[vuroth]

Scoring: IMP

1♠ 2♠ Pass ?

---

Is it worth mentioning the clubs, on the theory that I can always show my heart support if partner preferences diamonds? Or is it better to just bid hearts straight off, on the theory that my hand is only worth one bid?

[rogerclee]

I would just bid 3♥, because if my partner has clubs, then the opponents have diamonds. 2NT then 3♥ does not show a better hand than a direct 3♥.

[P_Marlowe]

rogerclee, on Sep 11 2008, 09:04 AM, said:

<snip> 2NT then 3♥ does not show a better hand than a direct 3♥.

I disagree, but maybe it was just a typo.
2NT followed by 3H is an inv. raise, you need
inv. raises, if you happen to play continuious
ranges.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[hrothgar]

Hi Vuroth

Sequences like

(1♠) - 2♠ - (P) - 3♣
(P) - 3♦ - (P) - 3♥

don't typically promise extra values. While you've bid twice, this sequence simple says that

1. You prefer Clubs to Hearts
2. You prefer Hearts to Diamonds

Its possible that some sequences following

(1♠) - 2♠ - (P) - 2NT might create some negative inferences:

For example, lets assume that you use 2NT to say "Show me your minor". This might implicitly suggest that bidding 3♣ and correcting Diamonds to Hearts shows extra values.

[rogerclee]

hrothgar, on Sep 11 2008, 07:14 AM, said:

This might implicitly suggest that bidding 3♣ and correcting Diamonds to Hearts shows extra values.

No, this implies that I was willing to play 3♣...

[ArtK78]

3♣ shows clubs and a desire to play clubs rather than either of partner's (presumed) red suits.

If you want to play in partner's minor, bid 2NT.

I have never run across 2NT followed by 3♥ as invitational. It is an interesting concept, but I don't think it has a great deal of merit. I want to let partner know that I have a heart fit with him, and I don't want to hear a 3♠ bid on my left over 2NT.

[kenrexford]

FWIW, I think that...

2NT checks on partner's minor. 2NT...3♥ implies that partner had the "wrong" minor.

3♣ is to play.

3♦ is best used as an invitational heart raise. With a desire to just play diamonds, bid 2NT and then convert 3♣ to 3♦.

3♥ is to play.

If 3♦ is an invitational heart raise, Advancer could actually have invitational+, where he will not pass 3♥.

[cherdano]

Roger and Richard, it is standard that 2N shows some values, while 3m directly are pass/correct. If you aren't willing to play 3♣ and have nothing you bid 3♦.

[MickyB]

2NT = INV+ enquiry. Now 3m = min, 3M = extras with corresponding minor
3C = Pass-or-correct

You could bid 3C and correct 3D to 3H on this hand, but I'd be inclined to bid 3H directly.

[han]

Don't know if it is standard but I've always played it as cherdano says.

[ArtK78]

I like Ken's method. It has the advantage of showing the heart fit immediately, whether to play (3♥) or to invite (3♦). You can still play 3♦ if you have only diamonds by bidding 2NT and correcting 3♣ to 3♦, if necessary. And you can play 3♣ if you have only clubs by just bidding 3♣ (what a novel concept - bid what you have!).

[jdonn]

The method I always use which is very good is:

2NT: Asking minor, promising values
3♣: P/C for the minor, not-values
3♦: Invitational heart raise

Bidding 3♣ to show clubs is a waste of a bid, showing/denying values is MUCH more useful.

[ArtK78]

So, if you are in fourth seat and you see this auction:

(1♠) - 2♠ - (P)* - ?

[or double - I don't think it changes anything]

and you hold:

Scoring: IMP

---

you have to choose between diamonds and hearts? You have no way to bid clubs naturally at the three level?

I trust that you will agree with me that 3NT is not a viable option.

I don't dispute that showing values with a fit for one of the minors isn't useful. But I would not discount the utility of being able to bid clubs naturally at the 3 level.

The same can be said to a lesser extent if you reverse the minor suits; however, you can agree that 2NT followed by 3♦ shows a weak hand with long diamonds. But partner may bid something other than 3♣ over 2NT, so this may not work, either.

[han]

Suppose you hold x xxx Jxx KJxxxx and partner opens 1S, wouldn't you like to bid a weak 2C?

It's a matter or frequency. I think the hands where you want to play in 3C (and they don't double) are infrequent enough that I prefer to use 2NT to show values. This is especially important if you don't play good-or-bad Michaels buut a continuous range.

[ArtK78]

han, on Sep 11 2008, 03:53 PM, said:

Suppose you hold  x xxx Jxx KJxxxx and partner opens 1S, wouldn't you like to bid a weak 2C?

It's a matter or frequency. I think the hands where you want to play in 3C (and they don't double) are infrequent enough that I prefer to use 2NT to show values. This is especially important if you don't play good-or-bad Michaels buut a continuous range.

There is certainly a difference.

Over 1♠, partner knows that you might have a weak hand with a suit of your own. You are not forced to bid over 1♠, and if you do bid 1NT (your only reasonable option), partner knows that you might be weak.

Over partner's 2♠, you have to bid at the 3-level. You should have a way to show that you don't like your choices.

Again, I don't dispute that the ability to show values and a preference for partner's minor over hearts is useful. I am not convinced that it is more useful than the ability to bid a long minor naturally.

[jmc]

I like the suggestion set out by Marilyn Hemenway here on page 6.

http://www.omahabrid...2/Gimmicks1.pdf

2♠ (if 1♥ was the opening bid) is to play and is not at all invitational
3♥ (if 1♠ was the opening bid) is to play and is not at all invitational
3♣ asks the Michaels bidder to pass if their minor is clubs or to correct to ` diamonds if it’s diamonds
3♦, 4♦, 5♦ show diamonds and are not correctable
4♣, 5♣ show clubs and are not correctable

3NT - to play

2NT asks whether the Michaels bidder is min or max:

Structured Responses over 1♠-2♠-P 2NT P would be:
3♣ shows clubs (and hearts) and a minimum
3♦ shows diamonds (and hearts) and a minimum
3♥ shows clubs (and hearts) and a maximum
3♠ shows diamonds (and hearts) and a maximum.

Structured Responses over 1♥ 2♥ P 2NT P would be:
3♣ shows clubs (and spades) and a minimum
3♦ shows diamonds (and spades) and a minimum
3♥ shows clubs (and spades) and a maximum
3♠ shows diamonds (and spades) and a maximum

It seems to cover things fairly well.

Jmc

[han]

The similarity is that we both gave a hand where one would like to play a different method. That is a poor argument. You can always post a hand and say: "here, look, if you had this hand, wouldn't you rather play my method"? Of course the posters here are aware of the benefit of being able to bid 3m naturally, that is obvious.