[h2osmom]

Scoring: IMP

p p 1h p
? 2h or 1s here? which is better?

---

[ArtK78]

1♠. Don't want to miss a 6-4 spade fit.

I can bid 2♥ next. Partner may be misled on your holding a third heart, thinking that you are just taking a preference if he rebids 2 of a minor, but the strength of the hand is about right.

[jjbrr]

I'd bid 1♠ because I think it more or less will achieve the same thing as 2♥ while being more descriptive. Any number of good things can happen: Partner raises spades, partner bids NT and I can raise ♥, partner jump shifts and I can bid 4♥, partner bids again after 1♥ 1♠ 2m 2♥. The only concern is when partner has a hand that makes game good opposite this hand with 3♥ but not this hand with 2♥, and I think that's a pretty small target.

[aguahombre]

If you think this hand is LR, 1S will survive. You will be bidding 3H, not two, if the auction continues without interference.

If you don't think it is a LR --I don't-- then many bad things can happen after 1S:
1) Opps can get in more cheaply in a minor and;
1a) your number of hearts will never be known for competitive purposes, or
1b) your later competition at the 3-level will sound like LR, which u decided you don't have.
2) Without competition, you still will probably have to mistate the size of your hand and/or the degree of heart support.
3) Partner's confidence in your understanding of "support with support" with minumum responding hands will be eroded.
4) (Too lazy to disect what could happen at higher levels.)

I assume the two 1S bidders above have upgraded this hand to a LR, because they are both experienced enough to know what I just wrote.

[kenrexford]

Kind of funny. On Saturday, I was dealt:

♠KQJ98xxxx ♥KQx ♦x ♣--

I was thinking briefly, whith great hunor, whether I'd respond 2♣ if partner opened 1♥, just to be weird.

Instead, LHO opened 3♣, partner bid 3♥, and RHO raised to 5♣.

I opted 6♠. On a club lead (Ace, pitch diamond), 6♠ made, even opposite a void from partner. 6♥ would have a backup plan of a ruffing finesse in spades, which fails. So, arguably I might have supported with support in that situation. But, I have never tabled a nine-card spade suit headed by KQJ before, and I probably never will, right or wrong.

[gwnn]

there was 1 thread a year or so ago about this but I can't find it.

as a general rule always bid spades with 6-3 and never with 4-3. with 5-3 usually bid ♥ but when you have just spades like QJTxx xxx Qxx xx I don't think 1♠ is bad.

[Cascade]

ArtK78, on Mar 30 2010, 06:42 AM, said:

I can bid 2♥ next.

Whatever is the right action this statement is simply not true.

There are many auctions some of which involve the opponents even when they are passed hands where 2♥ will not be available on the next round - in the extreme I have been at the table when my passed opponent overcalled on the second round at the four-level.

The point being that not raising immediately does give up something. It may or may not be worthwhile giving up but it is clearly wrong to assume some action at a low level will be available on the next round of bidding.

To me this illustrates two-handed (as opposed to four-handed) thinking that Cathy Chua wrote about in her book "Fair Play or Foul".

[jdonn]

Didn't Fred at the table once bid

1♥ p 2♥ p
p 2NT 3♣ (or was it 3♦?)

which he meant and his partner correctly interpreted as 6-3 in the majors? Gwnn find that thread! I know it was started by Fred if that helps.

[jjbrr]

jdonn, on Mar 29 2010, 01:38 PM, said:

Didn't Fred at the table once bid

1♥ p 2♥ p
p 2NT 3♣ (or was it 3♦?)

which he meant and his partner correctly interpreted as 6-3 in the majors? Gwnn find that thread! I know it was started by Fred if that helps.

http://forums.bridge...topic=36048&hl=

[aguahombre]

jdonn, on Mar 29 2010, 12:38 PM, said:

Didn't Fred at the table once bid

1♥ p 2♥ p
p 2NT 3♣ (or was it 3♦?)

which he meant and his partner correctly interpreted as 6-3 in the majors? Gwnn find that thread! I know it was started by Fred if that helps.

Nice. I would be even more impressed if he improvised the bid, and partner correctly interpreted it. Too late now for me, since my pard and I just added it after seeing your post.

[ArtK78]

Cascade, on Mar 29 2010, 01:34 PM, said:

ArtK78, on Mar 30 2010, 06:42 AM, said:

I can bid 2♥ next.

Whatever is the right action this statement is simply not true.

There are many auctions some of which involve the opponents even when they are passed hands where 2♥ will not be available on the next round - in the extreme I have been at the table when my passed opponent overcalled on the second round at the four-level.

The point being that not raising immediately does give up something. It may or may not be worthwhile giving up but it is clearly wrong to assume some action at a low level will be available on the next round of bidding.

To me this illustrates two-handed (as opposed to four-handed) thinking that Cathy Chua wrote about in her book "Fair Play or Foul".

Both of my opponents have already passed. I have a reasonable expectation that they will continue to pass, or, if not, that their bidding will not prevent me from bidding 2♥ at my next turn to call.

In any event, I feel that introducing my 6 card suit is more important at this point in the auction than raising on 3 card support.

[jdonn]

aguahombre, on Mar 29 2010, 01:45 PM, said:

jdonn, on Mar 29 2010, 12:38 PM, said:

Didn't Fred at the table once bid

1♥ p 2♥ p
p 2NT 3♣ (or was it 3♦?)

which he meant and his partner correctly interpreted as 6-3 in the majors? Gwnn find that thread! I know it was started by Fred if that helps.

Nice. I would be even more impressed if he improvised the bid, and partner correctly interpreted it.

That's exactly what happened.

[Jlall]

I would bid 2H.

[mikeh]

Jlall, on Mar 29 2010, 02:41 PM, said:

I would bid 2H.

Me too.

it is not that I don't expect to rebid 2♥ due to opposition action, altho that is a non-trival possibility, but it is more that a 2minor rebid by partner (surely a reasonable possibility) leaves my 2♥ call looking like a preference, while the notion of bidding 1♠ then 3♥ makes me ill, especially on a partial misfit with short trumps and weak spades.

And it's not like I'll know what to do if he rebids 2♥ either....sure, I'll raise but I expect dummy to disappoint way too often especially if they lead trump.

When the hand is this range, why not raise? Put it another way, if you raise, the odds are you'll be happy no matter what partner does next...the same is not true for 1♠.

[gnasher]

I'd bid 1♠. If that means that I can't show my heart support later, I'll live with it. If we have a game on it's more likely to be in spades than in hearts.

[fred]

mikeh, on Mar 30 2010, 12:08 AM, said:

Jlall, on Mar 29 2010, 02:41 PM, said:

I would bid 2H.

Me too.

Me three.

If my partner opened in 1st or 2nd seat I would find 2H to be completely painless.

Opposite the actual 3rd seat 1H opening (which for me could be based on a strong 4-card suit), I would not be very happy but I would still bid 2H as the least of evils. I simply could not stomach the concept of bidding 1H-1S-2m-2H with this hand.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[Codo]

I found 2 ♥ completly obvious and nothing here as changed my mind.

[jdonn]

I kind of like 1♠. I think it's more likely we belong there and have to bid it now than that partner not knowing about the 3rd heart will cost us. But it would be nice to have the understanding that if I later insist on hearts after 1♠ I could have normal single raise strength.

[PeterGill]

Under normal circumstances I would bid 2H. If I was playing in a partnership in which my partner's declarer play was even weaker than mine, I might bid 1S.

[mcphee]

The desire to bid S does not tempt me in any way and I see 2H as a rather good way to tell partner about my hand. I will be delighted if partner bids game, in fact even if he finds another bid I am happy.