[mcphee]

AQ643
A105
73
853

---

After you passed this hand in first seat partner opens 1H. What is your plan when the next hand passes? Do you show S and possibly hear partner raise with 3 or 4 trumps, or make a 3 card drury raise of H, or choose some other action?

Lets assume that partner opened 1H in first seat. Would you show S or elect to make a 3 card imit raise in H bidding 1NT and then 3H over partners expected low level minor rebid?

Do you treat a S bid and then 3H as 5S and 3 card limit for H when partner bids a minor next? What do you do if your partner were to raise to 2S should he happen to open in first seat?

I know how I feel about this particular hand type. I'd like to hear from the rest of the world.

[pclayton]

1♠ by either.

By an unpassed hand I plan to give a limit raise via a jump or xyz.

By an passed hand I have my choice of either getting passed out in 1♠, where 4♥ might stretch because of the double fit, i.e., : ♠Kxx ♥KQxxx ♦xxx ♣Ax. If I roll out drury, pard isn't going to know about my spade length anyway, so he can't evaluate properly. Further, any hand that passes 1♠ should also be a hand that calls itself a minimum opposite a drury response.

If the hand had a little more shape, say 5=3=1=4, I'd make a fit jump to 2♠. Normally I'd have 4 trump for this call, but the hand looks really pure in spite of only 3 trump.

Willing to listen to others here of course.

[han]

1S followed by 3H, as Phil says.

[mike777]

ditto.

[Double !]

A dissenter here:

2C rev. 3-card Drury followed by 2-spades, perhaps unless P rebids 2H: shows a fit bid with 3-trumps (vs either 2-D (rev drury 4 trumps) followed by 2S or initial 2-S response: fit bid with 4 trumps). Another bidding dinosaur bid.

This method sort of obviates the issue of whether 1S followed by a jump to 3H shows 3 trumps or what: by using rev drury, the natural of the trump fit is established as is the approximate answer of how high we are going.

BTW: I rarely play WJS: have better uses for me jump-shifts.

DHL

[Kalvan14]

From a passed hand, 2♣ (Drury) followed by 2♠ is the best approach: this hand - with the honors concentrated in the majors - is a true maximum for a passed hand (and if it were a 53[14] I'd have opened it).

From an unpassed hand, 1♠, followed by a jump to 3♥.

[adhoc3]

Kalvan14, on Jan 15 2006, 06:19 PM, said:

From a passed hand, 2♣ (Drury) followed by 2♠ is the best approach: this hand - with the honors concentrated in the majors - is a true maximum for a passed hand (and if it were a 53[14] I'd have opened it).

From an unpassed hand, 1♠, followed by a jump to 3♥.

Ditto.

The problem for me of not applying drury is that pard will always assume I have 2 Hearts only, regardless how many times I bid heart later.

[Winstonm]

Although not one of the choices, I vote for 2C Drury - the value of exactly separating 3 and 4 card support at the 2 level is of dubious merit, IMO, and the room saving of 2C makes up for the inconvenience. Over partners bid, I'll continue with 2S.

Winston

[pclayton]

Double !, on Jan 15 2006, 12:02 PM, said:

A dissenter here:

2C rev. 3-card Drury followed by 2-spades, perhaps unless P rebids 2H: shows a fit bid with 3-trumps (vs either 2-D (rev drury 4 trumps) followed by 2S or initial 2-S response: fit bid with 4 trumps). Another bidding dinosaur bid.

This method sort of obviates the issue of whether 1S followed by a jump to 3H shows 3 trumps or what: by using rev drury, the natural of the trump fit is established as is the approximate answer of how high we are going.

BTW: I rarely play WJS: have better uses for me jump-shifts.

DHL

After 1♥ - 2♣ - 2♦, I play:

2♥ - 3 trumps, no shortness
2♠ / 3♣ / 3♦ - 3 trumps and shortness
3♥ - 4 trump, no shortness
3♠ / 4♣ / 4♦ - 4 trump, shortness

I don;t think we have agreements on 2N and 3N.

[Chamaco]

I'd handle this situation just as if pard had opened 1st/2nd seat.

If pard opened light, he should be ready to pass any response: if he did open light but had no tolerance for spades, he made a bad choice, I should not plan my bidding catering for that.

Hence, if pard passes 1S, that should not be a tragedy.

Otherwise, if he rebids, he will guarantee a full pener, and I can invite just as if pard had opened 1st /2nd seat (whatever the methods used to show a 3 card limit raise)

[mr1303]

I'm going to bid drury here. If partner signs off, then that will suit me, and I won't bid again, mainly because it irritates me no-end when partners bid again in that sequence. Opposite any kind of encouraging noise (e.g. 2D playing reverse drury, I don't know what your methods are after using 2D as 3 card drury) I won't stop short of game.

[ochinko]

I bid 3♥ directly. 8 losers, almost an opening hand.

