[kenrexford]

Inspired by something I just read , I thought I'd share a couple of bidding problems that were asked about by my wife, a B/I with great potential. She and her partner ran into problems with these two hands.

Reopening 1NT shows 18-19 HCP

You open 1♣, passed by LHO and your partner, and RHO balances by bidding a suit. 1♣-P-P-1♥-? Should you bid 2NT to show 18-19 HCP?

Answer: No. This rebid of 1NT (1♣-P-P-1♥-1NT) shows 18-19 HCP. Why? First, you really don't have a good reason to show 18-19 HCP just for the fun of it -- partner already has shown 0-5 HCP by passing. Second, with partner being that weak, why would you rebid 1NT with a minimum hand, even 14 HCP? Do you like going -500?

In practice, 2NT was chosen and went -1.

Bid Where You Live

You open 1♣. The opponents will not bid. Partner responds 1♥, and you raise to 2♥. Partner now whips out a strange 3♦ call. What the heck is that?!?!?

When you make game tries, it always helps to let partner know what you have. I would suspect that partner has what she said she has -- hearts and diamonds. In practice, this person actually did have that. She had a nice looking hand with 5-5 in hearts and diamonds and wanted you to know her hand as much as possible when deciding whether to bid game or not. Nice bid.

Remember that for future reference. With ♠x ♥KQxxx ♦QJxxx ♣xx, 3♦ as a natural call after partner raises your hearts sure seems like a good description of your hand, eh? 1♣-P-1♥-P-2♥-P-3♦!

In practice, Opener bid 3NT because she thought 3♦ invited 3NT. Responder thought Opener knew best and passed. 3NT was hopeless, but 4♥ may have even made an overtrick.

[pclayton]

[el mister]

Hi Ken, I'm a beginner playing Acol. In the second hand you posted, I play 3♦ as a short suit trial bid. Saying that 4♥ may be on the cards, but help is required in the ♦ suit. In the hand you posted, it is more like a long suit trial bid right? Saying that you have ♦ covered, what do you think about that pard?

I wonder about these two ways of making trial bids, long and short, which is better? Either way, it seems to be a relatively rare sequence for me, 1M - 2M with no inteference.

In the hand posted, I would bid 4♥ directly, assuming that we have a good fit and each suit covered given my stiff ♠.

[vuroth]

At a level 1, I think the important thing is to recognize that 3♦ does not intend to change the agreed upon trump. If you're totally lost, bid 3♥.

I've seen both natural and help suit game tries, and I have no idea what's superior. At a guess, any agreement is about as good as another, though maybe an advanced player will have some logic as to one or the other.

[kenrexford]

A couple of thoughts.

First, it is entirely possible to agree to play any number of conventions to help with game tries. However, if you and partner have not agreed to use any conventions here, then bids are natural. "Long suit game tries" are natural bids.

Second, I actually prefer natural game tries myself. After years of trying different things, including the very exotic, I think natural works better in the long run. One reason is redudancy.

In this auction, keep in mind that Responder is unlimited. He could have simple game try strength. But, he could also have slam interest. If...

1♣-P-1♥-P-
2♥-P-3♦ is a short-suit bid and...

1♣-P-1♥-P-
2♥-P-4♦ is also a short suit bid...

...one for game and one for slam, you lose something -- the ability to show a two-suiter. That's an overly simple way of describing the problem, I know.