[hanp]

skaeran, on Apr 2 2009, 12:03 PM, said:

With (most of) my regulars I'd have responded 2♥ inititally, and rebid 3♥, which is invitational for us.

I'd not like to GF with the south hand, so if 2♥ is unconditionally GFing, I'd have to respond 1NT and take it from there. I don't think the hand is suitable for 3♥ over 2♦, thus I agree with 2♥.

I don't think 2NT was the right rebid with the north hand. I prefer 3♥, but this is pretty close.

Passing 2NT is impossible with the south hand. It's obvious to get to game now, the question is to which game. 3♣ sounds weak to me. So I guess it's got to be 3♥ - that ought to be COG.

I don't understand this Harald. Playing your system you'd invite but after 1S-1NT-2D the hand is not suitable for 3H? While I agree with the latter, it seems inconsistent.

[gnasher]

I think 3♣ is fourth-suit forcing. Yes, it might occasionally be nice to be able to bid it naturally, but 1♥-1♠;2♣-2♦ might be useful as a natural bid too, and we manage without that.

It's not even clear that a natural 3♣ will be that useful. With a weak 6-5 we might belong in 3♥ anyway; with a weak 5-6 responder might have bid 3♣ over 2♦.

[jdonn]

gnasher, on Apr 2 2009, 04:51 PM, said:

I think 3♣ is fourth-suit forcing.  Yes, it might occasionally be nice to be able to bid it naturally, but 1♥-1♠;2♣-2♦ might be useful as a natural bid too, and we manage without that.

Obviously this auction is not analagous. In the original auction opener has denied three card support for our suit, and shown a two or more in another suit, neither of which is true of your auction. Further, slam is a consideration in all five strains in your auction so the need for a bid to establish a game force at a low level is clear.

Quote

It's not even clear that a natural 3♣ will be that useful.  With a weak 6-5 we might belong in 3♥ anyway; with a weak 5-6 responder might have bid 3♣ over 2♦.

Your first statement amounts to 'we have a fair shot to guess the right contract anyway on a weak 6-5 without investigating an alternative' which is of course true on hands where you want a forcing checkback as well. As for 5-6, for it to bid 3♣ over 2♦ would clearly be an exception to the norm based on a great suit quality disparity, since the normal bid on that shape is most definitely 2♥, the suit we can bid at a lower level, that is higher scoring, in which we are more likely to have game, and which leaves opener room to cheaply rebid his original suit.

[hanp]

I think the largest difference is that we have both limited our hands. Having said that I think 3C as some checkback could be useful but it doesn't seem natural to me. I have noticed before that our British posters have a broader interpretation of fourth suit forcing than I do.

[JLOL]

Adam is really a Brit

[benlessard]

I wouldnt bid 3H over 2D i would just bid 2H.

I would surely raise to 3H instead of bidding 2Nt. Responder can still bid 3Nt if hes got only 5H, and if he pass i slightly prefer to be in 3H than 2Nt.

By default i would play 3C as forcing, but i do see value in playing it NF. Passing 2Nt is just a mistake.

[gnasher]

jdonn, on Apr 2 2009, 11:32 PM, said:

Your first statement amounts to 'we have a fair shot to guess the right contract anyway on a weak 6-5 without investigating an alternative' which is of course true on hands where you want a forcing checkback as well.

Playing 3♣ as natural doesn't help on all of the partscore hands: if you play 3♣ as either a weak 6-5 or a weak 5-6, you're simply transferring the guess from responder to opener whenever he's 5242. A natural 3♣ is only of clear benefit when opener is 5143.

You will reach a better partscore than me on a proportion of the (comparatively rare) 6-5 and 5-6 shapes. I will reach a better game than you on a smaller, but comparable, proportion of the (comparatively frequent) hands with six hearts and the values for game. I know which I prefer.

Quote

As for 5-6, for it to bid 3♣ over 2♦ would clearly be an exception to the norm based on a great suit quality disparity, since the normal bid on that shape is most definitely 2♥, the suit we can bid at a lower level, that is higher scoring, ...

2♥ is only higher scoring than 3♣ if it makes. With a weak 1516 opposite a 5242, playing in clubs is likely to be worth more than one trick, because of the difficulty of keeping control when playing in hearts. Opposite a singleton heart 2♥ will be horrible, whereas 3♣ might be OK opposite a singleton club.

Quote

in which we are more likely to have game, ...

We are talking about a hand that wants to sign off in 3♣ when opener bids 2NT, aren't we? I find it hard to picture a 5-6 that envisages game in hearts opposite a 5341 17-count, but doesn't fancy game in notrumps or clubs opposite a 5143 or 5242 17-count.

Quote

and which leaves opener room to cheaply rebid his original suit.

How often will he do that? I suppose this depends on how likely it is that opener has six spades. I'd nearly always rebid 2♠ over 1NT with a minimum 6-4, and would therefore pass 2♥ most of the time even with a singleton, but you'll probably tell me that's gone out of fashion.

[jdonn]

gnasher, on Apr 3 2009, 11:04 AM, said:

jdonn, on Apr 2 2009, 11:32 PM, said:

Your first statement amounts to 'we have a fair shot to guess the right contract anyway on a weak 6-5 without investigating an alternative' which is of course true on hands where you want a forcing checkback as well.

Playing 3♣ as natural doesn't help on all of the partscore hands: if you play 3♣ as either a weak 6-5 or a weak 5-6, you're simply transferring the guess from responder to opener whenever he's 5242. A natural 3♣ is only of clear benefit when opener is 5143.

Or when opener is 5242 and both contracts are better than 2NT?

[orlam]

gnasher, on Apr 3 2009, 11:04 AM, said:

A natural 3♣ is only of clear benefit when opener is 5143.

Isn't this a very frequent shape for opener? Maybe the most frequent? I would think 3♣ as natural is a clear gain when you have a weak 5-5, it doesn't have to be 6-5.

[junyi_zhu]

mtvesuvius, on Apr 1 2009, 05:19 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

ATB:

1♠ - 1NT
2♦ - 2♥
2NT - Pass

---

Playing 2/1 etc... Who screwed up?

South should move over 2NT, without gadget, south can guess to bid 3NT or 4H. With gadgets, he can bid 3D as transfer then correct 3H to 3NT to show his hand.

[barryallen]

To me the key here is that North has not retreated to 2♠, on that basis I cannot understand the problem for South, or is that too simple?

[jmcw]

2♦ and 2♥ seem conservative but reasonable rebids. Over 2♥ I prefer 3♥.