[ArtK78]

Scoring: MP

1♦ - 1♠
3♣ - 3♥
3♠ - 4NT
5♠* - 6NT

* 2 key cards plus ♠Q

---

If you have specific criticism of any particular bid (other than the final call), please provide an alternative. The alternative to the final call is obvious.

[jdonn]

It's fine to bid 3♣ on these hands (I swear!) but clearly if this is allowed in the partnership south is taking a huge risk to bid 6NT.

Then again who says anything went wrong? Your lead opps...

[pclayton]

This hand is a poster child for an inverted 2♦ rebid. Many more like this and I might take it up

Its so easy to criticize 3♣ here, but when my partners bid diamonds, clubs and spades, I think its safe to assume the club bid was at least on a fragment. I know people don't like reversing into phony majors, but I might have bid 2♥ and then raised spades. while I'm not showing a 3=2=7=1, I imply a 3=3=6=1.

6N is a wild gamble. Opposite the expected: AQx, x, AKQxxx, Kxx 6♠ is good but 6N is dicey.

[FrancesHinden]

It takes up a little more room, but it's also a poster child for a 4D rebid showing 3=7 in the pointy suits.

[ArtK78]

Typically, the 4♦ rebid shows 4 card support (at least that is how I understand it).

On the actual hand, a diamond was led! Unfortunately, diamonds were 4-1 and there was no squeeze. So, even without a club lead, you are back to the question of what went wrong.

I don't know about an inverted 2♦ rebid, but it is another example of the usefulness of a forcing 3♦ rebid.

[TimG]

ArtK78, on Oct 21 2008, 10:58 AM, said:

I don't know about an inverted 2♦ rebid, but it is another example of the usefulness of a forcing 3♦ rebid.

I started to suggest that a forcing 3♦ was another solution, but I think that in KS where 3♦ would indeed be forcing, the proper rebid with this hand would be 2♥.

[jdonn]

Very nice that three people in a row have managed to suggest three different methods that can solve the problem. I was worried we would get opinions about what should have happened with the actual agreements!

[rogerclee]

Bidding 3C with this is not fine, 2H is superior in every way. It is lower, it is less risky that partner will go crazy over it (since he will have 5 hearts if he does), and you have more in hearts.

[pclayton]

rogerclee, on Oct 21 2008, 08:35 AM, said:

Bidding 3C with this is not fine, 2H is superior in every way. It is lower, it is less risky that partner will go crazy over it (since he will have 5 hearts if he does), and you have more in hearts.

Right. Whatever excitement 2♥ generates; we know that pard's spades are better.

[han]

Agree, 2H is much better.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I dont like 3C, if it was intended as a splinter, but
I also dont like the alternative 4D.
If 3C is natural, the bid is ..., than you have to go
with 4D, if you think the support is sufficient.

Hard to say, what I would have bid, since I would not
been there, I would have opened 2C (Benjamin)
with the intention to show a semi frocing hand with
diamonds.
Not being able to open 2C, I guess I would have gone
with 3D, an underbid, I know.

3H, 3S are fine, so is 4NT and 5S.

I dont think 6NT is a real option, it gambles heavily on
a running diamond suit, which North ,may or may not
have, so I think 6S is clear cut, hence most of blame
goes to South, part of the blame to North, if 3C was
mnatural, if you lie to partner you are responsible, if
the final result is terrrible.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[cherdano]

rogerclee, on Oct 21 2008, 10:35 AM, said:

Bidding 3C with this is not fine, 2H is superior in every way. It is lower, it is less risky that partner will go crazy over it (since he will have 5 hearts if he does), and you have more in hearts.

I agree.

[jdonn]

rogerclee, on Oct 21 2008, 11:35 AM, said:

Bidding 3C with this is not fine, 2H is superior in every way. It is lower, it is less risky that partner will go crazy over it (since he will have 5 hearts if he does), and you have more in hearts.

2♥ is fine too, although I wish I could find in a dictionary what "in every way" means to post here. 2♥ is a major and a higher ranking suit than the one where you probably want to play, so it's not-superior in at least two ways.

