[Fluffy]

well, anyway, those who don't like 2♦ are not scientific lol.

[qwery_hi]

Cascade, on Jan 4 2009, 05:20 PM, said:

I find some other methods where I can show my support on the previous round rather than bidding an ace-empty suit.

Can you explain some more about your methods? Right now, the way I play, I have no bid other than 2♦ to respond. I could bid 2NT, but I'm a few points short for a Jacoby 2NT response.

[qwery_hi]

rogerclee, on Jan 5 2009, 05:31 AM, said:

Fluffy, on Jan 5 2009, 02:53 AM, said:

bah, whatever excuse just not to answer, lucky you that your 2NT methods are overloaded and can hold any hand from 7 spades to 3 from voids to 4333.

You are right, this is a very difficult problem! It is difficult because we know that partner has three diamonds, but which 3 diamonds he has are very important, and he will like Qxx a lot, when in reality, that is a terrible holding. It is difficult because partner has no idea about our heart shortness or the degree of our spade support, so all of his bidding is pretty meaningless, and we are out of room to show these features about our hand. All in all, a very hard problem!

Hopefully it is obvious now why 2♦ was a bad bid.

I think I'm missing something. Where is it mentioned that partner has three diamonds and a singleton club?

[Fluffy]

on the original post, it is in hidden text if you chose to bid 2♠.

[FrancesHinden]

Surely the poll doesn't really work, because the scientists either didn't bid 2D on the first round, or have a scientific call now.

I mainly play with scientists. In one partnership I responded 3H to 1S showing about 12-15 HCP with 4 spades and an unspecified small singleton.

In the other I responded 2NT FG spade raise over which partner made an artificial rebid showing (eventually) shape and strength.

So it's only the naturalists who responded 2D in the first place...

[whereagles]

Fluffy, on Jan 5 2009, 04:29 PM, said:

on the original post, it is in hidden text if you chose to bid 2♠.

Let me sum it up

QJxx
x
Axxxx
AKx

1♠ 2♦
2♥ 2♠
3♦ 4♥
4♠

If pard took 4♥ as splinter, then he probably has something like

AKxxx
KJxx
Qxx
x

So pass now.

[ggwhiz]

Whenever possible, I like to have the first hand into the auction be crew and the responder captain.

On this hand I'm bidding 2nt and dreaming of a 3♦ bid from pard that should make the rest of the auction relatively easy for me to take charge of.

Rather than show a stiff heart I think I get a lot more clues this way with or without a ♥ cue-bid from pard (we don't generally cue second round controls) and have room to find an occassional perfect fit grand.

Also, given that I'm REALLY cheering for a 3♦ bid over 2nt, I REALLY dislike
2♦ the first time.

[whereagles]

ggwhiz, on Jan 5 2009, 05:17 PM, said:

Whenever possible, I like to have the first hand into the auction be crew and the responder captain.

Well, you should play precision then. Capitaincy in natural bidding sometimes falls upon opener, especially when it comes to level.

[ggwhiz]

Hey, I just said whenever possible and know the difference but this case seems clear cut for a jacoby 2nt IMHO.

I'll hear about a 5-4-2-2 dog right away and investigate slam comfortably opposite a shapely dog that may or may not have a slam in it.

[dcvetkov]

I think 3♠ should really show this hand, good spade support, and hand unable to splinter first time, slam interest

If partner bids 4♦, then 4NT
If partner bids only 4♠, then he may have lousy opener, with some hearts wastage, and 4 level may be enough, but this hand mey be worth another try

[Cascade]

qwery_hi, on Jan 6 2009, 05:15 AM, said:

Cascade, on Jan 4 2009, 05:20 PM, said:

I find some other methods where I can show my support on the previous round rather than bidding an ace-empty suit.

Can you explain some more about your methods? Right now, the way I play, I have no bid other than 2♦ to respond. I could bid 2NT, but I'm a few points short for a Jacoby 2NT response.

I don't play in a 2/1 context but with this hand we bid 3♥ to show a singleton splinter.

Opener then either:

1. Bids 3♠ to play in case I do not have GF values;

2. Relays for range and controls with 3NT (with no shortage). I will bid 4NT to show five-controls and GF values;

3. Shows a shortage in clubs or diamonds;

4. Bids 4♠ to show some minimum opening with limited controls but accepting the splinter.

[TimG]

qwery_hi, on Jan 5 2009, 11:15 AM, said:

Cascade, on Jan 4 2009, 05:20 PM, said:

I find some other methods where I can show my support on the previous round rather than bidding an ace-empty suit.

