[jillybean]

MP's, not vulnerable

---

Is 1nt enough first round and what now?

[blackshoe]

I think I would have bid 2NT on the first round. I suppose I could bid it now. Or 3♦. If partner has a maximum for his bidding and a heart stopper, we should probably be in 3NT, and if he has an unbalanced hand, we can almost certainly make 3♦.

[kenrexford]

I have no problem with 1NT.

Now, 3♣.

My thinking is along these lines. First, I like a style where 1NT is somewhat wide ranging. With one partner, I actually play 5-11 without problems. The key is that Opener must keep auctions alive with tweener hands. So, no problem for me with 1NT. (If anything, people over-jump to 2NT. Partner did not open 1NT, so his max is usually 14. With 11, why force us too high? If partner does have the 15-16 hand, he'd unbalanced and should IMO bid again.)

Second, as to the rebid. I am strongly of the opinion that 1minor-1NT-2minor means that the minor is trumps unless the end contract is notrump. Thus, any new suit call furthers the goal of these contracts. as the most likely game is usually a grab-'em 3NT, the orientation should be in that direction. With this hand, 3♣ seems obvious. No heart card, great clubs, light spade stop, and a diamond card. 3♣ seems to advertise this.

[jillybean]

kenrexford, on 2011-April-19, 16:19, said:

I have no problem with 1NT.

Now, 3♣.

My thinking is along these lines. First, I like a style where 1NT is somewhat wide ranging. With one partner, I actually play 5-11 without problems. The key is that Opener must keep auctions alive with tweener hands. So, no problem for me with 1NT. (If anything, people over-jump to 2NT. Partner did not open 1NT, so his max is usually 14. With 11, why force us too high? If partner does have the 15-16 hand, he'd unbalanced and should IMO bid again.)

Second, as to the rebid. I am strongly of the opinion that 1minor-1NT-2minor means that the minor is trumps unless the end contract is notrump. Thus, any new suit call furthers the goal of these contracts. as the most likely game is usually a grab-'em 3NT, the orientation should be in that direction. With this hand, 3♣ seems obvious. No heart card, great clubs, light spade stop, and a diamond card. 3♣ seems to advertise this.

I like this , thanks.

[JLOGIC]

1N first is perfect.

3C might outline a heart lead, I'm not sure it's the right bid. 2N which obv implies a good diamond fit seems fine tactically. 3C is ok too.

The key is to not pass. You are worth an invite opposite a 6 card diamond suit, especially given that you are already limited. Partner will never play you for more than this, and you make game opposite a lot of normal 2D bids.

[Fluffy]

This is still the BIL right?, if you think your hand is worth only 1NT the round before, then it can only be worth a pass over 2♦. I think anything else doesn't belong to this forum, but obviously that's just my opinion.

[jillybean]

Fluffy, on 2011-April-21, 06:42, said:

This is still the BIL right?, if you think your hand is worth only 1NT the round before, then it can only be worth a pass over 2♦. I think anything else doesn't belong to this forum, but obviously that's just my opinion.

Sure this is the Beginner/Intermediate forum but I want "expert standard" answers, not dumbed down verions. I avoid using the Advanced/Expert Forum as
people want a higher standard of questions & responses in that forum.

[hrothgar]

JLOGIC, on 2011-April-19, 18:21, said:

1N first is perfect.

3C might outline a heart lead, I'm not sure it's the right bid. 2N which obv implies a good diamond fit seems fine tactically. 3C is ok too.

The key is to not pass. You are worth an invite opposite a 6 card diamond suit, especially given that you are already limited. Partner will never play you for more than this, and you make game opposite a lot of normal 2D bids.

One other point that is worth mentioning: Partner opened 1♦ in fourth seat (and likely has short spades)

We have a really nice hand opposite a long Diamond suit.
I agree that some bid is called for, but I'm not sure what the best call would be...

In particular, how would folks differentiate between 2N and 3♦?

[quiddity]

Fluffy, on 2011-April-21, 06:42, said:

This is still the BIL right?, if you think your hand is worth only 1NT the round before, then it can only be worth a pass over 2♦. I think anything else doesn't belong to this forum, but obviously that's just my opinion.

Really? I definitely don't agree with this. The value of a hand can change as the auction progresses - this is a key concept that every B/I needs to learn. Kxx of diamonds is gold opposite partner's rebiddable suit.

[kenrexford]

hrothgar, on 2011-April-21, 07:58, said:

One other point that is worth mentioning: Partner opened 1♦ in fourth seat (and likely has short spades)

We have a really nice hand opposite a long Diamond suit.
I agree that some bid is called for, but I'm not sure what the best call would be...

In particular, how would folks differentiate between 2N and 3♦?

It seems to me that 3♦ is just competitive/preemptive. 1-2-3 stop. Getting in the way of a passed Advancer. Whatever. Just not letting Advancer make a cheap 2♠ or 2♥ call.

[Fluffy]

jillybean, on 2011-April-21, 07:21, said:

Sure this is the Beginner/Intermediate forum but I want "expert standard" answers, not dumbed down verions. I avoid using the Advanced/Expert Forum as people want a higher standard of questions & responses in that forum.

I know jilly, my post was directed at other BIL users rather than you.

[JLOGIC]

Fluffy, on 2011-April-21, 06:42, said:

This is still the BIL right?, if you think your hand is worth only 1NT the round before, then it can only be worth a pass over 2♦. I think anything else doesn't belong to this forum, but obviously that's just my opinion.

Huh? You seem to be implying that you cannot bid 1N and then invite later when partner shows a 1 or 2 suiter, that seems crazy to me. You bid 1N because partner is frequently a weak NT hand type which you are not worth an invite opposite, and with an unbalanced hand he will usually bid over 1N, over which you can show a maximum 1N bid with a good fit.

Or more to the point, you don't rate to make game opposite the range of hands that partner passes 1N with, but you often have game when he bids 2D, and rarely go down in 3D, so you invite. And he knows pretty much exactly your hand type. Why can you not re-evaluate when partner shows a 6 card suit or a 2nd suit? Do you think 1S-1N-2D-3D or 1S-1N-2S-3S is also an impossible auction playing 1N non forcing? Seems pretty absurd, those are standard auctions.

[Fluffy]

I don't want to jam the thread with philosophical things, but when partner is unbalanced he might produce more tricks potentially, but his lower limit to opening also goes down to 11(10) HCP. My impression is that when partner bids over my 1NT bid is because he is "retreating" from the (often) best contract MP wise because he is too weak, not because he is "keeping the bidding alive" to be able to reach game.

What this means is: partner might pass some unbalanced maximums to try for the +120/150, but he will bid on the minimums. (I don't claim this to be mainstream behaviour)

I feel this is true for me, but I play 98% of my F2F hands in MPs. IMPs might have different philosophy.

[han]

I think with my wife (JLOGIC): you have an absolutely great hand in context and you should not pass. Which call you make is less important.