[kayin801]

---

You're playing SAYC. I don't play SAYC often enough but I would like some commentary to confirm or refute how I thought this hand should be bid.

1) Agree with the bidding so far?
2) How forcing/suggestive is 3♣?
3) How forcing/suggestive would 3♥ be?
4) What call do you make now?

Spoiler

I bid 3♥ and partner passed with 2146 and the ♣AQ, 4♥ came in on the 3-2 trump break. ATB?

Late edit: I suppose I'll add that with this partner nothing specific is discussed, you're making stuff up as you go along, so assume no 2NT lebensohl. I would have liked leb here.

[ArtK78]

This hand is certainly worth a reverse over 1NT. It has great playing strength. A more practical call would be 4♥, which is where the hand is likely to play, and it is hard to construct a hand opposite this one on which 4♠ is a better contract than 4♥ (especially since partner denied having 4 spades with his 1NT call). If I remember correctly, in SAYC a 1NT response to one of a major is not forcing. 4♥ will make opposite a nothing hand as long as there are not two trump losers. If partner has an ace, then you can afford two trump losers.

Many players use 2NT over a 2♠ reverse as a relay to 3♣, over which responder can pass or correct to 3♦ with a weak hand and a long minor. But, again, this hand does not want to allow partner to get a chance to pass 3♣ as 4♥ rates to be the right contract.

So, to answer your question, I would have bid 4♥ over 1NT.

Having bid 2♠, you ask about a 3♣ call. Given that the reverse promises a rebid, the 3♣ call is natural and forcing. It shows long clubs with less than 10 HCP (in SAYC, a 2♣ call over 1♥ promises 10 HCP). 3♣ is only a 1 round force, and responder can pass opener's rebid if it is a rebid of hearts, notrump or clubs.

3♥ over 2♠ is just a preference and is not forcing.

What call do I make over 3♣? The same call I would have made over 1NT - I bid 4♥.

EDIT: After posting the above, I looked at your spoiler. I think you can work out from the rest of my post where I assign the blame.

[Bbradley62]

I apologize in advance for my pet peeve rant, but...

kayin801, on 2012-September-28, 07:33, said:

You're playing SAYC.

kayin801, on 2012-September-28, 07:33, said:

Late edit: I suppose I'll add that with this partner nothing specific is discussed, you're making stuff up as you go along, so assume no 2NT lebensohl.

The primary advantage of playing SAYC is that it is a completely fill-out convention card, which you can agree to play without needing discussion. Lebensohl is not included. You should not think that you are "making stuff up as you go along"; there is nothing to make up when you have already agreed to a completely fill-out card.

ArtK78, on 2012-September-28, 07:45, said:

Many players use 2NT over a 2♠ reverse as a relay to 3♣, over which responder can pass or correct to 3♦ with a weak hand and a long minor.

These players are not playing SAYC, which was supposedly a given here.
[/rant]

I agree with Art that 4♥ is clear both over 1N and over 3♣.

[ArtK78]

Bbradley62, on 2012-September-28, 11:08, said:

I apologize in advance for my pet peeve rant, but...
[Reference to my mentioning that many players use a 2NT rebid by responder as a relay]
These players are not playing SAYC, which was supposedly a given here.
[/rant]

Note that kayin added the statement that the partnership did not use Lebensohl as a late edit - far later than my post. Yes, I understand that SAYC was specified, and Lebensohl is not a part of SAYC. Nevertheless, I felt it was appropriate to mention that many players use Lebensohl in this situation.

[the hog]

I would have bid 4H over the 1NT bid. The reverse was pointless except to give more information to the opponents.

[P_Marlowe]

#4 4H
#2 depends, it should be game forcing ... assuming Lebensohl is on, which invalidates , influences #3
#3 depends, being unsure about #2, assume NF
#1 sure, the seq. is reasonable, you want to be in game, and the only other bid would be 4H
It is true, that you are looking for magic cards, ..., which is hard to find out in an pickup partnership

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Bbradley62]

snarly response to "assuming Lebensohl is on" removed.