[TylerE]

Scoring: IMP

1♠ - 1NT (Forcing)
2NT (18-19 Bal) - ?

---

Nothing really forcing, no special gadgets.

[jdonn]

I think you have to start with 2♥, it could be a big misfit but you have to take that chance. This type of problem was very foreseeable.

Stuck in this position (meaning having no methods available) I'll take a total guess with 6♣.

[TylerE]

Playing a sound 2/1 style, I thought 2♥ would be a pretty severe overbid.

[mtvesuvius]

hmmm... 1NT has put us in an awful place, but idk of any scientific bid... 4♦? 5♦? 4♣? 5♥? I'll punt 6♣ also.

[whereagles]

Hum... well, the only thing I can think of that could remotely show this hand is 5NT pick-a-slam.

Too hard to find 7 anyway.

[kenrexford]

Punt with 6♣???

If I'm doing anything insane, I'm trying 5NT. He will take this as "pick a minor slam." If he picks clubs (wow!), great. If he picks diamonds, I bid 6♥.

But, what the Heck am I doing blasting this hand?!?

Why not just bid 3♥ and then 6♣? Is that too easy?

And, don't tell me that 3♥ is not forcing. I cannot imagine playing a system where I have no way to show hearts except bidding 4♥, just so I can play in 3♥ with a really weak hand.

[jdonn]

kenrexford, on Jan 29 2009, 02:47 PM, said:

Why not just bid 3♥ and then 6♣?  Is that too easy?

And, don't tell me that 3♥ is not forcing.

Sorry! I won't tell you, but I'll let the original poster tell you:

TylerE, on Jan 29 2009, 01:01 PM, said:

Nothing really forcing, no special gadgets.

[ArtK78]

I would have bid 2♥ on the previous round.

Now, you are just forced to guess.

[kenrexford]

jdonn, on Jan 29 2009, 02:49 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Jan 29 2009, 02:47 PM, said:

Why not just bid 3♥ and then 6♣?  Is that too easy?

And, don't tell me that 3♥ is not forcing.

Sorry! I won't tell you, but I'll let the original poster tell you:

TylerE, on Jan 29 2009, 01:01 PM, said:

Nothing really forcing, no special gadgets.

If the question is what to do if nothing is "really forcing," a term with which I am not familiar, then I suppose there is no sane answer.

However, I think the question has a hidden assumption that is errant. 3♥ is "really" forcing.

[jdonn]

I have no idea what a 'hidden assumption' is. However you have two great clues that 3♥ is not forcing.
- The poster said so.
- If 3♥ were forcing this problem wouldn't be here since it would be an utterly obvious bid.
So if you don't like the problem conditions, you should either complain about the conditions as you answer, not answer, or start another thread with different conditions. But I would think a lawyer wouldn't just read something and decide it means something else!

[Echognome]

Under the conditions of the OP, I like 5NT if partner will understand pick-a-slam, otherwise I guess to bid 6♣.

Under the "what fairly normal treatment you may want to consider" category, I would add playing transfers after a 2NT rebid.

[rogerclee]

TylerE, on Jan 29 2009, 11:13 AM, said:

Playing a sound 2/1 style, I thought 2♥ would be a pretty severe overbid.

LOL

[skjaeran]

Echognome, on Jan 29 2009, 10:14 PM, said:

Under the "what fairly normal treatment you may want to consider" category, I would add playing transfers after a 2NT rebid.

I do play transfers after a 2NT rebid.

[JLOL]

Hate starting with a 2/1, that is just way too likely to get you into trouble.

Our options now seem to be 4H or 6C (I will assume that a partner with which I play NO CONVENTIONS won't understand 5N). Obviously it's a guess, I'd probably go with 6C.

[Fluffy]

I am thinking about 4♣, this has to be forcing, it won't help us much though. But if partner sings off in 4NT we have a shot with 5/6♥

[kenrexford]

jdonn, on Jan 29 2009, 04:04 PM, said:

I have no idea what a 'hidden assumption' is. However you have two great clues that 3♥ is not forcing.
- The poster said so.
- If 3♥ were forcing this problem wouldn't be here since it would be an utterly obvious bid.
So if you don't like the problem conditions, you should either complain about the conditions as you answer, not answer, or start another thread with different conditions. But I would think a lawyer wouldn't just read something and decide it means something else!

Actually, if you read my answer, that's what I did.

1. I said that I'd bid 5NT if forced into this nonsense.

2. I then said that bidding 3♥ is the sane approach.

3. I then specifically rejected the original proposition that 3♥ is not forcing, but rather "not really forcing," because that's stupid.

[sireenb]

Fluffy, on Jan 29 2009, 05:45 PM, said:

I am thinking about 4♣, this has to be forcing, it won't help us much though. But if partner sings off in 4NT we have a shot with 5/6♥

I agree. Even if nothing is forcing 3♣ and 4♣ cannot both be non-forcing.

[gwnn]

Yes but over 4♣ and 4NT by pard how will we know which 2 aces he has? It is hardly likely the ♠A will help us, they will probably find the diamond lead.

[the hog]

If nothing is really forcing, then 1NT was wrong. Josh, what is the matter with you today? Got up out of the wrong side of bed? You are arguing with everyone!

[jdonn]

The_Hog, on Jan 30 2009, 12:54 AM, said:

If nothing is really forcing, then 1NT was wrong. Josh, what is the matter with you today? Got up out of the wrong side of bed? You are arguing with everyone!

Sorry mommy. I'll stop arguing about bridge and start calling out people who weren't talking to me for how they post, then I'll have good manners!

Ok ok, I think it might seem worse than it is though since I have about 932 posts today.