[jillybean]

Dealer: North Vul: NS Scoring: IMP

♠ AK5 ♥ QJ5 ♦ T543 ♣ KJT

West North East South

 -     1♠    Pass  ?

Playing 2/1 is this a 2♣ or a 2♦ bid?

[mike777]

edit

[ArcLight]

What about 1NT, then bidding 4 Spades.
The 4333 shape is a minus.
The "long" suit is weak.

Maybe if the club or heart honrs were in Diamonds it would be worth a 2Dime bid playing 2/1.

I don't see this as an obvious slam hand.
Now maybe if pard is 5-5 you have a chance.

[effervesce]

jillybean2, on Jul 22 2008, 07:46 PM, said:

<!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> North </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> NS </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </th> <td> AK5 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> QJ5 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> T543 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> KJT </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end -->

West  North East  South

 -     1♠    Pass  ?</span>

Playing 2/1  is this a 2♣ or a 2♦ bid?

Don't mind either bid. 2♣ only promises 3 in any case (you may be 3-4-3-3).

2♣ would help find 3NT if 3NT is the right spot, while 2♦ might inhibit a diamond lead if you end up in 3NT.

I slightly prefer 2♣ though, as when partner holds a singleton diamond bidding 2♦ makes it more difficult for him to evaluate his hand.

[andy_h]

These balanced GF hands are certainly a bit problematic if you don't have a sequence to show them. There is an article "Improving 2/1 GF Part 1" by Fred in the BBO Bridge Library that discusses this about several ways that people have played to show these balanced GF raises.

Lacking any conventions/agreements, I would strongly prefer to bid 2C as it keeps the door open for opener for the maximum space. He will also know that our 2C can be based on a (3)4+ suit due to the balanced hands we might have. It's also lucky that we have values in our club suit too, so opener's judgment won't go too astray if he happens to forget we can be balanced.

[dbsboy]

Can I bid a Jacoby 2NT?

Although this is a 4333 super balanced hand, the concentration of honours makes the hand attractive.

I will be delighted to bid 3S if p bids 3D (short) and try slam if p bids 4C, 4D, 4H
Otherwise signoff in 4S

[skjaeran]

I routinely bid 2♣ with this hand. I prefer 2♦ to show five in fact, and T9xx isn't even close to that. I'd often bid 2♣ where it's more marginal than this (this is a clear 2♣ IMO, I wouldn't consider 2♦ at all).

The reason I prefer this style is 1) that opener more often is able to describe his hand over 2♣ and 2) that your're far better off after a 2♦ response if that promises five (or four very good).

[kenrexford]

2♣. 100% for me. I will be very happy if partner bids 2♦ (could also be a three-bagger for me) or 2♥, as we can now agree spades and GF with my 2♠ second call (also stylistic but my preference that it 100% agree spades as 3+).

As an aside, I will also like my third bid in that sequence. Partner will, per force, bid 2NT over my 2♠ call, which for me denies two of the top three spades.

If partner's rebid had been 2♦, I will be able to deny two top clubs by not cuebidding 3♣, I will deny any of the top three diamonds by not cuebidding 3♦, I will deny any first-round or second-round heart control (shortness or honor) by not cuebidding 3♥, and I will show two of the top three spades by cuebidding 3♠. If partner shows contextually serious as his next call, I can then cue my club King and then possibly cue my heart Queen over 4♦, almost perfectly describing my hand. If partner's rebid had been 2♥ instead, I will again bypass 3♣ for the same reason, bypass 3♦ to deny any first-round or second-round diamond control, but now cue by heart Queen immediately.

[benlessard]

2Nt here hoping partner got a stiff D. I could also live with 2C but whatever the following bidding, later when partner make a cuebid in diamonds i wont know if its a stiff or an honnor.

[benlessard]

Quote

If partner's rebid had been 2♦, I will be able to deny two top clubs by not cuebidding 3♣, I will deny any of the top three diamonds by not cuebidding 3♦, I will deny any first-round or second-round heart control (shortness or honor) by not cuebidding 3♥, and I will show two of the top three spades by cuebidding 3♠. If partner shows contextually serious as his next call, I can then cue my club King and then possibly cue my heart Queen over 4♦, almost perfectly describing my hand. If partner's rebid had been 2♥ instead, I will again bypass 3♣ for the same reason, bypass 3♦ to deny any first-round or second-round diamond control, but now cue by heart Queen immediately.

Wont he play you for

AKx
Qx
xxx
KJTxx

or similar hand ?

[rogerclee]

Bidding 2♦ causes partner to mis-evaluate his hand, so I would not do that.

