[cencio]

---

West dealer

[jillybean]

What system are you using?

Playing STD, Standard American, this is a awkward hand to bid.

PLaying 2/1 North opens 1♠, South makes a GF 2♥ bid.
There's now various methods for North to proceed, showing the 6th spade or the diamond suit.

[mw64ahw]

I'll go with the Ambra approach.

[Cyberyeti]

mw64ahw, on 2025-February-18, 15:35, said:

I'll go with the Ambra approach.

Not in N/B I wouldn't have thought.

My auction would also not be N/B suitable but only because of kickback and lead to 6♦.

[mw64ahw]

In which case just bid natural and end in 6♦/♠

[thepossum]

I can't decide if I would bid 2 spades or 3 diamonds after the GF - quite possibly 3D to show the strength of the hand
Either way we will miss spades and end in 6D most likely

[thepossum]

I can't decide if I would bid 2 spades or 3 diamonds after the GF - quite possibly 3D to show the strength of the hand
Either way we will miss spades and end in 6D most likely

Anyone out there in 6NT

[mw64ahw]

thepossum, on 2025-February-18, 16:40, said:

I can't decide if I would bid 2 spades or 3 diamonds after the GF - quite possibly 3D to show the strength of the hand
Either way we will miss spades and end in 6D most likely

Anyone out there in 6NT

2♠ or 3♦ is approach dependent for me when playing 2♥ as invitational. Natural would be 2♠, but adapting SA 2♠ is min., 2N is GF, 3m is 6x(4x) min. with this ♠ suit quality.

I wouldn't get to 6N

[mikl_plkcc]

thepossum, on 2025-February-18, 16:40, said:

I can't decide if I would bid 2 spades or 3 diamonds after the GF - quite possibly 3D to show the strength of the hand
Either way we will miss spades and end in 6D most likely

Anyone out there in 6NT

What's wrong with playing 6♦? Any methods getting you to play 6♦ are good methods.

[Cyberyeti]

mikl_plkcc, on 2025-February-19, 10:06, said:

What's wrong with playing 6♦? Any methods getting you to play 6♦ are good methods.

6♠ or 6N(S) potentially score better at matchpoints

[jdiana]

thepossum, on 2025-February-18, 16:39, said:

I can't decide if I would bid 2 spades or 3 diamonds after the GF - quite possibly 3D to show the strength of the hand
Either way we will miss spades and end in 6D most likely

Same here.

If we played 2♣ as "clubs or balanced", then 2♦ would promise 5+ cards. In that case, I'd definitely bid 3♦ but I think I'd do that either way.

[mw64ahw]

jdiana, on 2025-February-19, 10:10, said:

Same here.

If we played 2♣ as "clubs or balanced", then 2♦ would promise 5+ cards. In that case, I'd definitely bid 3♦ but I think I'd do that either way.

And what do we bid with 2353 when we have a choice?

[jdiana]

mw64ahw, on 2025-February-19, 14:46, said:

And what do we bid with 2353 when we have a choice?

My comment was completely off base here - south would bid 2♥ with that hand, so I don't know what I was thinking. I guess I was thinking about the general problem of opener having a 6-4 or 6-5 hand.

I never played 2♣ as "clubs or balanced", though I like the idea (and it seems to have caught on), so I don't have any actual experience. But, to try to answer your question, I guess it depends on my exact hand and the rest of the structure. If my points are concentrated in diamonds, then I'd probably bid 2♦. If the opening bid was 1♥ and we're 2=3=5=3, then I guess I could go either way, intending to show my heart support. If the opening bid was 1♠ and I had stoppers everywhere, I might lean toward 2♣, with 3NT in mind.

I don't know. In general, if we adopted the method described by Andrew Gumperz - https://bridgewinner...ebulous-2c-bid/ - then I think bidding 2♣ in your example would allow for the best description of each player's hand.

I'd be interested to hear from people who play 1M-2♣ this way. How do you all handle this situation? Does 2♣ deny having 5 diamonds (or 5 hearts after 1♠-2♣)? If you have 5 diamonds, do you automatically bid 2♦ rather than 2♣, or is it a judgment call?