[phil_20686]

A
Qx
A987xx
AKTx

1♦ p 1♥ p
?

Is this enough for a 3c rebid?

[billw55]

Depends. Did partner bid 1♥ over 1♦? Or did lefty? A full auction would help.

edit: did you edit that or am I blind? Anyway, now I say 3♣.

[dicklont]

2♣
You are allowed to hold a maximum.

[mich-b]

2♣ is enough.
Bidding 3♣ also makes it more difficult to sort out the minor suit lengths correctly, on a reasonably low level.

[andy_h]

2♣, yes, it is a wtp. I'm not excited about stiff A plus a ratty diamond suit. If partner passes 2♣ who is to say this isn't the right contract? If we have any hope of game partner would almost definitely give a (false) preference to 2♦ in which we can then invite. Seems perfect.

[Jlall]

Nope not enough for 3C.

A rule I learned that doesn't seem so popular to teach anymore is try to avoid reversing or jump shifting if your anchor suit is very weak if possible. Here your playing strength is just not enough though.

[aguahombre]

Jlall, on Oct 22 2009, 10:05 AM, said:

A rule I learned that doesn't seem so popular to teach anymore is try to avoid reversing or jump shifting if your anchor suit is very weak if possible.

Pls don't teach it. The opponents' bidding is getting better against us anyway. Keep this one a secret

[FrancesHinden]

Yes it is a wtp

3C is game forcing opposite a minimum heart response.
Try constructing hands that pass 2C where you are making game. I can't.

[kgr]

If you bid 2♣ with this hand...
Is it bad to play 2♣ as forcing and 3♣ as mini-splinter (12-14 or 18-19) with ♥-fit?

[mtvesuvius]

2♣ seems right, when I was given this hand as a problem, the first thing I thought of was 2N... lol

Having actually considered this a bit, it's a pretty easy 2♣, and definitely not enough for 3♣.

[Jlall]

kgr, on Oct 22 2009, 11:37 AM, said:

If you bid 2♣ with this hand...
Is it bad to play 2♣ as forcing and 3♣ as mini-splinter (12-14 or 18-19) with ♥-fit?

yes

Ok that wasn't really fair, a lot of people use 2C as artificial and forcing and it has merit. You would need to put in a lot of works on the followups at least.

[kgr]

Jlall, on Oct 22 2009, 06:48 PM, said:

kgr, on Oct 22 2009, 11:37 AM, said:

If you bid 2♣ with this hand...
Is it bad to play 2♣ as forcing and 3♣ as mini-splinter (12-14 or 18-19) with ♥-fit?

yes

Ok that wasn't really fair, a lot of people use 2C as artificial and forcing and it has merit. You would need to put in a lot of works on the followups at least.

Thank you ...I wondered if all my methods were bad

[billw55]

FrancesHinden, on Oct 22 2009, 11:25 AM, said:

Try constructing hands that pass 2C where you are making game. I can't.

OK I give it a try

♠xx
♥Kxxxx
♦Kx
♣Qxxx

.. off a heart and a trump in 5♦. Do you bid over 2♣ with this? Maybe, the minor suit honors look pretty good.

[skjaeran]

billw55, on Oct 22 2009, 07:43 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Oct 22 2009, 11:25 AM, said:

Try constructing hands that pass 2C where you are making game. I can't.

OK I give it a try

♠xx
♥Kxxxx
♦Kx
♣Qxxx

.. off a heart and a trump in 5♦. Do you bid over 2♣ with this? Maybe, the minor suit honors look pretty good.

Yes, I'm bidding over 2♣ with this, definitely.

2♣ over 1♥ is wtp, IMO.

[dellache]

I'd bid 2♣ :
1. a tad too weak for 3♣
2. if you bid 3♣, you'll struggle then to differentiate between 5-5, 6-4 and 5-4.
3. if you bid 3♣, finding the 6-2 Heart fit will be more difficult.

If pard has 8+HCP he MUST bid 2♦ to keep the sequence alive, even with 3424.

(I would be more annoyed with ♥Kx)

[Fluffy]

You can always construct hands where you wanna be in game.

I hate this hand since 2♣ could be 4-5 in my system. I am thinking about bidding 2♦ as an option.

Those who move lightly over 2♣ are overbidding too much IMO.

[mike777]

2c

now I rebid 2d...easy..pard could have only 3clubs and extras...so the auction continues:


1d=1h
2c=2d
?

[dake50]

Yes, I see a risk in 3C with partner backed into my weak 6xD. But, I do have H-Qx, a good 4xC, SA single, how will partner picture this much with his H-AKxxxx? H-AKxxx?