[MattieShoe]

Scoring: IMP

P 1♣ P ?

---

I think partner should have opened 1NT, but in this case he didn't. My concern is my own bidding. I don't know how to respond in this situation!

Partner doesn't play splinters, if it makes any difference. I had too many points to bid 2 or 3♣, no suit worth mentioning other than clubs, and a singleton so NT seems less than perfect...

I ended up bidding 2NT to show opening points, partner responded with 3NT, and I bid 5♣. We went down one due to a 4-0 split and poor play on my part -- should have made.

Should I have bid differently? How?

[Jlall]

If you have no forcing raise in the minor available then you will always have problems when you have a forcing raise hand type.

[the hog]

Well, you need a forcing minor suit raise of some description. Some play inverted minor raises, so 2C would be forcing; some play a 2D bid as showing a C raise.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

most would play 2NT as 11-12, i.e. 2NT is wrong, unless you are
100% sure that 2NT is forcing, e.g. if you play SAYC by the book.

Without special agreements, I would suggest, that you bid 4C,
because if you dont want to play 3NT, you have no problem with
by passing 3NT.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Mbodell]

Yeah, this is a problem hand for pairs that don't have agreements. If you don't play 2♣ as inverted minors you have no good bid. Personally, I'd choose 3nt, but it certainly isn't a perfect bid, just the least bad bid IMO.

Even if you were playing splinters, you'd prefer not to splinter with this hand because you don't generally splinter with an A as partner will misevaluate his hand. If you have KQx in a suit someone splinters in you feel you have wasted values. When they have the A that is not a bad holding.

But absent a forcing minor raise then any of 3♣, 3nt, or 4♣ seems reasonable but non-ideal.

I agree that your partner should have opened 1nt assuming you play 15-17 nt.

[MattieShoe]

Ah... I know inverted minor raises but I tend to play in the relaxed room, which means my partners are often beginners and don't even know what they are :-) I'm trying to play fairly vanilla SAYC simply to increase the chances of not confusing my random partners. I'm glad to know there's no painfully obvious bid here though unless one adds in conventions though.

I was afraid 4♣ would be interpreted as a double-jump raise rather than a game invitation. Upon further reflection, I think 3NT was my best bet with a likely 7 quick tricks in my hand.

[andy_h]

Yeah, not having a forcing minor raise can get pretty hard or even a decent auction for that matter. If I didn't have that at my disposal, I would either just try a practical 3NT or 1♦ since I can probably 4th suit GF later and support clubs. I don't like bidding 4♣ since most often partner will have a weak NT and we would tend to belong in 3NT most of the time.

[Jlall]

In rubber bridge our system is 1m p 3m forcing and 1m p 2m NF. This gives you some problems with limit raise hands but those are way less frequent than forcing raises, and the problem of not having a forcing raise is MUCH bigger.

[kenrexford]

If you don't have a way to raise clubs and force, and you have 3136 shape or 1336 shape, bid 1♦. If you have 3316 shape, bid 1♥. You only have three hearts, but that's Dealer's fault.

If you have the same hand with long diamonds, instead, and partner opens 1♦, you do that same thing. Bid 2♣ with a three-card club suit if you can, or bid 1♥ with 3-3-6-1 shape.

When there is no forcing raise of the minor, bidding the other minor could be short, and hearts could be short with a stiff in the other minor.

With a six-card minor in support and 3-2-2 on the outside, make an intelligent decision, which might be a notrump call. If the 3-card suit is the other minor, no problem. If the 3-card suit is hearts, make a judgment call between 1♥, the minor on two cards, or notrump at the appropriate level. If the 3-card major is spades, pick between notrump, the two-card other minor, or the awful 1♠ option.

Worst case:

♠AJx ♥xx ♦xx ♣AKQxxx

Same side honors, but clumped into spades. IMO, 1♠ is a reasonable option.

[Echognome]

MattieShoe, on Sep 16 2009, 10:06 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

P 1♣ P ?

---

I think partner should have opened 1NT, but in this case he didn't.  My concern is my own bidding.  I don't know how to respond in this situation!

Partner doesn't play splinters, if it makes any difference.  I had too many points to bid 2 or 3♣, no suit worth mentioning other than clubs, and a singleton so NT seems less than perfect...

I ended up bidding 2NT to show opening points, partner responded with 3NT, and I bid 5♣.  We went down one due to a 4-0 split and poor play on my part -- should have made. 

Should I have bid differently? How?

A little confused with your story. See my bolded excerpts.

Recap:

Your partner opened 1♣.
The contract was 5♣.
The contract went down due to your poor play.
???

Did you end up playing it the wrong way around? Or are you asking about your partner's bidding problem?

[P_Marlowe]

MattieShoe, on Sep 17 2009, 02:55 AM, said:

Ah... I know inverted minor raises but I tend to play in the relaxed room, which means my partners are often beginners and don't even know what they are :-) I'm trying to play fairly vanilla SAYC simply to increase the chances of not confusing my random partners. I'm glad to know there's no painfully obvious bid here though unless one adds in conventions though.

I was afraid 4♣ would be interpreted as a double-jump raise rather than a game invitation. Upon further reflection, I think 3NT was my best bet with a likely 7 quick tricks in my hand.

If you want to avoid confusion, than I suggest, dont assume, that
2NT is forcing.
This is certainly part of SAYC, but it is not a well known part.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[MattieShoe]

Echognome, on Sep 17 2009, 03:56 PM, said:

A little confused with your story.  See my bolded excerpts.

Recap:

Your partner opened 1♣.
The contract was 5♣.
The contract went down due to your poor play.
???

