[jillybean]

Dealer: West Vul: All Scoring: IMP

♠ 974 ♥ A54 ♦ J874 ♣ K64

West North East South

 1♥!   Pass  1♠    Pass
 1NT   Pass  2♥!!    Pass
 Pass  2NT   Pass  .. 

! could be 4
!! natural ♥ support

How do you play 2nt here?

train wreck ahead

[han]

Minors.

[P_Marlowe]

3D.

2H is just preference, denying a 6 carder.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Lobowolf]

Yup, minors.

[jillybean]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 1♥!   Pass  1♠    Pass
 1NT   Pass  2♥    Pass
 Pass  2NT   Pass  3♦
 Dbl   Pass  Pass  Pass
 

Does anyone play balancing 2nt?

[jtfanclub]

Doesn't fit the bidding. If partner had the minors,

1. He'd show them a long, long time ago.
2. He'd just double. Surely that shows the minors 4-4 on this auction.

But I've got to admit, I've never seen an auction like this one before. I've never even seen it against me. What would be the point of using 2NT here to mean the minors?

EDIT: I wrote this before seeing Jilly's hand. The only reason to use a 2NT balancing here would be if you thought you were being cheated out of game, and a 12 count certainly doesn't qualify.

I'm having a hard time coming up with a hand where a balancing 2NT would be the right call. Maybe a 16 count with 3 hearts but no stopper and the wrong shape for an X?

[Stephen Tu]

My interpretation of 2nt is
"I either have to teach partner how to bid or get a new partner", and I know this before I see partner's hand.

[Lobowolf]

jtfanclub, on Aug 10 2008, 11:51 AM, said:

Doesn't fit the bidding. If partner had the minors,

1. He'd show them a long, long time ago.
2. He'd just double. Surely that shows the minors 4-4 on this auction.

With respect to point 1, there are many, many hands that would take action in the balancing seat that would not take action earlier. Partner could certainly want to compete against 2♥, especially at matchpoints, with a hand far less than the 5-5 hand he'd want for an immediate 2NT call over 1♥. I'd balance over 2♥ with a lot of hands that are 4-4 in the minors, especially at pairs. I'm not "showing" the minors with a hand like that over 1♥, and I'm not doing it over 1NT while my LHO is still unlimited. It's only after 2♥ comes back around to you that you know partner has some values and you can bid for both hands. If RHO's second bid had been something like 3NT or 4M, you won't have wanted to bid and suggest a poor sacrifice, or give declarer a hint about the distribution. It's only when the opponents are willing to pass the hand out at the 2-level that your action can be construed as purely competitive.

With respect to point 2, I imagine double would be takeout as well, but maybe with more defense to cater to the possibility that partner would leave it in? I don't think north can have a unilateral penalty double, but it's more likely than having a natural 2NT. You just don't want to be in 2NT with half the deck. Here's a hand I'd bid as North did, at least NV at pairs:

♠Jx
♥Tx
♦KQxx
♣QJxxx

[Lobowolf]

When I posted the above, I overlooked the conditions (IMPS, red) as is probably obvious from my comments. There are still hands I'd take the delayed action with, but fewer (obviously). Though you have some protection based on the fact that you're giving partner two choices to find a suit, and many opponents are reluctant to double partscores at IMPs.

To look at it another way...both sides have about half the deck, on the auction. There are almost no hands I'd want to be in 2NT on, but distributional values might create a situation where I'd be comfortable being in 3m. North could certainly be 5-5 for his actions, too, unless you race to bid 2NT immediately with any ol' 5-5 hand, which is a very poor idea for a couple of reasons I originally mentioned (suggesting a bad sacrifice, telling declarer how to play the hand).

[jillybean]

Stephen Tu, on Aug 10 2008, 09:52 AM, said:

My interpretation of 2nt is
"I either have to teach partner how to bid or get a new partner", and I know this before I see partner's hand.

Hopefully we will work on the first point, I like my partner and they're hard to find

[Lobowolf]

[jtfanclub]

Lobowolf, on Aug 10 2008, 12:13 PM, said:

I'm not "showing" the minors with a hand like that over 1♥, and I'm not doing it over 1NT while my LHO is still unlimited. It's only after 2♥ comes back around to you that you know partner has some values and you can bid for both hands.

I don't buy that for a minute.

If I don't have the strength to X 1NT to show the minors, I don't have the strength to balance into the three level. I have never understood the logic of "I can't interfere because one hand is unlimited". It's the opposite. If one hand is unlimited, then you may get away safely because they have to explore for game, or you may be doubled and go down, but it's fine because they were making game but stopped early to double you.

The reason why balancing is safer is because they have a fit, so you're more likely to have a fit. But here, they may not have a fit. When you balance here, you're just begging them to double you when they don't have a fit. You're at the 3 level, they have no game interest, why shouldn't they sit back and collect their money? If nobody was vulnerable, it's still better for them to double. On occassion, it gets them 100 instead of 140, but so what? It's one IMP, and when they set you two, they get it all back and then some, and there's no guarantee they're making 3 of a major.

