[jillybean]

Dealer: North Vul: NS Scoring: IMP

♠ K4 ♥ KT9653 ♦ 84 ♣ A94

West North East South

 -     1♦    Pass  1♥
 Pass  1♠    Pass  ?

What do you bid here and WHY please

[inquiry]

If you play xyz, you rebid 2♣ and over partners 2♦ forced bid, you bid an invitational 2♥. I suspect you don't play xyz or you would not ask.

if you play weak jump shifts, then you can bid 2♥. Partner will know you have a lot of them, and not a weak hand.

if you play strong jump shifts, 2♥ i would still bid only 2♥. If partner doesn't fit hearts this hand is not so good. I really really would bid 2♥ if partner tends to raise 1♥ to 2♥ on three card support.

Note, i admit 2♥ is a tad underbid, but i am not happy with my suits that partner bid, but my heart intermediates (T9) pull on me to bid 3♥, but i will avoid the temptation.

[mike777]

jillybean2, on Aug 24 2008, 08:53 PM, said:

Dealer: North Vul: NS Scoring: IMP

♠ K4 ♥ KT9653 ♦ 84 ♣ A94

West  North East  South

 -     1♦    Pass  1♥
 Pass  1♠    Pass  ?

What do you bid here and WHY please

easy 2h if we open lightish
easy 3h if we open Sound.

I just think alot of these problem rebids reflect what you open on in first and second seat.

[the hog]

Agree with Ben, but it is very close to a 3H bid.

[jtfanclub]

mike777, on Aug 24 2008, 09:48 PM, said:

easy 2h if we open lightish
easy 3h if we open Sound.

I just think alot of these problem rebids reflect what you open on in first and second seat.

I think it's only worth a 2♥ bid.

As opener, I tend not to pass my partner's rebid when I have 15+ and short hearts or 12-14 and some heart support. I'm allowed to look at the scoring and vulnerability too. I think it's much easier to have responder bid low and have opener push the bidding one higher with extra count or a fit.

But, yeah, it's close.

[655321]

Seems a normal enough 3♥ bid to me.

We have a decent 6 card heart suit, in a hand almost worth an opening bid. 3♥ describes the hand well - perhaps the ideal hand would have slightly better hearts. 2♥ does not get the strength of the hand across.

My second choice is 2NT.   2NT is OK on values, but might wrongside notrumps, and is also a bit misdescriptive with just Axx in the unbid suit..

[cherdano]

Agree with 3♥.

[rogerclee]

655321, on Aug 24 2008, 10:17 PM, said:

Seems a normal enough 3♥ bid to me.

We have a decent 6 card heart suit, in a hand almost worth an opening bid.  3♥ describes the hand well - perhaps the ideal hand would have slightly better hearts. 2♥ does not get the strength of the hand across.

My second choice is 2NT.   2NT is OK on values, but might wrongside notrumps, and is also a bit misdescriptive with just Axx in the unbid suit..

I agree that with the heart spots, it seems like a normal enough 3♥ bid.

I don't like 2NT though.

[mr1303]

If partner has a normal opening hand with a small singleton heart, game is not looking remotely good unless partner has significant extra values.

That is what tends me to look towards 2H rather than 3.

[plaur]

Im just a beginner, but would surely bid 3♥. It shows 10-12 and 6 hearts. I have that. I also have it controlcards only(AKK). No quacks. The T9 of hearts is an added bonus.

[brianshark]

Well I'm going to bid 3♥. I think it's good enough because you have a nice 11 count, 4 controls, 7 loser hand, potential source of tricks, etc. The ♥ suit is not great, but I think over-valuing the quality of the ♥ suit is a smaller less-likely-to-cost lie than undervaluing the strength of the hand. At imps, it pays to be optimistic. 3♥-1 when 2 was the limit is less costly than 2♥+2 when game can make.

This is assuming you don't play funny gadgets, weak jumps, etc.

[Walddk]

Assuming you don't play weak jump shifts where 1♥ followed by 2♥ is invitational with six cards, this is indeed a problem hand. While the hand has invitational values, it is also true that the suit is a little too weak to emphasize hearts.

I don't think 3♥ is a gross overbid, but I will go for the more conservative 2♥. Everyone seems to upgrade nowadays; I would like to downgrade here because of the weakish suit and the fact that I only have 3 of my 10 hcp in partner's suits.

Roland

[mike777]

If you open all balanced 11-12 hcp hands in first seat, why get too high 2h is enough.

If you pass balanced 11-12 hcp hands in first seat, easy 3H rebid.

[kenrexford]

I like invitational jump shifts for this problem. Hence, I would have jumped to 2♥ as my first call. Kind of the tails for WJS.

[P_Marlowe]

3H, the book bid, wtp?

You have 6 hearts (a single suited hand)
and an inv. hand, show it, and the way to
do it in standard is to make a jump rebid.

