to maintain 2NT as a viable contract?

2NT is "used" as G/B with a fit often. Consider, for example, a Jordan 2NT, or 2NT in a competitive auction by Advancer. Sure, these set trumps where trumps has not yet been set, but the situation seems similar.

Is this a rule that just has been taught by oral tradition, the justification for which no one remembers, or is there a sound reason?

Not that this necessarily matters here, as another call may be more appropriate even with G/B in play.

[whereagles]

I would use a save-suggesting bid over 2♠. I'm sure Ken can tell us which call that is

[kenrexford]

whereagles, on Feb 14 2008, 08:18 AM, said:

I would use a save-suggesting bid over 2♠. I'm sure Ken can tell us which call that is

To be honest, I kneee-jerked a simple 3♣ when asked about this away from the table. This was the call made at the actual table, a call that apparently allowed the partnership to stumble-bunny into 5♣ and somehow avoid a 5♦ call by the opponents. The deal could result in 5♥ or 5♣ making for us, 4♠ (ideal defense holds it to 10 tricks) or 5♦ (any defense) for them.

The person asking thought that the best/winning call would be 4♣. The idea was that Opener does not really know whether he wants to bid 5♣ or not and can simply place the decision with partner by making that call. I found that analysis to make a lot of sense, especially as we have a new suit, a cuebid, and maybe even GB2N available to show stronger hands.

3♥ was also considered, but I thought that this call should show a hand with the Ace or King of hearts and not QJxx.

W-R, I like 5♣ also, but at equal 4♣, if it means what my buddy thinks, seems to have a lot of appeal.

As an aside, Responder held ♠xxxx ♥A10xx ♦x ♣Jxxx. Any thoughts as to this decision to be practical and just focus the fit rather than to muddle around showing hearts in a spade-dominant auction?

[Gerben42]

Quote

good/bad does not apply after a raise....

Agreed. This hand is too good for 3♣ though. I bid 3♥ in case partner needs my help to decide if to defend or save vs 4♠.