[Phil]

Quote

But ultimately it's a lot easier to get to hearts after 2♦ than diamonds after 2♥.

and you say later:
"...(guess)whether to bid 3♥ after 1♥ 1NT 2♦ 3♦"

You state yourself it is a guess. You imply that 3♥ will frequently be an overbid if partner raises to 3♦ on many hands, and I agree.

I can get to diamonds easily enough when partner rebids 2N. This will be the time that it matters, since 2N is the main rebid partner can make that shows values.

Quote

One last point is I don't see how the guess of whether to bid 3♥ after 1♥ 1NT 2♦ 3♦ is any different than the 'guess' of whether to bid 3♦ after 1♥ 1NT 2♥ 2NT or something. In neither case are we guaranteed a fit (granted it's very likely in the second case when partner bids 1NT instead of 1♠). I just don't see how you can claim a diamond raise leaves us poorly placed. With a very minimum hand you pass the 3♦ bid, otherwise you stretch to bid 3♥ at least secure in the knowledge you have a fit to fall back on.

After 1♥ - 1N - 2♥ - 2N, 3♦ isn't a 'guess', its bidding out my hand! Why would we ever pass 2N with a 6-4, especially when partner is marked with 8 and usually 9 cards in the minors? By the way, this seems like a meaningless sequence to those that are rebidding 2♦ on most minimum and maximum 6-4's, since we assuredly are denying 4 diamonds. This is very similar to the 1♠ - 1N - 2♥ - 2N thread we were discussing a few weeks ago where you thought 3♥ was forcing and I thought it was NF.

It is the "minimum" hand that passes (your) 3♦ raise that should be your concern. Just like you can build these 18 and 21 perfectos that are producing slams, I can produce many more 20-23 point non-perfectos that are producing 4♥ that you will be languishing in 3♦. Game in hearts has to take priority over finding game in diamonds.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

Some comments nobody has mentioned yet:

It is depend on the meaning of other bids.

If 2D promises 4 cards, than you play that

#1 2C can be based on 2 cards (a common style), but it is a matter
of agreement
#2 2H can be based on a 5 carder, you have to find a bid with 5422
#3 ...

Similar, if 2H promises 6 cards, you may be forced to play that 2C
or 2D can be based on less than 4 cards.

I would bid 2D, if I show 9 cards, but if it does not, and if 2H promises 6,
I would bid 2H.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[jdonn]

Phil, on May 9 2009, 11:51 AM, said:

Quote

But ultimately it's a lot easier to get to hearts after 2♦ than diamonds after 2♥.

and you say later:
"...(guess)whether to bid 3♥ after 1♥ 1NT 2♦ 3♦"

You state yourself it is a guess. You imply that 3♥ will frequently be an overbid if partner raises to 3♦ on many hands, and I agree.

Are you kidding me?!?! It's like talking to rush limbaugh. I called it a guess because that's what you were implying it was, and then you parse it to freaking death because I didn't put little quotes around it. What is wrong with you?

Quote

I can get to diamonds easily enough when partner rebids 2N. This will be the time that it matters, since 2N is the main rebid partner can make that shows values.

My point is, specifically, you will very frequently have the auction
1♥ 1NT 2♦ 2♥ when you bid diamonds but hearts are right, but
1♥ 1NT 2♥ P when you bid hearts but diamonds are right. Simple.

Quote

By the way, this seems like a meaningless sequence to those that are rebidding 2♦ on most minimum and maximum 6-4's, since we assuredly are denying 4 diamonds.

And praytell, mr pick every word to death, how does "most" imply "assuredly"?

Quote

This is very similar to the 1♠ - 1N - 2♥ - 2N thread we were discussing a few weeks ago where you thought 3♥ was forcing and I thought it was NF.

First of all the second suit was clubs in that thread, not hearts, which is a major difference. Second of all I did not say I thought it was forcing. It's not. I said forcing is my preferred treatment. If I don't say something you can try to pick apart you just change it?