[Bokchoix]

♠K J 9 8 6
♥A 8 7 3
♦10 5 2
♣8

Playing Matchpoints, Standard American bidding, my partner opened 1D and with the hand above, I bid 1S.
Partner responded 2D (we agree this shows 6 cards).

At this point, my partner might have 4 hearts, might have 3 spades. If I bid 2H now, we would find our heart or spade fit. If pard has neither, I can correct 2NT to 3D, or pass 3D if that is his choice.

However, I considered that bidding 2H now, a new suit, would be forcing and therefore would be telling partner I have more strength than this, and might propel him to a poor 3 level or even game contract if his minimum 2D response was nevertheless decent. I elected to pass, as we had found a nice fit and I was not interested in inviting game opposite a hand only good enough to rebid 2D.

Partner felt I should have looked for the major fit, and tells me he would not expect extra strength from me.

So, in general terms, would 2H by me have promised extras, or can it be construed as attempting to improve the strain and not showing anything more than a minimum?
And with my hand in question, would 2H be a good rebid?

And now that I think of it, would a rebid of 3H be game-forcing in this auction?

[FelicityR]

The question you need to ask yourself here is what does 2♦ show? You have answered this by saying it shows 6+ ♦s and how many HCPs? Up to 15, maybe a poor 16/17 in an unbalanced hand. Now try to construct various hands opposite ♠KJ986 ♥A873 ♦1052 ♣8 and see how easy it is to make game in ♥s and ♦s (even NTs, and maybe ♠s) if he/she has a suitable hand.

2♥ here would only be forcing for one round, but it gives you the opportunity to clarify your hand, and bid out its distribution. Your hand is a lot more than the mere 8 HCPs distributionally now that you have found a 9 card fit in ♦s. You needed to bid beyond 2♦, and partner was right telling you that you need to bid again - not necessarily to find a major suit fit - but to show that you have a little bit extra.

[Cyberyeti]

Does it always show 6♦ ? what do you do with a 1453 15 count ?

But OK, what do you need to make game ? Well Ax, Kx, AKxxxx, xxx is a great game for example, as is something like x, KQxx, AQJxxx, xx so your hand is clearly worth more than 7 points.

Some experts play artificial bids over 1m-?-2m because bidding in this area is difficult, but you have to try 2♥, which I think shows values or diamonds or both.

[Bokchoix]

Thanks for your thoughts guys. I understand that there are hands partner might have where a game is on. But is that happening often enough that I should go fishing with an 8 count opposite a minimum opener?

I could equally propose he might have a hand like ♠xx ♥ xx ♦ KQJxxx ♣ AKx - perfectly in keeping with a rebid of 2D but which is going to be painful when I bid 2H and he takes a shot at 3NT because he figures me closer to a 10-12 count.

I guess my take-away is that while my 2H bid would be forcing, partner should not get too excited about it?

[Cyberyeti]

Bokchoix, on 2019-November-14, 13:31, said:

Thanks for your thoughts guys. I understand that there are hands partner might have where a game is on. But is that happening often enough that I should go fishing with an 8 count opposite a minimum opener?

I could equally propose he might have a hand like ♠xx ♥ xx ♦ KQJxxx ♣ AKx - perfectly in keeping with a rebid of 2D but which is going to be painful when I bid 2H and he takes a shot at 3NT because he figures me closer to a 10-12 count.

I guess my take-away is that while my 2H bid would be forcing, partner should not get too excited about it?

Depends on your agreements, if I had the ♦10 with 7 playing tricks I'd rebid 3♦ with the hand you give (and might anyway) but I don't play standard american.

[apollo1201]

Bokchoix, on 2019-November-14, 13:31, said:

Thanks for your thoughts guys. I understand that there are hands partner might have where a game is on. But is that happening often enough that I should go fishing with an 8 count opposite a minimum opener?

When opener can have up to 16, you should go « fishing » (esp. at IMPs) with a very good 8 count which is what you have: 3-cd fit with a singleton in case Majors don’t work, an A and a promising 5-cd suit headed by KJ and intermediaries. After all when partner opens 1NT and you have 8, you invite. Of course with Qxxxx Qxx Qx Qxx, pass 2D in a rush. Just a question of hand prospects judgment. Partner will not punish you for your courage by blasting game straight away.

Bokchoix, on 2019-November-14, 13:31, said:

I could equally propose he might have a hand like ♠xx ♥ xx ♦ KQJxxx ♣ AKx - perfectly in keeping with a rebid of 2D but which is going to be painful when I bid 2H and he takes a shot at 3NT because he figures me closer to a 10-12 count.

