[the hog]

Obviously not the hand he posted, Richard.
xx should be reserved for hands that wish to penalise the opponents, not for bids showing support which then allow the opps a cheap shot at bidding. xx is truly very poor.

[Quartic]

gnasher, on 2012-June-27, 05:34, said:

1♦ pass 2♣ dbl
2NT

should be a good club raise, because you would redouble with a strong balanced hand. Playing with a good English player I'd assume that without discussion (but maybe I'd be unwise to assume that).

I find the idea of passing over the double with primary support unappealing. The auction won't be any easier after

1♦ pass 2♣ dbl
pass 3♠ pass pass

I think the 2♣ response is normal, given the methods. There's not much point in playing Acol-style 2/1 responses if you're not going to use them.

I like the idea of using 2NT as a good club raise here, moving the strong balanced hands into redouble. I'll discuss that with my partner.

[JLOGIC]

the hog, on 2012-June-27, 18:47, said:

Obviously not the hand he posted, Richard.
xx should be reserved for hands that wish to penalise the opponents, not for bids showing support which then allow the opps a cheap shot at bidding. xx is truly very poor.

But bidding 3 non forcing club with this hand is not? How can you risk not playing in game after 1D p 2C with this hand?

[mike777]

JLOGIC, on 2012-June-28, 02:21, said:

But bidding 3 non forcing club with this hand is not? How can you risk not playing in game after 1D p 2C with this hand?

I think for nonexperts you raise the key point here that many might miss. In fact many will bid a nf 3c. This is real teaching hand.

if 2c is 100% gf not an issue but this is acol.

[hrothgar]

JLOGIC, on 2012-June-28, 02:21, said:

But bidding 3 non forcing club with this hand is not? How can you risk not playing in game after 1D p 2C with this hand?

As I learned things, the 3♣ bid is a free bid and shows extra values...
(I have the option to pass the double holding a minimum hand with a club fit)

Personally, I think that its better to have a more complex set of agreements and have the ability to show different strength club raises, however, I wouldn't assume this without discussion.

[lalldonn]

A forcing 3♣ is fine. A forcing 2NT showing a club raise is fine. XX showing general strength planning on supporting clubs next is fine. A non-forcing 3♣ is LOL bad. I think that covers all the bases.

[gszes]

hrothgar, on 2012-June-27, 15:43, said:

What do the words "Your general system is Acol (4 card majors, weak 1NT)" mean in your part of the world?

mumble grumble

Q
Jxxx
AQxxx
Kxxx

something like this then the idea is the same )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

[JLOGIC]

hrothgar, on 2012-June-28, 03:08, said:

As I learned things, the 3♣ bid is a free bid and shows extra values...
(I have the option to pass the double holding a minimum hand with a club fit)

Personally, I think that its better to have a more complex set of agreements and have the ability to show different strength club raises, however, I wouldn't assume this without discussion.

If 3C is forcing, then obviously I would bid 3C. Given that

A) It was posted as a problem hand
B) 3C was bid, and it was passed...

I'm going to guess that 3C was non forcing. Perhaps it's normal to play it as forcing, I have no clue. Intuitively, raising doesn't feel forcing, but I do not play this system so I don't know.

The hog seems to imply that 3C is non forcing but he will bid it anyways...because XX is "very poor, and describes a hand that wants to double them!" I am sure partner will be very confused when he doubles them and we bid clubs as to what we have. To me, ones priorities are out of whack if theyre willing to bid 3 NON FORCING clubs with a hand this good.

Really, what gnasher said is pretty obvious, and follows bidding logic from other situations, 2N should be a good raise, 3C a min raise, XX with a strong balanced or hand with both majors and short clubs. That gives us everything we need. The main problem with our lack of system on this hand is there is a gaping hole of either a forcing club raise, or a non forcing club raise, both of which are important to show immediately

[the hog]

JLOGIC, on 2012-June-28, 13:47, said:

2N should be a good raise, 3C a min raise, XX with a strong balanced or hand with both majors and short clubs. That gives us everything we need. The main problem with our lack of system on this hand is there is a gaping hole of either a forcing club raise, or a non forcing club raise, both of which are important to show immediately

The ho

I don't disagree with that premise. By the way, don't call me a "ho".

[JLOGIC]

lol, not sure what happened during that post!

[EricK]

What do 2♥ or 2♠ mean now? Since North has shown both majors, and partner decided to bid 2♣ instead of 1M, isn't there a good case for using them for some artificial purpose? eg initially stop-showing probing for NT, but may turn out to be an advanced cue-bid if bidding develops that way. If responder is still desperate to look for the major suit game even though advised of the bad break, he can still raise with support for opener's major.

[the hog]

EricK, on 2012-June-30, 01:29, said:

What do 2♥ or 2♠ mean now? Since North has shown both majors, and partner decided to bid 2♣ instead of 1M, isn't there a good case for using them for some artificial purpose? eg initially stop-showing probing for NT, but may turn out to be an advanced cue-bid if bidding develops that way. If responder is still desperate to look for the major suit game even though advised of the bad break, he can still raise with support for opener's major.

2M is still natural, of course.

[MrAce]

EricK, on 2012-June-30, 01:29, said:

What do 2♥ or 2♠ mean now? Since North has shown both majors, and partner decided to bid 2♣ instead of 1M, isn't there a good case for using them for some artificial purpose? eg initially stop-showing probing for NT, but may turn out to be an advanced cue-bid if bidding develops that way. If responder is still desperate to look for the major suit game even though advised of the bad break, he can still raise with support for opener's major.

2♣ does not deny 4 card major.

Assume you had 6♣+4M and have 12+ hcp and started 1M, and it went

1♦--1♠
2♦

You would have hard time to find a club fit, and even if there is not one, pd would get a wrong picture of your hand.

[EricK]

MrAce, on 2012-June-30, 23:01, said:

2♣ does not deny 4 card major.

Assume you had 6♣+4M and have 12+ hcp and started 1M, and it went

1♦--1♠
2♦

You would have hard time to find a club fit, and even if there is not one, pd would get a wrong picture of your hand.

I'm aware of that - but that doesn't mean that you need to reserve 2♥ and 2♠ as natural bids. You can include natural among the other meanings, of course. So after 1♦ (P) 2♣ (X) 2♠ (P) responder can still show the 5/6-4 hand by bidding 3♠. But it seems rather a waste of the 2 cheapest bids to reserve them for natural on an auction when we know that our 4-4 major, if one exists, is going to break 4-1 or 5-0

[Statto]

Even if 3♣ shows a small amount of extras to go with the ♣ fit, it doesn't need to be forcing. 5♣ is still is a long way off if partner is minimum, and we'll need some major suit stops from partner to make 3NT viable. Why shouldn't 3♣ be where we want to play?

PS. If 3♣ does show any extras, West should bid 3NT.