[jdonn]

whereagles, on Feb 15 2009, 02:33 PM, said:

straube, on Feb 15 2009, 06:42 AM, said:

I agree with Kenrexford.  You should have rebid 2S.  With a 6/4, you only rebid in your 4-card suit if you are hoping to have an extra chance to bid; in this way, you get to describe your pattern (so that partner can see if his cards are working) and you have the possibility of showing a 6-card suit which is worth more than a simple rebid but not worth a jump rebid.  Btw, imo even with 6S and 4H your rebid should have been 2S based on the same reasoning.

This is the US style of bidding. Not so common in Europe, though, where you usually skip a side minor only if it's like xxxx or so (and a min).

There is a point to the US style, though.

I'm not so sure it's the US style, I would rebid 2♦ on this hand 100% of the time. With three aces it will play very very well if we have a diamond fit.

[JLOL]

It's probably still the normal style, but there has been a big shift in the past 10 years to people who (almost) always bid their second suit. That style seems much better to me.

[mtvesuvius]

JLOL, on Feb 15 2009, 05:58 PM, said:

It's probably still the normal style, but there has been a big shift in the past 10 years to people who (almost) always bid their second suit. That style seems much better to me.

I agree... There is only so much you can accomplish in these auctions and finding the 4-4 instead of the 6-2 seems kind of important, besides with 3♦ and 2♠ partner will bid 2♠ anyway. I pass, and this is not close.

[straube]

jdonn, on Feb 15 2009, 04:16 PM, said:

whereagles, on Feb 15 2009, 02:33 PM, said:

straube, on Feb 15 2009, 06:42 AM, said:

I agree with Kenrexford.  You should have rebid 2S.  With a 6/4, you only rebid in your 4-card suit if you are hoping to have an extra chance to bid; in this way, you get to describe your pattern (so that partner can see if his cards are working) and you have the possibility of showing a 6-card suit which is worth more than a simple rebid but not worth a jump rebid.  Btw, imo even with 6S and 4H your rebid should have been 2S based on the same reasoning.

This is the US style of bidding. Not so common in Europe, though, where you usually skip a side minor only if it's like xxxx or so (and a min).

There is a point to the US style, though.

I'm not so sure it's the US style, I would rebid 2♦ on this hand 100% of the time. With three aces it will play very very well if we have a diamond fit.

The method I suggested is geared toward getting to game. I think there are some hands that responder will raise spades...
1S-1N, 2S-3S
where he would only correct to 2S as in...
1S-1N, 2D-2S
for which opener would be pleased to accept game.

It's much harder for opener to make his own invitation after...
1S-1N, 2D-2S
because responder may have as few as 6 HCP and 1 spade.

The hand ATxxxx AT Axxx x is probably something like a 16 count if you did the Kaplans and Rubens evaluation or perhaps a 5 loser hand if you used Klinger's Modern Losing Trick Count method. It probably should accept game after
1S-1N, 2S-3S.

but the hand has endplayed itself after 1S-1N, 2D-2S.

[jdonn]

straube, on Feb 15 2009, 09:57 PM, said:

The method I suggested is geared toward getting to game.  I think there are some hands that responder will raise spades...
1S-1N, 2S-3S
where he would only correct to 2S as in...
1S-1N, 2D-2S
for which opener would be pleased to accept game.

I agree there are such hands, although not that many.

Quote

It's much harder for opener to make his own invitation after...
1S-1N, 2D-2S
because responder may have as few as 6 HCP and 1 spade.

Well what's the difference, I think it's pretty clear to pass with this hand where partner preferences back anyway. The odds of reaching a good game are much slimmer than the odds of getting too high.

Anyway, it seems to me that the possibility responder has a singleton spade is a good reason to bid 2♦ instead of 2♠. Hands where either responder can pass 2♦ and reach a better partscore or where he can raise diamonds but would have passed 2♠ and we reach a good game that way are far more common than the rare hand where responder has to preference back to 2♠ with a singleton.

Quote

The hand ATxxxx AT Axxx x is probably something like a 16 count if you did the Kaplans and Rubens evaluation or perhaps a 5 loser hand if you used Klinger's Modern Losing Trick Count method.  It probably should accept game after
1S-1N, 2S-3S.

but the hand has endplayed itself after 1S-1N, 2D-2S.

As stated above I think it's easy to pass on that auction. Anyway I think it's more important to find a many great diamond contracts that would be missed than to make bidding toward game in spades just a tiny bit more accurate.

I don't always rebid the second suit with 6-4, but I think it's clear on this hand due to the aces. With the same hand but KQT9xx of spades I would rebid 2♠, even though I know some people who would rebid 2♦ even then.

[straube]

jdonn said:

straube said:

It's much harder for opener to make his own invitation after...
1S-1N, 2D-2S
because responder may have as few as 6 HCP and 1 spade.

Well what's the difference, I think it's pretty clear to pass with this hand where partner preferences back anyway. The odds of reaching a good game are much slimmer than the odds of getting too high.

I think we're agreeing that it requires more for 1S-1N, 2D-2S, 3S than the example hand has. My argument was that this hand should have rebid 2S and then accepted partner's raise of 3S to game. Having rebid 2D, he can't know if partner would have raised to 3S.

jdonn said:

Anyway, it seems to me that the possibility responder has a singleton spade is a good reason to bid 2♦ instead of 2♠. Hands where either responder can pass 2♦ and reach a better partscore or where he can raise diamonds but would have passed 2♠ and we reach a good game that way are far more common than the rare hand where responder has to preference back to 2♠ with a singleton.

There are obviously ways each method has of winning. Your method finds superior diamond part scores (and sometimes diamond games) and even leaves open the possibility for finding a spade game (1S-1N, 2D-3D, 3S-4S), but it also misses some spade games (1S-1N, 2D-2S).

[whereagles]

Justin, why do you prefer always rebidding the 2nd suit?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I think, if 2D would always promise a 4 card, than I would alway
bid diamonds.

But if 2D could be bid on a 3 carder only, than showing the 6th
spade has a lot more appeal.
The question is, what do you bid with 5332, some will bid 2C, some
will bid 2D.

With kind regards
Marlowe