Can you explain some more about your methods? Right now, the way I play, I have no bid other than 2♦ to respond. I could bid 2NT, but I'm a few points short for a Jacoby 2NT response.

♠QJ72
♥9
♦A7632
♣AK4

is a few points short of a Jacoby 2NT response? Or, did I miss a switch of hands under discussion?

[vuroth]

Maybe partner opens REALLY light?

[qwery_hi]

TimG, on Jan 5 2009, 03:29 PM, said:

qwery_hi, on Jan 5 2009, 11:15 AM, said:

Cascade, on Jan 4 2009, 05:20 PM, said:

I find some other methods where I can show my support on the previous round rather than bidding an ace-empty suit.

Can you explain some more about your methods? Right now, the way I play, I have no bid other than 2♦ to respond. I could bid 2NT, but I'm a few points short for a Jacoby 2NT response.

♠QJ72
♥9
♦A7632
♣AK4

is a few points short of a Jacoby 2NT response? Or, did I miss a switch of hands under discussion?

Strictly by HCP, I've read that J2NT needs 16+. I may be wrong. However, this hand with A's, K is a J2NT I guess.

[RichMor]

TimG, on Jan 5 2009, 03:29 PM, said:

qwery_hi, on Jan 5 2009, 11:15 AM, said:

Cascade, on Jan 4 2009, 05:20 PM, said:

I find some other methods where I can show my support on the previous round rather than bidding an ace-empty suit.

Can you explain some more about your methods? Right now, the way I play, I have no bid other than 2♦ to respond. I could bid 2NT, but I'm a few points short for a Jacoby 2NT response.

♠QJ72
♥9
♦A7632
♣AK4

is a few points short of a Jacoby 2NT response? Or, did I miss a switch of hands under discussion?

Mainstream treatment of 2NT as a forcing raise usually excludes hands with a singleton or void, although not all play that way.

As to an immediate 4♥ 'splinter' raise, this hand is a little too good for a minimum splinter and not good enough to splinter and continue over a sign off.

With the example hand, I think it's best to 'bid around' the shortness:
1♠ - 2♦
2♥ - 3♣
any - 4♠

That's old fashioned but usually works.

[whereagles]

ggwhiz, on Jan 5 2009, 05:23 PM, said:

Hey, I just said whenever possible and know the difference but this case seems clear cut for a jacoby 2nt IMHO.

Jacoby 2NT doesn't put responder as captain. If you're playing it that way, you're probably playing it wrong, because opener can have anything from a bad 12 to a shapely 20.

[Codo]

Gonzalo, I agree with you that 2 Diamond followed by 4 Heart shows this hand better then putting it into the 2 NT camp.

2 NT mostly asks declarer, so this tool should be used when no better describtion is avaiable or when responder has a balanced hand.

When the bidding after 1 ♠ 2 ♦ reaches 4 Heart, you had shown a side suit, a shortness and a hand too good for a direct splinter. Exactly what you will put down in dummy.
Hardly possible with an overloaded 2 NT bid.

If partner cannot move over 4 HEart, I will stay silent, I have no extras.

[TimG]

RichMor, on Jan 5 2009, 04:21 PM, said:

♠QJ72
♥9
♦A7632
♣AK4

As to an immediate 4♥ 'splinter' raise, this hand is a little too good for a minimum splinter and not good enough to splinter and continue over a sign off.

With the example hand, I think it's best to 'bid around' the shortness:
1♠ - 2♦
2♥ - 3♣
any - 4♠

That's old fashioned but usually works.

You'd bid the same way with:

♠QJ72
♥9
♦A762
♣AK43

or does the 4th x in diamonds really make that much of a difference?

[Cascade]

Codo, on Jan 6 2009, 11:12 AM, said:

Gonzalo, I agree with you that 2 Diamond followed by 4 Heart shows this hand better then putting it into the 2 NT camp.

Why raise hearts?

Or are we discussing a different auction now?

[Fluffy]

Roland follows the path 1♠-2♦-2♥-2♠-3♦-4♥.

the problem with this path is what arised at the table, it is way different that partner has ♦Qxx than ♦Kxx because our ♣K is working.

Kevin Fay suggested 2♦- 2♥-2♠-3♦-4♣. He would find out that partner doesn't have ♦K, and the rest of the useful cards, he can find with 4NT.

Splinter's advantage was that it allowed us to stay at the 4 level. Partner had ♥AKQx.


But there was no need for staying low, partner had little extras:

♠A10xxx
♥AKQx
♦Q9x
♣x

Funny that some paths lead to slam, others to stay in 5, and all of them are right becuase its a slam on a finese .