[kayin801]

I was East.

Scoring: IMP

1♠-2♣
2♠-2NT
3NT-4♣
4♠-AP

1♠ limited to 15

---

So it's my fault IMO, but admittedly I have trouble with hands like these. Can anyone suggest an auction to get to at least SIX? (1S-2C-2S-3C-3D-3S-4S-4NT etc maybe?)

I bid 2NT over 3C cause I thought it would help us get to NT more easily when it's right. That having been said, I bid on anyway, so so much for that idea. I guess I'm just trying to imagine partner's decision when they hold AQJxx, xxx, QJx, Qx and I bid 3C.

[Fluffy]

2♣ is GF I guess, I blame west for not bidding 3♠ over 2NT, his and is highly suit oriented with all the honnors in the black suits. If 2♣ promised 5 even 3♣ is reasonable.

[quiddity]

It's a bit comical that both partners preferred to bid NT rather than show HHTxxx.

[kenrexford]

With great fear...

I happen to have a very strong attachment to the idea of supporting with support. Maybe too much, but it serves me well.

In the specific auction 1♠-P-2♣, where 2♣ is GF, Opener will almost always have six spades when he rebids 2♠. With only five spades, and fewer than four hearts 9can't rebid 2♥), Opener will have at least five cards in the minors. If we also eliminate hands where Opener would raise clubs, Opener will have at least two diamonds (and only then with 5323 and a hand where for some reason 3♣ seems wrong).

With some balanced hands with 5323 or 5332 (hands with only three diamonds), many would open 1NT, leaving you with 5332 hands with 11-14 or 18-19. If a 2NT rebid seems wrong for some reason, I think that purification of the sixth spade is so important that Opener should be allowed to bid an occasional 2♦ with possibly short diamonds (3, or very rare 2).

That approach means that 1♠-P-2♣-p-2♠ promises six spades.

If you then support with support (sure -- might be wrong on some hands. But, showing support seems to pay off more in the long run, to me), the start of this auction is:

1♠-P-2♣-P-
2♠-P-3♠

The benefit on this hand to a support-with-support approach is obvious. Opener makes a courtesy cue of 4♣. Playing serious 3NT, 4♣ denies serious interest but shows a club cue. whether you cue the ace only, or any top honor, the club courtesy cue is just what Responder needs to hear. He can now see that his club suit is a likely trick source, and the two aces seem fabulous. 4NT should answer the remaining questions. Yep -- two with the Queen.

[mike777]

kayin801, on Feb 24 2010, 05:10 PM, said:

I was East.

Scoring: IMP

1♠-2♣
2♠-2NT
3NT-4♣
4♠-AP

1♠ limited to 15

---

So it's my fault IMO, but admittedly I have trouble with hands like these. Can anyone suggest an auction to get to at least SIX? (1S-2C-2S-3C-3D-3S-4S-4NT etc maybe?)

I bid 2NT over 3C cause I thought it would help us get to NT more easily when it's right. That having been said, I bid on anyway, so so much for that idea. I guess I'm just trying to imagine partner's decision when they hold AQJxx, xxx, QJx, Qx and I bid 3C.

does 2s promise 6 if so east has an easy 3s slam try?

1s=2c
2s (6)=3s(slam try in spades)
4c(cue)=4nt etc...


If 2s shows only 5 is 3c 100% game force?

In any event these deals need to be easy really easy in your partnership if you play 2/1....this hand is what 2/1 game force is all about.

[jdonn]

Love the 2NT bid. West should bid 3♠ over that. You will cuebid over that but the rest depends on style and slam will still probably be missed due to general lack of values.

[the hog]

I like the bidding through 2NT; over 2NT west should bid 3S as the 2S bid certainly did not promise 6S. Now a 4D cue might get you there.

[rogerclee]

I hate the 3N and 4C bids. That said, I wouldn't have done any better.

[jdonn]

Hmm I like the 4♣ bid at the time it was made. Partner almost always has a doubleton club and with all these controls and the key ten of clubs, 6♣ could be a good contract.