It has the drawback of not giving partner enough information whether we have 1 or 2 fits, but it also doesn't draw a map for the defenders. After 1♥ - 1♠ partner will describe his hand further, and opps will benefit twice while the gain for us is questionable at best.

[hrothgar]

This is a surprising complicated problem:

I'd like to be able to provide partner with the most accurate description of my hand. In an ideal world, I'd love to be able to have an auction like

P - 1♥
2[♣]- 2♦]
2♠

This auction allows me to clarify trump support, hand strength and show my spades at a convenient level. (Note, I agree with Winston that I prefer to bid 2♣ if I go the drury route to provide partner a bit more latitude to describe his hand. if you do want to use two separate bids for drury, you should probably use 2♣ for the common 3 card limit raise and either 2♦ or 2♠ for the 4 card limit raise)

My worry about 2♥ is that by showing a fit, I will make it more likely that the opponents enter the auction. If I supress my fit and start with a 1♠ bid, it makes it much more dangerous for the opponents to show their minor. Paradoxically, supressing information from the get go might permit a more efficient exchange...

Mark me down for 1♠

[Al_U_Card]

I play the F-bomb so this one is easy. Since my 1S guarantees 5+ (pard will not usually have 4) I can cater to his 1NT with 2H showing up to 10 hcp as a passed hand. Interesting that the hand has 8 losers for either major suit so If pard did not use the F-bomb or bid 2H then he is very likely to have a good hand and he will make a move that I will take to game.

[Fluffy]

I would just use drury.

[mcphee]

I was quite surprised with the amount of players who elected to bid 1S rather than choose the simple 3 card drury option. The intention seems to be they are willing to push partner to the 3 level when they may have opened a minimum hand, at times even with 4 good H, possible KQJx to suggest a lead.

Some of the responders suggest that partner may not pass 1S, a bid that is not really 100% F from a passed hand, although many of us would hope partner bids again.

The most important feature about this hand after a 3rd seat opening is the "3 card limit raise" values for H and I feel very strongly this is the point you want to make to your partner. Bidding S is far over rated in MHO. If it is a simple 2 level hand where you may scramble to make 8 tricks, and be life and death to do so some days, what is the rush to play at the 3 level? Why is failing to TELL partner what you have within the methods in play such a bad thing? Isn't this the reason why Drury is effective?

[flytoox]

mcphee, on Jan 17 2006, 05:57 PM, said:

I was quite surprised with the amount of players who elected to bid 1S rather than choose the simple 3 card drury option. The intention seems to be they are willing to push partner to the 3 level when they may have opened a minimum hand, at times even with 4 good H, possible KQJx to suggest a lead.

Some of the responders suggest that partner may not pass 1S, a bid that is not really 100% F from a passed hand, although many of us would hope partner bids again.

The most important feature about this hand after a 3rd seat opening is the "3 card limit raise" values for H and I feel very strongly this is the point you want to make to your partner. Bidding S is far over rated in MHO. If it is a simple 2 level hand where you may scramble to make 8 tricks, and be life and death to do so some days, what is the rush to play at the 3 level? Why is failing to TELL partner what you have within the methods in play such a bad thing? Isn't this the reason why Drury is effective?

Perhaps it is not so surprising. The advantage of 1S is that it gives pd a chance to raise spade and in that case you can upgrade the hand and bid a game in majors.

If pd passes 1S, then he must have min. and tolerance for spades and it will be just as good as hearts.

[pclayton]

We have two important messages to convey to pard, 1) We have support, and 2) we have a nice spade suit.

I'm not speaking for the other 1♠ bidders, but if we convey "1", we definitely cannot tell pard about "2". This distinction won't matter on a lot of hands, but there are some nice minimums that fit spades where pard simply cannot evaluate.

OTOH, if we start with "2", there is an excellent chance that pard will take another call, whereby we can tell pard about our heart support.

It is true that a direct Drury call keeps up at the 2 level - which is where we would like to rest if we are making exactly 8 tricks. But I'm willing to bet that pard's knowledge of our suit helps him make the decision on whether or not to bid game.

[han]

The problem with 2D is that you can never show the spades. Obviously you are passing when partner rebids 2H (if not then there is really no need to bid 2D). If partner bids anything higher than that then you cannot show spades without committing to game.

Many people have answered that they would bid 2C as 3-card Drury but it is given that you do not have that bid available (I agree that that would be MUCH more attractive than 2D as drury). Similarly, if XYZ was available over 1H-1S-1NT then that would make 1S more attractive as you may still be able to invite and stay at the 2-level.

So the choice is between being able to stop in 2H when partner is minimal on the one hand, and allowing partner to make an educated guess on the other. I think that this is already in favor for 1S, but the fact that partner may be able to pass 1S with a minimal hand makes the case for 1S even stronger.