[matmat]

Fourth seat, all red, imps. playing 2/1 with some gadgets, but nothing uncommon, you pick up:

♠A5
♥K98532
♦A3
♣KQJ


you open 1♥, p responds 1♠. opps remain silent. what call do you think is best?

[awm]

I'm pretty sure 2♣ is the normal bid. The hand is too good for a 2♥ rebid but the suit is not sufficient for 3♥. If partner doesn't pass 2♣ you are in pretty good shape (can raise a 2♥ preference or 2♠ rebid to three and obviously you are happy if partner game forces or makes an invitational bid).

Second choice 2NT.

Obviously a great hand for 2♣ Gazzilli rebid.

[cherdano]

Yes, 2♣ is perfect, after partner's preference to 2♥ and my 3♥ rebid he will upgrade his club honors...oh wait...

[dcvetkov]

I think choises are 2NT, 3H and fake 2c

I really, hate 3H with this suit.. Partner will expect better suit and 3NT could easily fall apart if heart do not produce enough tricks quickly

I can live with 2NT, but I agree wih adam 2C, although there is some risk of missing a game. On a side note, it is better to give chance partner to bid NT if possible, something tells me he needs to declarer NT ( lead coming to his probable queens in spades and diamonds)/

[P_Marlowe]

3H, ugly, but here we go.

As was already mentioned the alternative
is 2C, which would be the bid, if you would
hold a heart less Axx in diamonds.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[skjaeran]

I'm simply rebidding 2♥ on this.

[655321]

2♣

Second choice, 2NT, also reasonable.

Not that keen on 3♥, and no other bid seems plausible.

[Apollo81]

normal 2♣

[kfay]

After fingering the 'I don't know' for a while I voted 2♣. Not surprised to see I have company but I don't feel so 'normal' so to speak.

[ASkolnick]

Um, unless you have some special treatment isn't 2♣ passable? I think 2N is a fine bid.

[jdonn]

2♣ is totally normal. If partner doesn't pass you are definitely well placed, and if he does pass you could as easily be doing well as badly. I don't understand this great fear of partner passing. If he does then aren't we probably in a better contract than 2NT or 3♥? In fact contrary to awm I feel 2♣ is a better bid if you are NOT playing gazilli (I admit I've never played it).

[han]

Sigh, I guess I would also bid 2C. Yes that's passable.

[Fluffy]

Agree with jdonn, I have been playing since forever that 15-17 balanced hand rebid a 3 card minor then bid 2NT, I never played a bad contract in 2m.

2♥ is also reasonable, and 3♥... well that's what I would teach beginners to bid, so it shouldn't be that bad .

[mikeh]

2N 100, 2♥ 80, 2♣ 70, 3♥20

I could be talked into reversing the scores for 2♥ and 2♣

2N is the value bid

2♥ represents the value of the hand for hearts

2♣ is better than 2♥ if we know partner is not passing with 5=1=4=3 8 counts, or the like, but 2♥ is almost certainly a better part score than is 2♣

3♥ is silly... it conveys a fundamentally distorted view of the hand. Now, a lot of non-experts tend to bid 3N over 3♥ on hands on which the better call is 4♥. If partner is one of those, then I can stomach 3♥ a little more... it is a misbid, but partner will usually misbid in response, and so maybe the misbids will cancel out

[jdonn]

mikeh, on Apr 2 2008, 06:28 PM, said:

2N 100, 2♥ 80, 2♣ 70, 3♥20

I could be talked into reversing the scores for 2♥ and 2♣

2N is the value bid

2♥ represents the value of the hand for hearts

2♣ is better than 2♥ if we know partner is not passing with 5=1=4=3 8 counts, or the like, but 2♥ is almost certainly a better part score than is 2♣

3♥ is silly... it conveys a fundamentally distorted view of the hand. Now, a lot of non-experts tend to bid 3N over 3♥ on hands on which the better call is 4♥. If partner is one of those, then I can stomach 3♥ a little more... it is a misbid, but partner will usually misbid in response, and so maybe the misbids will cancel out

Doesn't your analysis sort of ignore that you are bidding 2♥ on a decent 17 count?

[mikeh]

jdonn, on Apr 2 2008, 06:59 PM, said:

mikeh, on Apr 2 2008, 06:28 PM, said:

2N 100, 2♥ 80, 2♣ 70, 3♥20

I could be talked into reversing the scores for 2♥ and 2♣

2N is the value bid

2♥ represents the value of the hand for hearts

2♣ is better than 2♥ if we know partner is not passing with 5=1=4=3 8 counts, or the like, but 2♥ is almost certainly a better part score than is 2♣

3♥ is silly... it conveys a fundamentally distorted view of the hand. Now, a lot of non-experts tend to bid 3N over 3♥ on hands on which the better call is 4♥. If partner is one of those, then I can stomach 3♥ a little more... it is a misbid, but partner will usually misbid in response, and so maybe the misbids will cancel out

Doesn't your analysis sort of ignore that you are bidding 2♥ on a decent 17 count?

no

no call is 'right', altho 2N is better, imo, than anything else. Both 2♥ and 2♣ are significant distortions. 2♣ distorts both of my suit lengths, but can contain hands of this strength. 2♥ is accurate on shape and a big strength distortion. For me, and I said I might be persuaded otherwise, the two shape distortions are about equal to and maybe bigger, in aggregate, than the one strength distortion. Besides, this is a poor(ish) 17 precisely because my hcp are primarily outside my suit. Of course, that makes 2N a bit more of an overbid... no bid is perfect, and the 100 I 'awarded' 2N isn't supposed to say that it is.

[jdonn]

I see, sorry I had misread the part comparing 2♣ and 2♥.

All I can say about 2NT is I used to do that, and changed purely based on my experience. It happened several times in a row that we got to 3NT when we belonged in a 6-2 major suit fit. Whatever problems people cite with 2♣ seem theoretical to me since none of them have ever happened to me. Maybe I'm just that lucky.

[the hog]

2NT. I try to avoid bidding suits that don't exist and fooling my partner.