[geofspa]

Scoring: IMP

Teams
Board 17
Bidding
1♠ p ?
(2/1 GF - more or less BBO Adv FD card)

---

In the 2nd half of the teams game I sat with this opposite a 1♠ opener ... should I respond with 2♠ with this?

[geofspa]

As a post script I opted for PASS which was passed out. Partner then proceded to take 11 tricks and in the post mortem suggested that with a 9 loser hand I should have supported.

(BTW I make it a 9.5 losers)

[se12sam]

I would have passed or bid 1NT(?) if I had xxx in spades (assuming a Q in some other suit) and a 9½ loser hand.

But Qxx (or QTx in this case) is good enough support not to mislead partner. And as I would have treated this closer to a 9 loser hand, I will raise to 2♠

[whereagles]

It's an easy 2♠ for me

[Codo]

With the given methods I had bid 2 Spade. With 3433 and the same HCPS I had passed.

[hotShot]

I would bid a weak 2♠.

[hrothgar]

I prefer a forcing NT to an immediate 2♠ (I don't think this hand is quite strong enough for an immediate spade raise)

I strongly prefer 2♠ to pass

[mike777]

geofspa, on Apr 29 2009, 03:54 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

Teams
Board 17
Bidding
1♠ p ?
(2/1 GF - more or less BBO Adv FD card)

---

In the 2nd half of the teams game I sat with this opposite a 1♠ opener ... should I respond with 2♠ with this?

Easy pass.....semiforcing 1nt second choice...never never 2s

tell partner to never never open 1s with 4 loser hand and long spades....even on bbo

[dicklont]

1NT and 2♠ in the next round.
Although your partner probably won't give you the chance to bid 2♠ because he will rebid 2NT or higher.
Now you´re happy that you responded with your spade support.

This hand is not strong enough for an immediate 2♠, but much to good to pass.
In 2/1 the 1NT response is defined as 5-12 hcp, any shape, could hold (3card) support.

[geofspa]

Thanks for the thoughts on this and on the Open or Pass thread

[mtvesuvius]

2♠ for me also. With xxx♠ I'll go through forcing NT.

[hanp]

1NT.

[jdonn]

Obviously I hate pass, but I also hate 1NT. What is there about this hand that is too weak for a normal single raise? Calling it 5 points is counting points like my mother (sorry mom).

[skjaeran]

Playing the methods in the OP I'd raise to 2♠.

Playing with some of my regular partners I'd bid 2♦ (with one) or 2♥ (with another), both showing either a weak raise or a natural 2/1.

[andy_h]

Easy 2S. Honour-third support, a king, and a doubleton - looks pretty good to me. Loser count shouldn't be a rule to be taken highly. If at all, I would recommend dropping loser count entirely as part of hand evaluation.
(Of course, loser count can be useful in other times for example if you're expecting a loser in a side suit of Ax when partner doesn't cue the king etc, but the No. of tricks = 24 - My losers + partner's expected losers is really not good imo)

[neilkaz]

Never pass with this. Support with support and this is adequate for a raise and let your methods decide whether to go via 1NT forcing or not. My ex-PD's passed with this.

[JLOL]

hrothgar, on Apr 29 2009, 05:09 AM, said:

I prefer a forcing NT to an immediate 2♠ (I don't think this hand is quite strong enough for an immediate spade raise)

I strongly prefer 2♠ to pass

agree

[Phil]

1N. Semi-constructive raises are the norm now.

[Lobowolf]

jdonn, on Apr 29 2009, 10:51 AM, said:

Obviously I hate pass, but I also hate 1NT. What is there about this hand that is too weak for a normal single raise? Calling it 5 points is counting points like my mother (sorry mom).

Thanks, Josh. I thought the game was passing me by.

[whereagles]

Phil, on Apr 30 2009, 01:06 AM, said:

1N. Semi-constructive raises are the norm now.

I've had some rather bad experiences by not raising pard immediately. The reason is if 4th bids aggressively and his pard supports at the 3 level, our major suit fit gets lost real quick.

If one insists on using the forcing NT for raises, better doing it only on 4333 hands.