To give a much more common auction:

1♥ 1NT
2♣ 2♥
P

If you're using 2NT at this late point of the auction as minors, opponents are going to love you to death. Short of having a monster hand that your defense didn't allow you to show before, I can't imagine why you'd ever make that bid.

[Lobowolf]

jtfanclub, on Aug 10 2008, 11:17 PM, said:

Lobowolf, on Aug 10 2008, 12:13 PM, said:

I'm not "showing" the minors  with a hand like that over 1♥, and I'm not doing it over 1NT while my LHO is still unlimited.  It's only after 2♥ comes back around to you that you know partner has some values and you can bid for both hands.

I don't buy that for a minute.

If I don't have the strength to X 1NT to show the minors, I don't have the strength to balance into the three level. I have never understood the logic of "I can't interfere because one hand is unlimited". It's the opposite. If one hand is unlimited, then you may get away safely because they have to explore for game, or you may be doubled and go down, but it's fine because they were making game but stopped early to double you.

The reason why balancing is safer is because they have a fit, so you're more likely to have a fit. But here, they may not have a fit. When you balance here, you're just begging them to double you when they don't have a fit. You're at the 3 level, they have no game interest, why shouldn't they sit back and collect their money? If nobody was vulnerable, it's still better for them to double. On occassion, it gets them 100 instead of 140, but so what? It's one IMP, and when they set you two, they get it all back and then some, and there's no guarantee they're making 3 of a major.

To give a much more common auction:

1♥ 1NT
2♣ 2♥
P

If you're using 2NT at this late point of the auction as minors, opponents are going to love you to death. Short of having a monster hand that your defense didn't allow you to show before, I can't imagine why you'd ever make that bid.

ONE reason that balancing is safer is that they have a fit; another one that you're apparently overlooking is that the fact that the auction is dying indicates that my partner has values. That's the relevance of the limited vs. unlimited distinction.

Not only that partner's lack of values means bidding is less safe in terms of going for a number, it's also less USEFUL. If partner is broke, and responder's next bid is a jump to game, all I've done by coming in earlier is help declarer play the hand.

The three level is safer when you know that partner has values than the two level is when he might not.

[Cascade]

jillybean2, on Aug 11 2008, 04:45 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 1♥!   Pass  1♠    Pass
 1NT   Pass  2♥    Pass
 Pass  2NT   Pass  3♦
 Dbl   Pass  Pass  Pass
 

Does anyone play balancing 2nt?

Do all of your hands feature ♦ Axxxx opposite a singleton?

[jillybean]

Very observant of you Wayne (ns)

[mikeh]

This was a unusual auction, but I am sure that virtually every expert would take 2N as the minors.

One poster implied that a minor suit hand could double the 1N rebid to show the minors.. he is incorrect, at least in the sense that I think he was trying to imply. A double of 1N would be typically an opening hand (or better) with short spades and usually something close to 1=4=4=4 shape. The given auction implies close to 5-5 shape without the values for a 2N overcall of 1♥... red at imps, 2N should deliver a pretty good hand so it is possible to construct hands not quite good enough over 1♥ but which are worth bidding once partner is marked with high cards by the opps stopping in 2♥.

Incidentally, west's auction sucks... if he thinks his hand is a 1N rebid, then his opening (unless he is Steve Robinson) is 1♦. However, since he got a great result, I doubt that anything will change his mind.

[ASkolnick]

No, if they play a canape (4 card major before longer minor) style, he cannot bid 1D, he must bid 1H since 1D may deny a 4 card major. Once he decides that his hand is semi balanced and that Qx for clubs is best from his side, he can decide to bid 1N.

1D-1S-1N may indicate he does not have a 4 card heart suit, but I don't know if it is what they play, but it certainly is a reasonable treatment.

[mikeh]

ASkolnick, on Aug 12 2008, 10:17 AM, said:

No, if they play a canape (4 card major before longer minor) style, he cannot bid 1D, he must bid 1H since 1D may deny a 4 card major. Once he decides that his hand is semi balanced and that Qx for clubs is best from his side, he can decide to bid 1N.

1D-1S-1N may indicate he does not have a 4 card heart suit, but I don't know if it is what they play, but it certainly is a reasonable treatment.

of course, but one could always argue that 'if they play such and such non-standard treatment, then they bid it correctly'. Canape methods are not exactly standard, and should be alerted, and there was no note of that in the problem post

[jtfanclub]

mikeh, on Aug 12 2008, 11:53 AM, said:

of course, but one could always argue that 'if they play such and such non-standard treatment, then they bid it correctly'. Canape methods are not exactly standard, and should be alerted, and there was no note of that in the problem post

Canape needs to be alerted?

[skjaeran]

jtfanclub, on Aug 12 2008, 07:59 PM, said:

mikeh, on Aug 12 2008, 11:53 AM, said:

of course, but one could always argue that 'if they play such and such non-standard treatment, then they bid it correctly'. Canape methods are not exactly standard, and should be alerted, and there was no note of that in the problem post

Canape needs to be alerted?

Depends on the regulations that applies.

But I'm definitely of the opinion that canape should be alerted. Since it's not something you normally expect. And since opener might not take another bid, the opening bid is the bid to alert, not the rebid in a longer suit.