[jmcw]

Scoring: IMP

2♣----2♦
2♠----3♦
3♠---- ?

---

Your 2♦ is GF and 3♦ shows 5+ without 2 honors.

What do you bid over 3♠

[Hanoi5]

I think I can't raise spades. 3NT, partner should have something in hearts. He didn't bid clubs, could he have 4? Then 4♣ would be correct (as someone pointed out this might sound as a cue-bid, and in that case 4♠ would be better). What would 3♠ have been over 2♦?

[jmcw]

Hanoi5, on Jul 11 2009, 07:09 PM, said:

I think I can't raise spades. 3NT, partner should have something in hearts. He didn't bid clubs, could he have 4? Then 4♣ would be correct. What would 3♠ have been over 2♦?

3♠ over2♦ show a solid suit at least AKQTxx

[peachy]

Anything other than 4S should show an ace - which I don't have - after partner has shown long spades. Assumedly not solid or self supporting because the auction would have been 2C-2D-3S with that. Also, I have a minimum responding values [in context with the system]; if I had a bit more, I would bid 3NT but with this, I'll settle for 4S.

[jmcw]

peachy, on Jul 11 2009, 08:32 PM, said:

Anything other than 4S should show an ace - which I don't have - after partner has shown long spades. Assumedly not solid or self supporting because the auction would have been 2C-2D-3S with that. Also, I have a minimum responding values [in context with the system]; if I had a bit more, I would bid 3NT but with this, I'll settle for 4S.

That is just about what I was thinking. I can live with 3NT but 4♣ makes me cringe.

[Ant590]

4♠ for me.

[jdonn]

3NT wtp. You are the responder to 2♣, partner can't expect stoppers everywhere, it just denies a spade fit.

[EricK]

4♠ is silly IMO. If partner wants to insist on ♠ he can take you out of 3NT, so surely supporting partner shows more than a small singleton.

[Echognome]

jdonn, on Jul 12 2009, 09:50 AM, said:

3NT wtp. You are the responder to 2♣, partner can't expect stoppers everywhere, it just denies a spade fit.

It is for this reason I would have bid 2NT/2♠.

[mike777]

Echognome, on Jul 12 2009, 08:00 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jul 12 2009, 09:50 AM, said:

3NT wtp. You are the responder to 2♣, partner can't expect stoppers everywhere, it just denies a spade fit.

It is for this reason I would have bid 2NT/2♠.

ditto

[jdonn]

Echognome, on Jul 12 2009, 08:00 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jul 12 2009, 09:50 AM, said:

3NT wtp. You are the responder to 2♣, partner can't expect stoppers everywhere, it just denies a spade fit.

It is for this reason I would have bid 2NT/2♠.

I agree, mostly so partner can rebid 3♣ if he has them.

[skjaeran]

3NT now, no support. Probably the bid that works best to slow down partner unless he's got a monster.

As others, I prefer 2NT over 2♠.

[jmcw]

jdonn, on Jul 12 2009, 10:46 PM, said:

Echognome, on Jul 12 2009, 08:00 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jul 12 2009, 09:50 AM, said:

3NT wtp. You are the responder to 2♣, partner can't expect stoppers everywhere, it just denies a spade fit.

It is for this reason I would have bid 2NT/2♠.

I agree, mostly so partner can rebid 3♣ if he has them.

Seems to me a 2NT call over 2♠ should deny a useful side suit. How do you ever find your ♦ slam?

[ArtK78]

I hate 2NT over 2♠. Not only do I have a real suit to bid, but I am wrong-siding the no trump contract.

When partner rebids 3♠, he endplays me into bidding 3NT.

[jdonn]

jmcw, on Jul 13 2009, 07:40 AM, said:

jdonn, on Jul 12 2009, 10:46 PM, said:

Echognome, on Jul 12 2009, 08:00 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jul 12 2009, 09:50 AM, said:

3NT wtp. You are the responder to 2♣, partner can't expect stoppers everywhere, it just denies a spade fit.

It is for this reason I would have bid 2NT/2♠.

I agree, mostly so partner can rebid 3♣ if he has them.

Seems to me a 2NT call over 2♠ should deny a useful side suit. How do you ever find your ♦ slam?

Partner hasn't passed out 2NT yet so we won't miss a 5-4 diamond fit. If your main priority is finding a 5-3 diamond slam from responder's side with his Kxxxx, you need to reexamine your priorities.

[jmcw]

jdonn, on Jul 13 2009, 10:20 AM, said:

jmcw, on Jul 13 2009, 07:40 AM, said:

jdonn, on Jul 12 2009, 10:46 PM, said:

Echognome, on Jul 12 2009, 08:00 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jul 12 2009, 09:50 AM, said:

3NT wtp. You are the responder to 2♣, partner can't expect stoppers everywhere, it just denies a spade fit.

It is for this reason I would have bid 2NT/2♠.

I agree, mostly so partner can rebid 3♣ if he has them.

Seems to me a 2NT call over 2♠ should deny a useful side suit. How do you ever find your ♦ slam?

Partner hasn't passed out 2NT yet so we won't miss a 5-4 diamond fit. If your main priority is finding a 5-3 diamond slam from responder's side with his Kxxxx, you need to reexamine your priorities.

Maybe I asked the wrong question. Seems a number of you prefer 2NT vs 3♦ as a rebid. I confess it never occured to me at the table ( I need 2♠ for that bid ), can't say that I see any compelling reason to feel different now!. Admittedly 3NT seems the better call over 3♠. Thankyou for the response.

[barryallen]

Agree with the 2NT over 2♠, but that is not the position we find ourselves in and it comes down to 3NT or 4♠. 3NT has the benefit of being 1 trick less but there may communication problems. The only problems I can envisage would be because opener is weaker than advertised but greater shape, that being the case 3NT would get pulled so I do not see a down side to 3NT?