[Codo]

I jopin the chorus for 100 % north.
1. Bid 2 Club (after this I had bid 2Diamond followed by a club raise with south)
2.For me 1 HEart 1 Spade- 3 Heart 2 Spade from responder shows a constructive hand, so I had not passed - but this is the lesser crime compared to NR. 1

[helene_t]

Agree that North should have raised 2♠ to 3 but I think South would pass that.

South has a hard problem if North bids 2♣. 2♠, 3♣ or 2♦ are possible bids IMHO. Maybe game could be bid then. Or maybe not.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

since you open all 5332 with 1 NT, a 2C rebid
by opener would show a 4 card club suit.

Given the quality of the heart suit, 2C is certainly
reasonable, but I wont critisice rebidding 2H, showing
the 6 carder, and if your agreement is always showing
the 6 card mayor, at least if min, a certainly sensible
agreement, than the bidding was fine.

North cant do more, he is min, and he has a 6 carder.

So I would say hand did not fit with methods / agreements
in place.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Cascade]

jdonn, on Apr 14 2008, 04:11 PM, said:

Cascade, on Apr 13 2008, 10:02 PM, said:

jdonn, on Apr 14 2008, 07:29 AM, said:

Cascade, on Apr 13 2008, 02:16 PM, said:

To all of the 2♣ bidders - what would you bid over 2♣ with the south hand.

4♣ I think. Even if I bid 3♣, which seems like an underbid, I would expect north to bid 3♥ over that.

Is that invitational?

We play pretty much any raise to 4minor as slammish.

Yes, I would always go through 4th suit forcing on that hand. Why bid 4 when you can agree it with 3? I only play what you're saying when 3 was already forcing.

This means we have two invitational bids

1♥ 1♠
2♣ 3♣/4♣

That seems too much to me.

Or do you play 2♣ is forcing and so have to raise with a minimum.

[jdonn]

Cascade, on Apr 14 2008, 06:38 PM, said:

jdonn, on Apr 14 2008, 04:11 PM, said:

Cascade, on Apr 13 2008, 10:02 PM, said:

jdonn, on Apr 14 2008, 07:29 AM, said:

Cascade, on Apr 13 2008, 02:16 PM, said:

To all of the 2♣ bidders - what would you bid over 2♣ with the south hand.

4♣ I think. Even if I bid 3♣, which seems like an underbid, I would expect north to bid 3♥ over that.

Is that invitational?

We play pretty much any raise to 4minor as slammish.

Yes, I would always go through 4th suit forcing on that hand. Why bid 4 when you can agree it with 3? I only play what you're saying when 3 was already forcing.

This means we have two invitational bids

1♥ 1♠
2♣ 3♣/4♣

That seems too much to me.

Or do you play 2♣ is forcing and so have to raise with a minimum.

I don't see why it seems like too much. 4♣ is a rare bid. Besides doesn't that mean you have three game forcing bids (4♣, 2♦ --> 3♣, 2♦ --> 4♣) and only one invitational bid?

[Cascade]

That makes some sense.

Although we would have to change our meta-rules. Currently any free raise to 4minor is forcing (unless this is patently ludicrous).

It is not quite true that there are three forcing raises since occasionally in response to 4th suit forcing partner will bid at or beyond 3♣. This is not that likely on the actual auction but on a similar auction, say 1♦ 1♥; 2♣ 2♠ 4sf, it is more likely. I am not sure if we would want to change our rules depending on the level of the 4th suit bid.

I am not entirely sure how we would modify our rule for when 4minor is invitational. I will give it some more thought. On this particular sequence we do seem to have plenty of room to force.

[skjaeran]

Without a different agreement I'd expect 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♣ - 4♣ to show a distributional invite with 5-card support. That's how it's played in Norway.