Did you end up playing it the wrong way around?  Or are you asking about your partner's bidding problem?

Your recap is correct. Assuming standard 15-17 1NT, partner should have opened 1NT. I'm not worried about his mistake because I have no control over it. The bad play was entirely my fault but I know what I did wrong there -- one of those situations where I knew I screwed up 1/2 second too late. I was preoccupied with wondering why partner didn't bid 1NT and what to do about 4-0 split, just had a brain meltdown.

I was asking about my bidding problem though. My issue was I didn't know how to respond to 1♣ when I've got a strong 6 card club suit, no outside 4 card suits, and opening hand because I don't have a reasonable forcing response without extra conventions and I'm too strong to support clubs without inverted minor raises. I bid 2NT but I wasn't happy about bidding it, so I was just seeing if there's a standard way to handle the situation.

From the responses, it looks like it's just a problem hand without conventions to deal with this situation.

Solutions, in no particular order:

1. 2♣ using inverted minor raises. (Probably ideal assuming partner plays inverted minor raises)

2. 3♣ without inverted minor raises -- lies about points and may be passed out.

3. 4♣ as a game invitation, hopefully partner doesn't interpret it as a double jump raise. Also removes the possibility of playing in 3NT.

4. 2NT, lying about distribution, but partner might misinterpret meaning and may not play 2NT response as forcing. (what I did)

5. 3NT shows points but lies regarding distribution, and is likely to be passed out. (what I'd probably do next time if partner doesn't use inverted minor raise... Top scores for this hand were in 3NT contracts, all in response to 1NT openers though...)

6. Change suits at 1 level, lying about length in suit but is forcing so one can hopefully correct later.

7. Using less than ubiquitous conventions like forcing 2♦ to indicate club support or 1m p 3m as forcing rather than inverted minor raise.

After the 3NT response to my 2NT, I probably should have passed given the points NT brings and that the club fit would play fine in NT too. I was just worried about the diamonds given my singleton, but it turns out that wasn't a problem. With the stopper in my short suit and most likely 7 quick tricks in my hand, NT was probably worth the risk compared to 5♣

[Cyberyeti]

You're results merchanting somewhat as 6♣ is laydown unless trumps are 4-0 so that is where you want to be rather than 3N.

I would always play inverted minors, but if I didn't, I'd bid 3♦ splinter or if that wasn't available 1♥.

[Mbodell]

MattieShoe, on Sep 18 2009, 02:15 AM, said:

Echognome, on Sep 17 2009, 03:56 PM, said:

A little confused with your story.  See my bolded excerpts.

Recap:

Your partner opened 1♣.
The contract was 5♣.
The contract went down due to your poor play.
???

Did you end up playing it the wrong way around?  Or are you asking about your partner's bidding problem?

Your recap is correct. Assuming standard 15-17 1NT, partner should have opened 1NT. I'm not worried about his mistake because I have no control over it. The bad play was entirely my fault but I know what I did wrong there -- one of those situations where I knew I screwed up 1/2 second too late. I was preoccupied with wondering why partner didn't bid 1NT and what to do about 4-0 split, just had a brain meltdown.

I think the issue echognome was making is that if your partner opened 1♣ and the final contract is 5♣ why were you the declarer? Was there a lead out of turn or something? Were you playing with a computer or playing director who always lets you declare when your side wins the contract? There is a missing piece of the story, I think, was the point being made.

[MattieShoe]

Mbodell, on Sep 18 2009, 05:46 PM, said:

MattieShoe, on Sep 18 2009, 02:15 AM, said:

Echognome, on Sep 17 2009, 03:56 PM, said:

A little confused with your story.  See my bolded excerpts.

Recap:

Your partner opened 1♣.
The contract was 5♣.
The contract went down due to your poor play.
???

Did you end up playing it the wrong way around?  Or are you asking about your partner's bidding problem?

Your recap is correct. Assuming standard 15-17 1NT, partner should have opened 1NT. I'm not worried about his mistake because I have no control over it. The bad play was entirely my fault but I know what I did wrong there -- one of those situations where I knew I screwed up 1/2 second too late. I was preoccupied with wondering why partner didn't bid 1NT and what to do about 4-0 split, just had a brain meltdown.

I think the issue echognome was making is that if your partner opened 1♣ and the final contract is 5♣ why were you the declarer? Was there a lead out of turn or something? Were you playing with a computer or playing director who always lets you declare when your side wins the contract? There is a missing piece of the story, I think, was the point being made.

Wow, my memory must be faulty. I know I had the hands and bidding correct because I looked them up. I just double-checked and it was my partner who screwed up the play, not me. I apologized to partner for screwing up bidding, then in later analysis decided that 5♣ makes if it's played it correctly. Somehow those wires got crossed in my brain and I was remembering apologizing for screwing up the play even though I didn't play the hand!

I swear, I'm not making it up!

Edit:
I'm finding it really creepy that I can remember perfectly playing the hand even though I didn't. I apologize for the confusion.

[vuroth]

MattieShoe, on Sep 18 2009, 05:15 AM, said:

one of those situations where I knew I screwed up 1/2 second too late

Don't I know about those.

Right now, I feel like I just need to play a ton more hands, and I'll start to recognize the situation a half second sooner. Longer term, though, I'm sure I'll have to improve my mental toughness.

As for the hand, I tried to play "by-the-book" SAYC for as long as possible. The first thing I had to give up was the meaning of 1m-2NT, since everyone seems to think it's invitational. The second thing I gave up on was adding inverted minors, because having no forcing minor raise was maddening.

Good on you for how you bid, though.