[FrancesHinden]

OK, I admit we did this to our opponents, but as one of them was gnasher I'll pretend I'm posting on his behalf rather than gloating.

---

1♣ = natural, or 11-14 balanced without 4 diamonds, or any 18- bad 20 balanced (including those with 5 diamonds)
1♥ = 4+ spades, may be very light
1♠ = unbalanced with 3 spades, or a hand that would have rebid 1NT in the standard auction 1C - 1S - ?
2♣ = sign-off in 2D, or invitational with 5 spades, or some game forces
2♦ = poor clubs, not the unbalanced spade raise

At the other table the auction was
1♣ - P - 1♥ - P
1♠ - P - P - 1NT
P - 3NT all pass

(first 3 bids had much the same meanings as at our table)

[Hanoi5]

North 75%. South could have passed 2♦ with nothing, and North knows South clubs are not that great so where are his/her HCP's?

Of course the 25% missing goes to E/W who managed to make 5 bids with only 15 HCP's and whatever I missed form what South could have done.

[wank]

obviously south should show some strength. a 2♠ UCB would do the trick imo

[gwnn]

I blame Frances. I think NS both made more or less percentage calls which did not lead to the best contract.

[han]

When the points are roughly evenly split and both north and south are balanced, this can certainly happen. I agree though that south should have bid more strongly after north doubled 2C. In my opinion both 2H and 2S should be cuebids, I don't have an agreement about the difference.

[petterb]

100% North for not overcalling 2♣ first round.

[gszes]

I can see pasing the first round as n in the face of
an unlimited auction especially v/nv. The problem
seems to be s not bidding 2h (s cant suddenly have
a 1h overcall they failed to make) to show club
support and searching for nt. after s bids 2h
bidding 3n should be easy for N.

I blame s for not thinking about in context bidding
and I congratulate N for disciplined original pass.

[Hanoi5]

I didn't realize North had doubled an artificial 2♣ which shows clubs, so South was merely competing. If there was a way for South to show strength then that's the bid and not 3♣. 75% South.

[gnasher]

petterb, on 2011-September-11, 12:23, said:

100% North for not overcalling 2♣ first round.

In this partnership a first-round 2♣ would have been Michaels.

[petterb]

gnasher, on 2011-September-12, 02:10, said:

In this partnership a first-round 2♣ would have been Michaels.

Then 50% North and 50% South for bad system agreements.

[rfedrick]

Good hand for the weak NT in our match.

1NT-(P)-2H-(P)
2S-(P)-P-(3C)
AP

ATB.

[TMorris]

(In the flight below) we also had a weak NT and they passed out 2 ♠

[rhm]

South has a remarkable hand facing a DBL of an artificial 2♣. 3♣ is merely competitive. South would bid 3♣ with an ace less.
2♥ can not be natural, having passed over 1♣.
A good alternative to avoid a misunderstanding is to bid 3♦, which gets both your strength and your fit across.
If partner does not have the values for game, you would not have been allowed to play 3♣ anyway and 4♣ must be reasonably safe.

Rainer Herrmann