[PhantomSac]

kenrexford, on Feb 25 2010, 01:18 PM, said:

Just a thought. I have my own ideas on how this sequence would go using my own preferred methods. But, other basic methods are perfectly useable.

It seems that perhaps for some alternative approaches, one option would be a snapdraggon-style jump:

1♠-P-2♣-P-
2♠-P-4♣

If this 4♣ call has no particular (or important) meaning, then for some of you it might be worth considering using this call to show real clubs, spade "support" (in the form of a doubleton, perhaps support or perhaps not), and slam interest.

And over that 4D shows a slam try in spades (enabling last train), and 4H shows a slam try in clubs (enabling 4S keycard, 4N last train), 4N keycard in clubs (lest partner preempt you over 4H with a 5C bid), keycard in spades always starts 4D. Seems pretty obv

[kayin801]

Thanks for the input all. As most of you figured out, we play that 2C doesn't promise real clubs (2+) and is GF, and that the 2S rebid only promised 5, though if it doesn't have 6+ it's a min balanced hand with values concentrated in the blacks. We sort of discussed that in this auction opener has denied 4 cards in any other suit, though they could potentially have a weak 4 card diamond suit if their spades were good?

I like what kenrexford suggested in his last post, minus the jumping to the 4 level part. It could work, probably more so in 2/1, but I'm not sure how much sense it makes in big club to put opener in charge when they're limited in strength and to basically two different hand shapes.

Maybe opener can spell out their hand in an auction like this:
1M-2♣
2M-2NT
now 3 o/M shows the kind of hand opener had. Presumably if opener had hearts responder could rebid spades after the heart rebid if they had 4 (or opener could bid them, with precision the reverse doesn't carry as much weight), and if opener opened spades, unless the hearts were really really bad compared to the spades they'd bid 2♥ over 2♣. I guess the latter maybe runs into trouble when responder holds something like x, AKQx, KQxx, Kxxx and opener is 54 or 64... I might be getting too specific at this point though

The specific auctions would then be 1♥-2♣-2♥-2NT-3♠ and 1♠-2♣-2♠-2NT-3♥ and making responder fully captain at this point. Presumably responder has shown willingness to play in NT so with the crappy min balanced hand opener can just raise 2NT. This also lets us reserve bidding the major a 3rd time for an exceptional 6 card suit (not that AQ10xxx is anything to sneeze at) or a 7-bagger. Opener could also show 3 card club support if they wanted. Maybe it seems weird to create an auction for exactly this hand for opener, but I feel like this kind of opening hand isn't so rare that it wouldn't be useful.

[gnasher]

PhantomSac, on Feb 25 2010, 07:14 PM, said:

gnasher, on Feb 25 2010, 01:04 PM, said:

If 2♣ promises real clubs, maybe:
1♠-2♣
2♠-2NT
3♣-3♠
4♠-4NT
5♠-6♠

Seems like you just got to 6S opposite AQT8x xx Jxx Axx? Or are you implying this hand would raise to 3C if 2C promised clubs.

This is what opener has said about his hand:
- Spades
- More spades
- Something in clubs
- Spades
All of this with a 5332 shape, opposite a hand that bid notrumps at it's second opportunity? If you're not going to rebid 2NT, and you're not going to raise 2NT to 3NT, you really have to bid 3NT over 3♠.

Quote

You also will miss 7C opposite AJxxxx xx xx AQx because you agreed spades and not clubs.

True, though I could live with missing 7♣ if I were in 6♣ instead. A more serious problem is that I get to 6♠ rather than 6♣. Maybe my responder should bid 5NT over 4♠.

Quote

Quote

I can understand the benefits of bidding 1♠-2♣ on a 2443 shape, but if you're playing that style, surely you shouldn't bid 1♠-2♣;2♠-2NT on both a 2443 and a 2326?

I don't know why this is surely the case. You don't show your clubs immediately because you think it's more important to bid NT because you have both suits stopped and are relatively balanced and leave some more room for partner. Bidding NT then 4C over 3N will describe your hand almost perfectly. If partner shows 6 spades partner shows 6 spades, you can show spade support and start cuebidding.

I guess the point is partner never knows about your source of tricks, which is the source of a lot of problems on this hand. Still I don't see why its logically inconsistent to focus on the other features of your hand.

If I had to describe the responding hand in one word, I'd choose "clubs" rather than "balanced". If you can always show clubs after bidding 2NT, your approach sounds OK, but it would be unwise to risk following a route where you might have to suppress the clubs.

Is there a risk of that? For example, is
  1♠-2♣
  2♠-2NT
  3♠-4♣
a suit?

[hanp]

Is there a risk of that? For example, is
1♠-2♣
2♠-2NT
3♠-4♣
a suit?

Why is this a risk, on this auction you will want to play in spades?

[gnasher]

hanp, on Feb 26 2010, 11:35 AM, said:

Is there a risk of that? For example, is
1♠-2♣
2♠-2NT
3♠-4♣
a suit?

Why is this a risk, on this auction you will want to play in spades?