Regarding downgrading this hand, well you can
of cizrse, but I would say, that holding Kings and
Aces is not a holding which points toward
downgrading, even if this values are contained in
your long suits.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: If you have problems with the bid, due to the
poor suit quality, you may understand, why some
partnerships have agreed to play (constr.) weak
jump shifts, which would allow them to make a 2H
rebid, which would show this hand.
But if you dont play this agreement you have to go
with 3H.

[skjaeran]

Playing weak jump shifts and pretty light openings, this is an easy 2♥ rebid for me.

Playing without gadgets and with a slightly sounder opening style, this is very close to a 3♥ rebid. But to me the heart suit is a tad weak for that. The nice controls weighs up something for this. I'd normally stay conservative here, and only rebid 2♥, but I can stand 3♥ too.

[Lobowolf]

jillybean2, on Aug 24 2008, 08:53 PM, said:

Dealer: North Vul: NS Scoring: IMP

♠ K4 ♥ KT9653 ♦ 84 ♣ A94

West  North East  South

 -     1♦    Pass  1♥
 Pass  1♠    Pass  ?

What do you bid here and WHY please

♥I'd bid 3H, for a couple of reasons.

1. Even though it's on the bubble, losing trick count evaluation suggests an upgrade -- it's a 7-loser hand, which is usually the equivalent of an opening hand.

2. Jeff Rubens' "In and Out" valuation also suggests a mild upgrade - the ace in the unbid suit, and the king in partner's suit is worth more than if the ♣A and ♠K were reversed. The ace is a trick regardless; the king needs help (granted, less help than a queen would). Since partner bid spades, it's probably getting that help.

3. It's IMPs; I'm going to err on the side of the overbid.


The obvious danger is getting too high, but perhaps an even bigger danger on this hand is getting to the wrong game, i.e. 4♥ going down when 3NT makes. -100 against 140 is one thing; -100 against 600 is something else entirely. For that reason, on THIS hand (even though I don't like it in general), I wish I were playing 4th suit forcing 1 round, instead of to game. Might get to 3NT by partner, with his (hoped-for) Qxx of clubs protected and giving us 2 club stoppers for a making 9-trick game when you can't get ten tricks in the 6-2 fit with such ratty hearts.

Since 3♣ would be game forcing, though, I'll take a 3♥ call. It's easier to explain (and recover from) -100 against 140 than 170 against 620.

[mikeh]

I don't think this is a problem to get too worked up over: 3♥ is an overbid by about the same amount as 2♥ is an underbid...ok, maybe a trifle more.

Style matters, and not just whether one plays weak jumpshifts... the range for the wjs also matters... I gather that there are some who jumpshift with as many as 8 hcp... for them, 2♥ should be routine, and not the least bit an underbid. For others, 2♥ may be, say, 3-6, and now the 2♥ rebid range begins at 7, and we are definitely very strong for the call.

And there is another fundamental issue. I expect most B/I players (and most others as well) bid up the line with 1♠... maybe it denies (for some) 4=3=3=3, but could still be balanced. If, otoh, you play a style in which 1♠ promises at least 9 black cards (clubs longer than spades, or even the unpopular variant of 1♣ then 1♠ on 5=5 hands), the 1♠ rebid is more likely (than if one played up the line) to include short hearts, thus arguing in favour of the conservative 2♥ rebid.

So a lot of possible factors to weigh, but, at the end of the day, not a particularly clear solution. But I think there is more to win by aiming low than there is by pushing, especially with an indifferent suit.

[pclayton]

skaeran, on Aug 25 2008, 10:26 AM, said:

Playing weak jump shifts and pretty light openings, this is an easy 2♥ rebid for me.

Playing without gadgets and with a slightly sounder opening style, this is very close to a 3♥ rebid. But to me the heart suit is a tad weak for that. The nice controls weighs up something for this. I'd normally stay conservative here, and only rebid 2♥, but I can stand 3♥ too.

I'm with Harald here. If I'm playing WJS, this is a very easy 2♥ call.

Even then, my partners will very often raise with three trump, even holding 4♠'s, so the allure of a 6-3 fit is very diminished. Quite frequently we will bypass spades with a 4=3=3=3 hand as well and bid 1N.

Pard can still raise 2 to 3, and I expect a lot of 4=2=2=5's and bigger 4315's to do so. 3♥ seems to cater to a 4=2=3=4 / 4=2=2=5 that won't move over 2, but those hands seem few and far between.

OTOH, there are plenty of outright misfits that we can't wriggle out of after 3♥. Imagine pard with a 4=1=2=6 or 4=0=2=7. If he really supposed to bid 4♣ over 3♥?

[Lobowolf]

mikeh, on Aug 25 2008, 01:46 PM, said:

So a lot of possible factors to weigh, but, at the end of the day, not a particularly clear solution. But I think there is more to win by aiming low than there is by pushing, especially with an indifferent suit.

I agree that it's a close call, but strictly speaking, there's "more to win" (a vulnerable game bonus at IMPs) by aiming high (though, granted, it might be less likely to win). Didn't know whether you missed the scoring conditions, or they just weren't enough to sway you.