[rogerclee]

kenberg, on Oct 22 2008, 06:05 AM, said:

Feel free to tell me I'm nuts.

I don't think you are nuts, but I think that deciding that the hand is not worth a game force is very bad bridge. Not only are forcing NT sequences worse in general, but this hand is easily carrying its weight, with a heart fit and moderate shape. I think if you think about normal opening bids for partner, you will find that you miss a lot more good games than bad games and occasionally miss slam.

[oldman5757]

The 2♣ call is perfectly normal. I don't know why P doesn't bid out his pattern. 4♥ is a lazy call, IMHO.

[kenberg]

rogerclee, on Oct 22 2008, 04:22 PM, said:

kenberg, on Oct 22 2008, 06:05 AM, said:

Feel free to tell me I'm nuts.

I don't think you are nuts, but I think that deciding that the hand is not worth a game force is very bad bridge. Not only are forcing NT sequences worse in general, but this hand is easily carrying its weight, with a heart fit and moderate shape. I think if you think about normal opening bids for partner, you will find that you miss a lot more good games than bad games and occasionally miss slam.

I'll never miss game regardless of the S hand although I confess to missing slam on these combined cards. I am planning on bidding 4H over a 2m response to 1N. If 1H-1N-2m-4H exists, this seemed to me to be a reasonable hand for it. Described as pessimistic, I accept that description. I would also accept nuts, but pessimistic is better.

[rogerclee]

kenberg, on Oct 22 2008, 02:48 PM, said:

rogerclee, on Oct 22 2008, 04:22 PM, said:

kenberg, on Oct 22 2008, 06:05 AM, said:

Feel free to tell me I'm nuts.

I don't think you are nuts, but I think that deciding that the hand is not worth a game force is very bad bridge. Not only are forcing NT sequences worse in general, but this hand is easily carrying its weight, with a heart fit and moderate shape. I think if you think about normal opening bids for partner, you will find that you miss a lot more good games than bad games and occasionally miss slam.

I'll never miss game regardless of the S hand although I confess to missing slam on these combined cards. I am planning on bidding 4H over a 2m response to 1N. If 1H-1N-2m-4H exists, this seemed to me to be a reasonable hand for it. Described as pessimistic, I accept that description. I would also accept nuts, but pessimistic is better.

It is inconsistent for you to rebid 4♥ over any minimum rebid partner can make but not start with 2♣. If you are going to bid game anyway, you may as well start with 2♣, which will lead to a nicer auction on all of your slam hands. You will only very infrequently gain when partner would incorrectly bid slam opposite a 2♣ response but stop at the 5-level opposite a forcing 1N. I don't know what hand this is, and anyway, partner will be doing the opposite (not getting to slam when he should) far more often. You will also lose the ability to play 3N when you want to, which I would gladly cooperate with if that is what partner wants.

[effervesce]

Partner's 4♥ bid was bad. Despite having a void in your suit, he still has a huge hand with a great 5 card sidesuit. The whole point of 2/1 is to save space for slam investigation- why then waste it by bidding 4♥.

[kenberg]

Thanks Roger. If I can presume a little, I guess you are saying either that the auction 1H-1N-2m-4H doesn't exist, or perhaps only exists if 1N was bid with the expectation of bidding 3H over, say, 2C from opener but after a 2D bid, coupled with a top of the range 1N, it now seems 4H is worth the try. A rare to non-existent auction, in other words.

Anyway, back to the current hand. Mike Lawrence in his 2/1 disk gives credit to Paul Soloway for the idea that 1H-2C-3D should show a 5-5 with good cards, 1H-2C-2D-something-3D shows a weak 5-5. Of course most instead now play the first auction as a splinter with club support. Whatever the case, it seems 6H should be reached after the 2C bid although that J of spades is a very important card and a bit hard to show.

[Gerben42]

Quote

It doesn't need to but it does.

That's a question of agreement. If it does, what does 1♥ - 1N - 2♣ - 3N mean, for example? I miscounted partner?

For me, this shows a 3.5 NT bid (agreement).

[rogerclee]

kenberg, on Oct 23 2008, 05:57 AM, said:

Thanks Roger. If I can presume a little, I guess you are saying either that the auction 1H-1N-2m-4H doesn't exist, or perhaps only exists if 1N was bid with the expectation of bidding 3H over, say, 2C from opener but after a 2D bid, coupled with a top of the range 1N, it now seems 4H is worth the try. A rare to non-existent auction, in other words.

Yes, except this sort of thing is far from rare.

For example, ♠Axx ♥Kxxx ♦Ax ♣xxx opposite a 1♠ opener would be a typical example of a hand which has greatly improved opposite a 2♦ rebid but would only invite opposite a 2♣ rebid.

[Codo]

Gerben42, on Oct 23 2008, 10:14 PM, said:

For me, this shows a 3.5 NT bid (agreement).

3,5 NT? Then your 1 NT answer should be 100 % forcing, just in case.

[Apollo81]

rogerclee, on Oct 23 2008, 09:22 AM, said:

kenberg, on Oct 23 2008, 05:57 AM, said:

Thanks Roger. If I can presume a little, I guess you are saying either that the auction 1H-1N-2m-4H doesn't exist, or perhaps only exists if 1N was bid with the expectation of bidding 3H over, say, 2C from opener but after a 2D bid, coupled with a top of the range 1N, it now seems 4H is worth the try. A rare to non-existent auction, in other words.

Yes, except this sort of thing is far from rare.

For example, ♠Axx ♥Kxxx ♦Ax ♣xxx opposite a 1♠ opener would be a typical example of a hand which has greatly improved opposite a 2♦ rebid but would only invite opposite a 2♣ rebid.

Agree with roger. Switch the ♥K and ♦A to create an even more clear example.