Not necessarily. I want to play in clubs opposite AJxxxxx x Kxx Qx or AJ10xxx x Kxx Qxx or AJxxxxx xx Kx AQ.

[Fluffy]

the second one looks like a 3♣ rebid, third one maybe also given that you can bid 4♠ over 3NT.

[gnasher]

Fluffy, on Feb 26 2010, 01:26 PM, said:

the second one looks like a 3♣ rebid, third one maybe also given that you can bid 4♠ over 3NT.

We're talking about a style where 1♠-2♣ doesn't promise club length, so 1♠-2♣;2♠-2NT might be on a 2443 shape. Why, in that style, would opener bid 3♣ on Qxx or AQ?

This seems really weird to me. The hand with KJ10xxx suppresses his suit, so the other hand has to bid a strong doubleton to make up for it?

[Fluffy]

ah well, if that's the style I think 2NT rebid is plain wrong. Ranging the club suits from 2NT, 3♣ and 4♣ it is pretty clear IMO that this one belongs to the 3♣ zone.

[jdonn]

gnasher, on Feb 26 2010, 04:51 AM, said:

If I had to describe the responding hand in one word, I'd choose "clubs" rather than "balanced".  If you can always show clubs after bidding 2NT, your approach sounds OK, but it would be unwise to risk following a route where you might have to suppress the clubs.

Is there a risk of that?  For example, is
  1♠-2♣
  2♠-2NT
  3♠-4♣
a suit?

Frankly this sounds to me like the type of criticism of the method that is only made by people who haven't played it.

I would think of it this way. Responder's 2NT rebid says "balanced, or semi-balanced with clubs." (surely that second message is a better message than either just "clubs" or just "balanced"). Then over 2NT a 3♣ bid by opener would say "interested in clubs opposite semi-balanced with clubs." If opener doesn't do that then responder has little or no need to announce which hand type he was on.

[gnasher]

Is opener allowed to be "interested in clubs opposite balanced"? That is, can he be 5-4, 6-4 or 5-5?

[Jlall]

gnasher, on Feb 26 2010, 04:51 AM, said:

All of this with a 5332 shape, opposite a hand that bid notrumps at it's second opportunity?  If you're not going to rebid 2NT, and you're not going to raise 2NT to 3NT, you really have to bid 3NT over 3♠.

I see what you're saying, but with 5 good spades and concentrated values/ not much in the reds it seems reasonable to me to choose the 5-2 spade fit. Maybe you're right though, 5332 is 5332 heh.

I disagree with your characterization of 2S as "more spades" though, in my style I would bid 2S even with QTxxx Axx xx AQx, so 2S doesn't say much about spades to me at that point.

I would say I've shown spades, then no side 4 card suit/not both red suits stopped if 5332, then clubs. At that point, with 5 very good spades and a suit oriented hand, I might choose spades.

[kenrexford]

Is there something to be said for practicality?

I mean, if a call usually shows six spades, and if a raise could be made with two spades, then consider

1♠-P-2♣-p-
2♠-p-3♠

Let's say that 2♠ almost always shows six, and that 3♠ could be 2+. If this agrees spades, as a practical matter, and if occasionally that means playing 4♠ on a 5-2 fit, is that risk (and the likelihood of that risk) more important to avoid than the benefit of being able to raise spades immediately and thereby have intelligent auctions, where the fit usually exists anyway, even if one side is not really sure?

All these strange auctions and decisions to avoid the risk of a 5-2 fit and to cater for this that and the other sounds like a bunch of nonsense to me. This is why I personally make a 2♦ call as a waiting call, because I can live with the much-more-rare situation where Responder goes berzerk in diamonds after bidding clubs first. But I'd rather do the practical raise opposite possibly five than the bid clubs and waiting 2NT and flags and weasels approach.

[ONEferBRID]

I think I may be improving -- or ??
Lately, I've been understanding Ken's posts ...and they make sense !

[Fluffy]

ONEferBRID, on Feb 26 2010, 11:45 PM, said:

I think I may be improving -- or ??
Lately, I've been understanding Ken's posts ...and they make sense !

I feel sorry for you lol, and I think Ken also

[helene_t]

I really don't like the idea of bidding 3♠ over 2NT. Doing so should show a suit that play excellently opposite a singleton and not too pathetically opposite a void.

The 2♠ bid must be very specific as it takes up a lot of space. Even playing Acol with partners who force me never to open 1NT with a 5cM I would never make this 2♠ bid on a 5-card suit. Bidding 2♦ on a doubleton I would consider a smaller lie. In 2/1 there is even less of an excuse for bidding 2♠ on a 5-card suit as 2NT and 3♣ are also available for balanced minimums.

I think Easts 2NT is OK. Don't feel strongly about it.

West might have bid 3♣ over 2NT but I think that is somewhat contrived. West should probably have shown club support after 4♣. If 5♣ is the only way of doing so I can somewhat understand the 4♠ bid. I think we need 4♦ as a generic club raise here, or alternatively play 4NT/5♣ as Turbo.