Help
With no interference you hold vul at imps Q83, AT, T9652, 973 your pd opens one natural club, you respond one diamond and pd bids one spade: your call?
Page 1 of 1
a simple sequence
#2
- Lamentable Bunny
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,505
- Joined: 2008-March-01
- Gender:Male
- Location:Portland, ME
Posted 2012-July-29, 13:49
I bid 1NT. I wouldn't be surprised if some players would pass. Other bids seem weird beyond consideration.
Bridge Personality: 44 44 43 34
Never tell the same lie twice. - Elim Garek on the real moral of "The boy who cried wolf"
Never tell the same lie twice. - Elim Garek on the real moral of "The boy who cried wolf"
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,099
- Joined: 2008-November-21
Posted 2012-July-29, 14:36
Passing 1♠ is reasonable. Bidding 2♣ is reasonable if 1♠ promised an unbalanced hand.
I would not bid 1NT vul at imps.
I would not bid 1NT vul at imps.
#4
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 645
- Joined: 2010-December-02
Posted 2012-July-29, 17:56
I pass, partner would have bid 2♠/2NT with a game forcing hand oposite a 6 count...
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 12,029
- Joined: 2009-February-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:St. George, UT
Posted 2012-July-29, 18:47
the_clown, on 2012-July-29, 17:56, said:
I pass, my partner would have bid 2♠/2NT with a game forcing hand oposite a 6 count...
FYP.
My partner would have an unbalanced hand with longer clubs, and 2♣ by me would be appropriate. She has less than the values for a jump-shift to 2S, but I see no reason to avoid the 8+ card fit in favor of the 4-3 or to let the opponents have two cheap balancing calls.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
#6
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,066
- Joined: 2012-March-06
Posted 2012-July-30, 01:08
Pass seems really normal unless this auction promises 5+ clubs for you in which case bidding 2♣ is fine.
Why are we worried about the opponents? These are the same opponents who both passed over 1♣ and 1♦, right? And now they are going to balance if we pass 1♠ which usually isn't even an 8 card fit?
Why are we worried about the opponents? These are the same opponents who both passed over 1♣ and 1♦, right? And now they are going to balance if we pass 1♠ which usually isn't even an 8 card fit?
"What's the big rebid problem? After 1♦ - 1♠, I can rebid 1NT, 2♠, or 2♦."
- billw55
- billw55
#7
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 645
- Joined: 2010-December-02
Posted 2012-July-30, 01:25
aguahombre, on 2012-July-29, 18:47, said:
FYP.
My partner would have an unbalanced hand with longer clubs, and 2♣ by me would be appropriate. She has less than the values for a jump-shift to 2S, but I see no reason to avoid the 8+ card fit in favor of the 4-3 or to let the opponents have two cheap balancing calls.
My partner would have an unbalanced hand with longer clubs, and 2♣ by me would be appropriate. She has less than the values for a jump-shift to 2S, but I see no reason to avoid the 8+ card fit in favor of the 4-3 or to let the opponents have two cheap balancing calls.
Without agreement I assume that partner would bid 1♠ on a random balanced hand with 4♠.
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 12,029
- Joined: 2009-February-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:St. George, UT
Posted 2012-July-30, 01:42
the_clown, on 2012-July-30, 01:25, said:
Without agreement I assume that partner would bid 1♠ on a random balanced hand with 4♠.
I don't find many players who use up the line continuations with balanced hands after 1♣-1♦ because I don't find many players who bid 1♦ with a four card major unless their responding hand has game-force strength.
Perhaps about half of us would rebid 1♠ after 1♣-1♥ with a balanced hand, but even that is shunned by forum posters who prefer to rebid 1NT and then try to sort out the spade situation later by adding complications to NMF.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
Page 1 of 1