[helene_t]

I'm sure there are a lot of good reasons for not playing 2NT as 18-19 bal. But that's the system you agreed to play and then you have to stick to it. If you suddenly realize that the system sucks and it would be better to play 2NT as some artificial bid so that the 18-19 bal would have to fake some other bid (or open 1NT or 2♦ or whatever) then please save that discussion for the system discussion session. Don't invent new systems at the table.

[whereagles]

I used to bid 1♠ with these hands, but now I bypass that all the time ^^

[skjaeran]

Non-brainer 2NT. The 2NT rebid show 18-19 balanced. That's what I've got.

2♠ is a jump reverse. GF with an unbalanced hand. This hand doesn't fit that description.

I play 1♠ as forcing here (in principle, there are hands where partner will pass and be right). I might have a 4225/4xy6 hand not strong enough to GF or a 3-suiter. (Or a minimum hand with 4♠ of course.)

[jtfanclub]

jdonn, on May 19 2007, 02:35 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

P P 1♣ P
1♥ P ?

---

All comments welcome

So, I was directing a face-to-face game a couple of weeks ago.

I was called to the table when the bidding had gone...

1♣-P-P.

Five seconds after the last pass was played, the LOL playing there said "Oh! I didn't see my partner's bid. May I change my call"? The opponents said no, and since it wasn't a case of pulling the wrong card or an immediate change, she wasn't allowed to change it.

So, the last guy passes, and his partner led. Dummy puts down....

Txxx
Q7xx
8xxx
x

and she honestly did not understand why the rest of us cracked up.

I'm not saying that I hate the 2NT call, or that I wouldn't use it if there wasn't some other legal bid available, but when I have two choices to describe my hand:

1) One bid uses up next to no space, allows partner to get out low when he was just kidding, but doesn't descibe much about my hand.

2) The other bid uses up a lot of space, describes my hand very accurately, but puts us way too high when partner bid on crap.

I would bid 1♠, but that's because I mostly play SA with LOLs who respond to 1♣ with hands not much better than the one I mentioned. If I was playing a pickup game with a professional bridge player, can I safely assume partner's got a 6 count for his 1♥ bid?

[mikeh]

Fluffy, on May 20 2007, 12:11 AM, said:

mike777, on May 19 2007, 09:03 PM, said:

The hand type he is worried about was:

Kxxx....xxxxx..xx...Qx

Assume opener may or may not have 4 card spade suit and 18-19 hcp.

Who cares about that?, 2NT is forcing anyway, we will find the spade fit later

2N is not even remotely forcing in standard methods. It shows a balanced 18-19, and will often be based on a great 17. Since most good players respond to 1♣ on decent 5 counts (or less), playing 2N as a force is silly.

[hotShot]

helene_t, on May 20 2007, 09:25 AM, said:

I'm sure there are a lot of good reasons for not playing 2NT as 18-19 bal. But that's the system you agreed to play and then you have to stick to it. If you suddenly realize that the system sucks and it would be better to play 2NT as some artificial bid so that the 18-19 bal would have to fake some other bid (or open 1NT or 2♦ or whatever) then please save that discussion for the system discussion session. Don't invent new systems at the table.

Well said!

[inquiry]

Well, in several of my partnerships, 2NT by opener here shows heart support (4+) and strong game try or even game forcing. In those partnerships I can not bid 2NT. Playing 2/1 without that 2NT agreement, then I would bid 2NT with this hand.

When playing the 2NT bid as forcing raise of responders major, then I will bid 1♠ with this hand. I would never jump to 2♠, as that would promise 5+♣'s which I seem to lack, as well as spades.