[CSGibson]

Scoring: MP

P-(P)-1♣-(1♦),
1♥-(2♦)-?

---

Playing 2/1 with an advanced partner, agreements include support doubles. Hidden follow-up:

Spoiler

If you bid 3♦, partner will bid 4♣. If you bid 2♠, partner will bid 2N as an attempt to sign off somewhere at the 3 level.

[gnasher]

2♠. Even if I wanted to force to game, it's better to start with 2♠, because that allows for both finding a spade fit and finding a diamond stop.

When partner bids 2NT, I'll go quietly with 3♣. We have lots of high cards but not many tricks, and he's quite likely to have a low doubleton diamond.

[benlessard]

Agree with 2S, It tend to suggest a more unbalanced hand but here 4S in 43 fit is possible. Also 5C seems a long way home.

[pooltuna]

2♠ looks like the best lie

[Codo]

I think about passing. Partner did not double, so we may have no fit anywhere.

If this is passed around to him, he may repeat a six card heart suit in which case I will try to find a making game.

But if he passes (most likely case), I hope that my defence is good enough to beat 2 ♦ while there is no security that any possible is found if I bid now.

I think about a 3532 as quite a likely possibility if partner cannot act over 2♦.

[hanp]

gnasher, on Sep 6 2010, 03:31 AM, said:

2♠. Even if I wanted to force to game, it's better to start with 2♠, because that allows for both finding a spade fit and finding a diamond stop.

When partner bids 2NT, I'll go quietly with 3♣. We have lots of high cards but not many tricks, and he's quite likely to have a low doubleton diamond.

2S shows 5+ clubs right? So I have no clue why we would rebid our 4-card club suit after partner bids 2NT!

Also, 2S in competition should not promise the near game-force that an uncontested Canadian reverse promises. For example, with AKxx xx x AQJxxx I think it would be pretty strange not to bid 2S over 2D. With that hand I'd bid 2S followed by 3C in fact.

I know I'm using one of the rare times that gnasher is way off, to avoid answering the original question which is pretty nasty. I love support doubles but I hate them here.

[cherdanno]

If 2NT is an artificial bid to sign off, then I don't think 3♣ shows any more clubs than we have already shown. How else could partner sign off in clubs?

[phil_20686]

hanp, on Sep 6 2010, 10:04 AM, said:

gnasher, on Sep 6 2010, 03:31 AM, said:

2♠.  Even if I wanted to force to game, it's better to start with 2♠, because that allows for both finding a spade fit and finding a diamond stop.

When partner bids 2NT, I'll go quietly with 3♣.  We have lots of high cards but not many tricks, and he's quite likely to have a low doubleton diamond.

2S shows 5+ clubs right? So I have no clue why we would rebid our 4-card club suit after partner bids 2NT!

Also, 2S in competition should not promise the near game-force that an uncontested Canadian reverse promises. For example, with AKxx xx x AQJxxx I think it would be pretty strange not to bid 2S over 2D. With that hand I'd bid 2S followed by 3C in fact.

I know I'm using one of the rare times that gnasher is way off, to avoid answering the original question which is pretty nasty. I love support doubles but I hate them here.

Common to play lebensohl or "black out" here I think.

[aguahombre]

cherdanno, on Sep 6 2010, 09:22 AM, said:

If 2NT is an artificial bid to sign off, then I don't think 3♣ shows any more clubs than we have already shown. How else could partner sign off in clubs?

Yep. We were under pressure with 2S, so sure we might have had one more club. But that train has left the station, and in cooperation with Leben 2NT, we are not going to compound the problem with 3D and show more HCP than we have, too.

Leben is only in effect because of the interference, here. If we had freely jumped to 2S/1H, everything would be different.

[hanp]

Do I have to read hidden parts to understand a gnasher post these days?

[gszeszycki]

X

this should show extra values and is by far the most flexible. This allows p to rebid 2h with minimum (even if they have only 5) as maybe our last makeable spot.

2s should be saved for hands with unbalanced distribution. Our hand is much better on defense than offense.

responder did not neg x but chose 1h probably beacuse they dont have 4 spades or their 5+ hearts are vastly superior to their 4 tiny spades. Missing a 44 spade fit not so important since we wont have game if p is minimum. if P has some extra values they can hazard a 2s bid and then we can strongly consider 4s as a contract.

[hanp]

By the way, is 2NT here lebensohl because that's what's being played without competition? Or does the partnership use 2NT in this way because they play good/bad?