[dcvetkov]

We are vulnerable

This is your hand

- Q42,Q932,AJT954

PD You

1H 2C
2D ??

What is your bid? ( Lets assume you did bid 2 clubs as GF, perhaps a strech)
Do you like your chances for some diamond slam or go back to hearts?

Rate these rebids bids from 0 to 10;)

2H
3S ( Splinter)
3D
3H
4H

[jdaming]

In your partnership agreement what does 2♦ promise? Just 4 cards? Better than min strength?

I would that a splinter in support for ♥ is best and see if partner likes his hand enough to show us somthing like 4♣/♦. So my rankings:

2♥ - 5 (Says nothing significant but does keep bidding low and show support)
3♠ - 10 (Because it shows support and gives partner a good idea of our shape)
3♦ - 8 (shows ♦ support but still not clueing in p to distrobution / support)
3♥ - 3 implies better ♥ support than you have.
4♥ - 1 (if you have made the decision to GF you might as well explore going higher)

[skjaeran]

Why did I not just raise to 2♥, this isn't close to a 2♣ bid IMO.

[jdonn]

I agree with 2♣, and 2♥ seems obvious to me now. Next I'll bid 3♦. I always play in game forcing auctions I show my shape below 3NT with no known fit, below 3 of our sit with a known major suit fit.

[mike777]

Prefer forcing 1nt rather than 2c but given 2c is forced on us I just rebid 2h now.

[pclayton]

I like 2♣ myself. This hand has improved, but where are the spades? 2♥ now.

[Lobowolf]

If you steer toward 4♥, what's the plan over 4♠? I think Phil asked a good question...where are the spades? 2♥ is a lot more likely than 4♥ to find out.

[jdonn]

Lobowolf, on Aug 18 2008, 09:27 PM, said:

If you steer toward 4♥, what's the plan over 4♠? I think Phil asked a good question...where are the spades? 2♥ is a lot more likely than 4♥ to find out.

The opponents passed over 1♥, and 2♣, and 2♦! So you are worried about bidding 2♥ since NOW they will bid spades? Sorry if that's not what you are suggesting but it sure sounds like it.

[Lobowolf]

I've seen stranger things happen, and heard all sorts of explanations, from the desire to get the chance to lead a spade against NT to "I didn't want to stick my neck out until I knew you had a fit." I'm not necessarily saying I disagree with 2♥, but I do think that it's more likely you'll end up making a decision over 4♠ than you'll get to a good 6♦. And if finding 6♦ (or, I guess, 6♥) isn't the rationale for not bidding 4♥ now, then what is?

[jdonn]

Lobowolf, on Aug 18 2008, 10:14 PM, said:

...I do think that it's more likely you'll end up making a decision over 4♠ than you'll get to a good 6♦...

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

[Echognome]

jdonn, on Aug 18 2008, 07:09 PM, said:

The opponents passed over 1♥, and 2♣, and 2♦! So you are worried about bidding 2♥ since NOW they will bid spades? Sorry if that's not what you are suggesting but it sure sounds like it.

My guess is that Phil isn't worried about the opponents bidding spades. He's worried about partner having some spade length and hence club shortness.

[jdonn]

I wasn't yelling at Phil, he just asked the question but he still bid 2♥...

[Echognome]

I didn't assume you were yelling at him. I wasn't defending him. I was just hazarding my guess of what he was getting at.