[Fluffy]

at the point 4♠ was made, it could make sense to be a cuebid

[mcphee]

I happen to be one of those bozos who like to raise when it is sensible. For example, if partner bids 2C over 1S and I hold 3 cards and no other color I raise showing no extra values. The rebid of 2S strongly suggests 6, although 5 is possible if a 2NT rebid is not the best continuation.

On the bidding shown I would have raised to 5C having felt I contributed a fine description of what I had. I think the E player should have raised S rather than bid 4C. I Do not understand the need to suggest 3NT as a place to play with the E hand, in fact consider it foolish.

[hanp]

I agree that 1S, 2C, 2S and 2NT were good and 3NT was bad. Obviously this depends greatly on agreements, I'm assuming that 2S did not promise 6.

I agree with Rexford (hope I am not paraphrasing) that using 1S - 2C- 2S as a catch-all is a huge waste of space.

[PhantomSac]

I agree with 2N assuming you play a style where 2S does not show 6, otherwise I'd raise spades (obv).

I wonder if people like 3C or 3S over 2N, and if that's impacted by how natural 2C was (for instance if 2C is your bid with 2443 or 3433). If 2C showed real clubs then 3C seems pretty obvious at that point. Even if 2C could be a random balanced hand 3C might be the best bid as it pinpoints your values and saves some space, though obviously the missing 3rd club could cost you. Bidding 3S would be reasonable/normal of course, and of course 3N is not good.

Interestingly bidding 3C will probably lead you to 6C which is greatly inferior to spades even though them both a 6-2, so I'm sure nobody would do that when seeing both hands

Maybe west thought he had shown 6 with 2S, and east hadn't, either that or one of them made a pretty terrible choice.

Also, rebidding 3C would have gotten west to appreciate his hand a lot more, but it might also lead to 6C which is pretty terrible.

What about the auction 1S 2C 2S 2N 3S 4C, is that coming in spades or could it just be a slammish 1336? If east could use that auction as a cue west could bid 5C imo. However if it could be like 1336 18 then east would probably have to bid 4D. Again if 2C had shown real clubs I think west could do something here, but if 2C could have been a random balanced hand, west cannot really last train even with 2+Q. Overall this would be a gain for a style where 2C shows clubs (eg if 1M 2N was nat), but personally I dislike that style.

As noted it would also be a gain for a style where 2S showed 6, so east could set trumps and west could cuebid clubs, ez game.

[jdonn]

Even if 2♠ shows 6 I think a direct raise should still show 3 and this hand should bid 2NT. You could distinguish between 2 and 3 card support and you could find a 6-3 club fit. But I have to admit it's just how it seems to me since I don't have any experience playing the rebid promises 6 (I use something more like transfers to not waste the bids here).

[PhantomSac]

jdonn, on Feb 25 2010, 11:42 AM, said:

Even if 2♠ shows 6 I think a direct raise should still show 3 and this hand should bid 2NT. You could distinguish between 2 and 3 card support and you could find a 6-3 club fit. But I have to admit it's just how it seems to me since I don't have any experience playing the rebid promises 6 (I use something more like transfers to not waste the bids here).

But that's not what MECKWELL do, oh blasphemous one! Haha just kidding I also have never played 2S shows 6 but it seems like setting trumps as soon as you have a known fit is better than differentiating between 2 and 3 card raises.

[whereagles]

I take it 2♠ could be made on a min 5332. If so, it's not easy to bid 6, let alone 7.

[gnasher]

I'm puzzled. 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?

If 2♣ doesn't promise real clubs, this would be a possible auction:
1♠-2♣
2♠-3♣
4♣-4♦
4♠-5NT (cue / pick-a-slam)
6♠

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

[PhantomSac]

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.

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

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.

[aguahombre]

gnasher, on Feb 25 2010, 11:04 AM, said:

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

Everything except the "maybe".
This auction doesn't even require the 2S rebid to have shown six or the 2NT call to be anything other than a temporizing action. 4S/3S confirms the 6-2 fit, and the earlier 3C, pretty much described everything useful about opener's hand.

edit: for Phantom, I guess I was influenced by the ability to raise clubs on the second round with nice 3-card support.

[kenrexford]

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.