What would you rebid if the queen of hearts was a diamond? Or a club? Or what if the queen of spades was a diamond? Or some combination of two of those things? I think it's a fantasy land to assume (without special methods - see prior posts!) that 3♣ must be a real suit. So even if you like 2♥ better on the particular hand, you still haven't addressed the real problem of how to avoid this type of contract in general.

[TimG]

jdonn, on Oct 21 2008, 11:22 AM, said:

Very nice that three people in a row have managed to suggest three different methods that can solve the problem. I was worried we would get opinions about what should have happened with the actual agreements!

The strong 3-card raise is an acknowledged trouble hand for standard/eastern scientific methods. See BW MSC for periodic mention. I doubt anyone here is going to suddenly solve the problem with the methods specified (none, so an Eastern Scientific approach assumed).

[kenrexford]

I don't like 6NT.

I also do not like the lie about hearts. I would much rather bid 3♣ because it sounds like a likely made-up suit.

Also, 1♦-1♠-2♥-3♥-3♠ would be really useful if a cuebid in support. I don't think it gains in the end to have two options for manufactured bids.

[benlessard]

This was already discussed, and for me its an obvious 2H. Switch the major around and ill still bid 2S (unless we play that 1S is forcing)

I dont care about any argument about made up suit or disturbing the shape you can take a time machine to a long gone era and see that JS and reverse can be done on 2 card fragment.

1D-----1S
2H

here 2H is your cheapest forcing bid so its an efficient way to show the strong 3 card raise hand & strong hand without a club stopper. Also sooner or later its going to be fun to be able to show the stiff in clubs wich a artificial 2Nt or a super phony 3C will never be able to do.

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...20jumshift&st=0

[RichMor]

TimG, on Oct 21 2008, 01:27 PM, said:

The strong 3-card raise is an acknowledged trouble hand for standard/eastern scientific methods.  See BW MSC for periodic mention.  I doubt anyone here is going to suddenly solve the problem with the methods specified (none, so an Eastern Scientific approach assumed).

Yes this is one of the typical Master Solver's Club 'nightmare hands'.

It used to be that the panel roughly split into 2 groups, one would rebid 3♦ and say 'if I get by this round .....' the other would raise a major response with strong 3-card support.

Lately a lot of the panelists make up a reverse or an off-shape 2NT rebid.

I don't remember seeing a problem where any panelist made a jump shift rebid on a singleton.

Maybe a general solution - in the context of 2/1 methods - is to agree that a jump rebid of opener's minor specifically shows or denies(you pick) 3-card support for responder's major.

[jdonn]

RichMor, on Oct 21 2008, 02:43 PM, said:

TimG, on Oct 21 2008, 01:27 PM, said:

The strong 3-card raise is an acknowledged trouble hand for standard/eastern scientific methods.  See BW MSC for periodic mention.  I doubt anyone here is going to suddenly solve the problem with the methods specified (none, so an Eastern Scientific approach assumed).

Yes this is one of the typical Master Solver's Club 'nightmare hands'.

It used to be that the panel roughly split into 2 groups, one would rebid 3♦ and say 'if I get by this round .....' the other would raise a major response with strong 3-card support.

Lately a lot of the panelists make up a reverse or an off-shape 2NT rebid.

I don't remember seeing a problem where any panelist made a jump shift rebid on a singleton.

Maybe a general solution - in the context of 2/1 methods - is to agree that a jump rebid of opener's minor specifically shows or denies(you pick) 3-card support for responder's major.

I have seen one where it was made on a void. Ax Jxx AKQJxxxx -, 1♣ P 1♥ P ? I'm sure it would get no points on this forum, but 3♣ is a completely valid bid.

[mike777]

I understand those experts that reverse into 2 card suit or even those that jump shift into a stiff club and who can get out into spades.

I will try 3d and hope I can "just get past this round"

[TylerE]

It's threads like this that re-affirm my belief as to the superiority of strong club methods.

In my methods of choice

1♣ (16+) - 1♥ (GF. 5+ ♠)
1♠ (Trump ask) - 2♣ (exactly 5 cards, 1 of top 3 honors)
2♦ (Ask in ♣) - 2♠ (3rd round)
2NT (Ask in ♦) - 3♥ (2nd)
3♠ (Ask in ♥) - 4♠ (AK or AQ)
6♠

Notice how we get to stop at the 4 level oppisite no hearts.