[dbsboy]

Now I think that it may not be that good to try slam even if the auction goes 1S-2N-4C/4D/4H. Which means that I will only think of slam after 1S-2N-3D

[jillybean]

2nt (jacoby) promises 4 for me, I do have AKx but no need to mislead my p.

I did bid 2♣ , (1♠:2♣ 3♣:4♠)

The opps cried foul, 'no alert' and all 3 said my bid was 2♦ as I had a real, 4 card suit; I understood I should have 5 for this, 10xxx looks terrible for a 2♦ bid. Isnt 2♣ the standard and yes, probably should be alerted.

[qwery_hi]

Is it so clear that the 2♣ bid should be alerted? Even if it is alerted, isn't it an unnatural bid since a natural suit bid would require 4 or more cards. So would a systemic 2♣ bid be GCC legal?

[Edmunte1]

I disagree with:
- 2NT Jacoby
- 1NT followed by 4♠ (space taking not constructive method)
- 2♦ (should be 5+cards or very good 4)

2♣ (2+card ) is the normal everyday bid, keeping the bidding low and easy

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

2D.

If you have already agreed to bid 2C with less than 4 cards,
in case you are 4333 with 4 hearts,
Than it is no big change to agree, that a 2C bid may be based on
only 2 cards.
Such an agreement would allow you to require a certain quality
of the 4 card diamond suit.

The issue is not the given hand, but a hand with the shape 3442.
If you say in this case, that a 2D bid is a wtp, assuming that you
have the same diamond holding, than 2D is also a wtp with the
hand you gave.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: Of course you could also agree that 2NT (call it Jacoby 2NT,
or call it Marlowe 2NT special) showes game forcing values with at
least 3 card support.

[P_Marlowe]

dbsboy, on Jul 22 2008, 11:19 PM, said:

Can I bid a Jacoby 2NT?

Although this is a 4333 super balanced hand, the concentration of honours makes the hand attractive.

I will be delighted to bid 3S if p bids 3D (short) and try slam if p bids 4C, 4D, 4H
Otherwise signoff in 4S

Sure you can, but the majority off BBF posters, you may also say all,
with the sole excepztion of me, require that you have 4 card support.

As always: Given just the name of a convention does not specify anything.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[dbsboy]

Let me try to analyze this hand. An analysis from the viewpoint of a beginner.

1. Its values are a bit soft

2. The honours are concentrated in the same suits.



This analysis is purely about what I think so I dont know if its correct or not. Its good because I am writing in the B/I forum, so nobody will say 'I am stating the obvious' or 'This is completely wrong'

1. You downgrade your hand a lot when partner has a singleton in you High-card-concentrated suit.

2. If your p has a singleton in your loser suit, you will upgrade your hand a lot because your partner is likely to have some high cards to protect your Queens and Jacks.

Its different from AXX AXX AXXX AXX because this hand works well against any short in partner's hand...



That's why I find 2NT an interesting bid because it helps me to find out parnter's shortness immediately, and I know how to react.

I am not saying 2NT is the right bid, but isn't it more important knowing what you are looking for, rather than only bidding according to textbooks?

Um...2NT has drawbacks. I can think of 2

1. 1S-2C-2D/2H-2S even serves a better purpose. Everything partner bids later shows his hand. And knowing that he has a 4 card suit is also important! (2NT shows 5-4-3-1 / 5-3-4-1 usually, and 3C shows 5-1-4-3 / 5-4-1-3) But 1S-2C-3C is not so clear...if I bid 3S (textbk bid?) I dont know what 4D is. In this case can 1S-2C-3C-3D help me check whether if p has H high cards?

2. Even if the auction goes 1S-2N-3D (shortness), there is no guarantee you can make slam. Your partner still needs something extra. But this tells me that if I have some more points in H/C I will definitely bid 2NT, despite my 3 card trump support.

[hrothgar]

Anyone else tempted to bid 3NT (meaning "I want to play 3NT")

[benlessard]

Ive never quite understood the reason for the 4th trump requirement. Of course i know that the 9 card fit is important when partner show a stiff and you can envision a dummy reversal. But knowing the singleton is important too even without dummy reversal.

1S----2C
3C----3S

Its probably the most likely sequence and i dont think you are well placed for the rest of the auction.

The 2nd most frequent auction is

1S-----2C
2Nt----3S

Wich is a little bit inferior to the jacoby path.

The 3rd more frequent sequence is

1S----2C
2S----3S again that pose some problems.

Even usually fairly rare sequence now become quite frequent and pose some slight problems.

1S----2C
3red (splinter)------???

here some play that 3S show Hx (advanced cuebids) and not always 3 card support.

The time when 2C is good is when...

1S--------2C
2red -----2S
3something.

but i dont think these good ones compensate for the others hands.