[mcphee]

For those who insist on 4 card raises of partners major response, I feel sorry for you. These are the partners who return to the table down in 3N because it was wrong sided. "Sorry nothing I could do on the H lead".

2S a standout, it is not your fault partner has 4S, it's theirs. A point of interest for the NON S raisers, often on these hands when partners do not respond in H prior to S indicates the chance of 3H's not unrealistic. If you do not have methods to inquire about the length of the raise, get some. Do the NT re-bidders honestly think it is unreasonable for partners to bid 3N holding 5S, full opening values and KJX in H?

Insisting on 4 card support to raise a major is similar to insisting you always have 4 cards in the other major to make a t/o dble or a neg dble. Bottom line, it's losing bridge.

[NickRW]

No great preference one way or the other for me in general with these - I think the lack of red stops, the fact that we are quite well blessed with aces and kings, and the small doubleton heart tends to suggest that 2♠ is the better call in this case though. NT might well be better played from the other side if it is right.

Nick

[goodwintr]

Everyone seems to be worried about getting to the right game from the right side, and that is surely a consideration. But, either 1NT or 2S might very well end the bidding, without further opportunity for exploration -- so it is also a consideration to decide right now, on the limited information available, which of those two contracts you think will be better. Because responder might well have five spades and a hand that doesn't bid over 1C-1S; 1NT, and because a 4-3 fit might be very playable when responder doesn't have five spades, I think I'd bet on spades. As others have pointed out, that decision doesn't have to be final if responder in fact does bid again.

[gnasher]

mcphee, on Jul 17 2009, 01:31 PM, said:

Do the NT re-bidders honestly think it is unreasonable for partners to bid 3N holding 5S, full opening values and KJX in H?

Yes, of course it's unreasonable. If your style is that an immediate spade raise promises four-card support, it would be silly for partner not to check back for a 5-3 fit. It would be equivalent to hearing your partner open 1NT and bidding Stayman instead of transferring.

[jdonn]

I should mention, and this is just another random guess by me, that most people who bid 1NT are from places where people just don't raise on three card support, and thus they probably lack experience in that area. America I know, and I bet many other places, have historically had many people who play both styles. I have years of experience rebidding 1NT on these hands and years more rebidding 2♠. I am confident in saying a style that rebids 2♠ simply works better.

[junyi_zhu]

jdonn, on Jul 17 2009, 03:32 PM, said:

I should mention, and this is just another random guess by me, that most people who bid 1NT are from places where people just don't raise on three card support, and thus they probably lack experience in that area. America I know, and I bet many other places, have historically had many people who play both styles. I have years of experience rebidding 1NT on these hands and years more rebidding 2♠. I am confident in saying a style that rebids 2♠ simply works better.

2S improves your prospect of finding 2S as a partial. For game and slam bidding, 1NT is better, cause the 1NT rebid keeps the bidding very low and you have more space to describe your hand if you play two way checkbacks. If you bid 2S, you still may have some problems in the future. Suppose you play 2NT over 2S as an inquiry, it is still not easy to design the relay steps to distinguish the hand with 3 card support, a singleton or with a weak doubleton somewhere, maximum or minimum. So generally, if you play a team game with a partner who plays two way checkbacks, 1NT is slightly better. If you play MP with a partner who doesn't play many conventions, 2S is slightly better.

[barryallen]

Out of interest, given the original hand of

---

with minor point / shape changes to the non spade suits, would any change their position regarding a 1NT or 2♠ response?

[NickRW]

barryallen, on Jul 22 2009, 11:39 AM, said:

Out of interest, given the original hand of

---

with minor point / shape changes to the non spade suits, would any change their position regarding a 1NT or 2♠ response?

For me yes. Change the hand to something like:

xxx
Kx
QTx
AKxxx

Then I think maybe I like 1NT

Nick

[helene_t]

I don't think 1NT (played by me) is likely to be a better contract than 2♠. If p has only four spades, opps have 8+ hearts between them and are likely to lead them against notrump.

One problem I have with 2♠ is that the bid gets quite a range if it includes 12 points balanced with 3-card support.

[fromageGB]

I don't like 1NT by me if we are playing natural responses.

In our methods I bid 1NT here simply because that's what my partner's bid asks me to do, and he will have various reasons/rebids.

If partner had spades he would bid 1♥ and then I would be delighted to bid 1♠ showing 3. If he wanted to take it out to NT it would then be the right way round on this hand.