As above, if partner can have 16, you can’t move only when you have 10-12. Partner btw shouldn’t jump to 3NT with this but just 2NT maybe. 3NT should be sth like 1363 and 15-16 that was almost worth a jump to 3D but maybe with insufficient D quality. If you fear that partner gets too excited, maybe 3D is enough with your hand, partner will only move on when top range.
Furthermore, you have to agree with p if 2H is just a general force, not promising 4H or even a stopper there, or if it guarantees 54 M. When the sequence is 1C-1S-2C, things are easier but here you have less room. In all cases, a sequence with minor repeated is delicate to handle but this one is the worst (lower range respondent with 4H, opener has D) and can have ambiguity. Follow ups on what is forcing and what is not are also tricky.
Last, maybe a convention called reverse Flannery (?) could help you but it doesn’t arise that frequently and many ppl survive w/o it. You trade off responder’s jump to 2H over 1m to show 5S/4+H and depending on vuln and shape something like 3 or 5 to a bad 9. Here you would be really max for the bid. Then opener takes charge. But it has drawbacks and subtle inferences should the bidding start 1m 1S 1NT.

[mycroft]

In American standard bidding (with or without 2/1 GF) intermediate strength hands are hard to bid. With a jump-shift showing a unilateral GF, and a simple [non-reverse] new-suit not being forcing, (and 1♦-1x; 3♦ being "passable, but I really don't want you to", and taking away any room you had had to find non-diamond fits), there are a lot of hands in the 15-17 range that are difficult. Among other reasons, this is why the modern tendency to "if possibly 1NT, then 1NT", even with odd shapes like 2=4=5=2 and 3=2=6=2 (and 3=5=3=2 as well) - just to get them out of the hands you have to find a rebid for.

One of the consequences of this is that 1m-1x; 2m is not necessarily "a minimum opener"; it's a "minimum or medium". One of the things I have difficulty training my students is that you have to cater to the "medium", in case that's what I have. Yes, it will cost you when partner really is minimum, but:

• is that really worth missing game when partner isn't?
  
• when you have a diamond fit, what's the chance you'll get to play 2m, or will you be pushed to 3 anyway?
  
• when you don't have a diamond fit, what's the chance that 2M on the 5-2 plays as well as 2m on the 6-1 (or even the 6-2)?

So, with this hand I bid. I'm fine if there is no major fit, as we should be good in 3♦ on the 9-carder. If partner has the 1=4=5=3 minimum that this was "best lie" on, well, 2♥ is better. If partner has 3 spades, great. If partner has 2 spades, still pretty good. And if partner has the 1=3=6=3 16-count, 3NT is probably Just Fine, Thank You.

As others have said, this isn't really "an 8-count". It's an Ace and a King, in long suits, and the spades are potentially runnable 1-loser opposite Qx; even Tx is fine if there's a way to your hand (either playing in spades or heart cards in opener). Even the hearts, while "ace-empty", have nice spots (as opposed to even A853). And you have really nice support for running partner's diamonds, including the T. This hand started out as a "really nice 8-count" and hasn't lost much if any value in the auction.

Do note that partner will likely not have both 4 hearts and 16-17; with that hand he usually rebids 2♥.

[nige1]

Bokchoix writes 'Playing Matchpoints, Standard American bidding, '
######################################
I rank
1. 2♥ An attempt to improve the strain that keeps game prospects alive. For most partnerships 2♥ is F1 (forcing for 1 round), so advertises some values.
2. Pass. Unilateral view but a reasonable gamble. At Matchpoints, plus scores are golden.
3. 3♦. Natural and constructive but might miss a ♥ fit.
4. Don't jump to 3♥. It would be GF (game-forcing). Hence a gross overbid. Some partnerships further agree that it is artificial, showing a ♦ fit and a ♥ shortage (splinter).

---

[helene_t]

Partner has max 15, and some 15-counts would have rebid 3♦ or opened 1NT. So usually 11-14. He may have raised with three spades but could easily have four hearts.

2♥ is not unreasonable as we could have a 4♥ contract on a good day, but it does carry the risk that partner gets too enthousiast with 14 points and a club stopper.

[wuudturner]

Compare two hands:

Hand #1
KJ986
A873
T52
8

Hand #2
KJ986
A873
8
T52

In both cases, the bidding has started

1♢ - 1♠
2♢ - ???

Which hand do you like in context of the bidding? In hand #1, you know about a probable 9 card diamond fit. Even in an extreme case, partner has 5 cards. Perhaps they have 1453 shape, and insufficient values to reverse in to hearts. If not, then with say 2353 shape, a 1NT rebid would be common. Otherwise, partner will usually have 6 diamonds for the diamond rebid.

So which hand do you want to go off adventuring on? Hand #1 has some promise, and a safe place to land, in 3♢. So you can happily rebid 2♡ there, just in case partner has the perfect hand.

On hand #2, you are now sitting in a safe place to play, in 2♢. There is no happy place to land if partner has a shape like 1363. So bidding on with 2♡ on hand #2 is too risky.