[djehuti]

Scoring: IMP

---

Opponents silent:
1♠ - 1NT - 2♦ - ??

From system partner cannot have strong hands above 16, nor 15-17 balanced, nor 12-15 with 5-5 and all working points in both suits( ♠ ♦ ).

(i didnt know were to post this hand, hope its ok)

[mike777]

If partner is limited at Imps I would just blast to 5D now.

[Winstonm]

Seems likely that one of my two kings will be worth next to nothing, so IMO 3D is enough.

Winston

[pbleighton]

Let's see..

We are limited to 26 hcp and probably 9 diamonds (if 10, not a great suit).

I am singleton (though ace) in pd's primary suit.

3D is just fine. 5D might make, but it is substantially against the odds.

Peter

[toothbrush]

I bid 3♦. Partner can chose between pass with a minimum, or bid 3NT or something in ♦ with extra values, or even 3♥ with a 5-3-4-1 (best response you can get, but unlikely because this gives opps 10 clubs).

Bidding 5♦ immediately might work, but I don't like a ♣-lead. Big chance that opps start with two ♣-tricks. The singleton ♠A is not as valuable as it looks imo.

[djehuti]

what about an heart fit? wouldnt you want to be in 4 hearts in front of most minimums of partner that have 3 hearts? even 5-3-3-2?

[pbleighton]

"what about an heart fit? wouldnt you want to be in 4 hearts in front of most minimums of partner that have 3 hearts? even 5-3-3-2?"

There is no way to show your hearts playing 2/1 - 2H is a weak signoff, and 3H shows a decent 6 card suit.

Peter

[djehuti]

I was hoping someone would suggest 4 ♥... Isnt this just about what we have?

[pclayton]

djehuti, on Jun 18 2006, 07:51 PM, said:

I was hoping someone would suggest 4 ♥... Isnt this just about what we have?

The only way to find hearts sensibly is for pard to bid them over your diamond raise on the way to 5♦. Bidding hearts in the face of a possible misfit would suggest at least 6.

[djehuti]

If we had 7 or 8 hearts and nothing else we could bid 4 ♥ over 1 ♠, having 9-11 with enough ♥ (7-8) for game we wouldnt make ourselves shy and bid 2 ♥. Isnt 4 ♥ just an impossible bid here, suggesting ♦ and ♥, after we've bid 1nt??

[P_Marlowe]

djehuti, on Jun 18 2006, 11:20 AM, said:

what about an heart fit? wouldnt you want to be in 4 hearts in front of most minimums of partner that have 3 hearts? even 5-3-3-2?

Unless I am not mistaken, the most likely distribution
for your partner is 5-?-4-?, which means, most
of the time you wont have a heart fit.

And unless you always open sound, you may
not have the power to make 10 tricks.

If you bid 4H, I wish you good luck if they start
to double you, because it will get expensiv, and
5D wont be a rescue, ... for starters it is one level
higher.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: If you have agreed, that 4H shows hearts and
diamonds ( a fit jump), than we can talk about the
bid, altough in this case I would prefer a 3H fit jump.

[whereagles]

djehuti, on Jun 19 2006, 04:37 PM, said:

If we had 7 or 8 hearts and nothing else we could bid 4 ♥ over 1 ♠, having 9-11 with enough ♥ (7-8) for game we wouldnt make ourselves shy and bid 2 ♥. Isnt 4 ♥ just an impossible bid here, suggesting ♦ and ♥, after we've bid 1nt??

Well, if it's 100% impossible for you to have hearts, then 4♥ must be diams+hearts. Just don't expect anyone here to agree with you because most would NOT bid 1♠-2♥ on 7 cards and 8 hcp

By the way, tell me what you'd bid over 1♠ with..

K
KQT98x
Qxx
xxx

3♥? Otherwise this might pretty much be what most would make of 1♠-1NT-2♦-4♥ if it can't be a 7-carder.

[han]

I have no agreement about what 4H would show, I certainly wouldn't risk it.

This is quite a heavy 3D raise, but 5D seems too much. Anybody for 4D?

I would feel better about 4D if I could be certain that partner has 4+ diamonds. Especially when playing precision I would opt to play a semi-forcing 1NT response rather than a forcing 1NT.

[kfgauss]

djehuti, on Jun 19 2006, 04:37 PM, said:

If we had 7 or 8 hearts and nothing else we could bid 4 ♥ over 1 ♠, having 9-11 with enough ♥ (7-8) for game we wouldnt make ourselves shy and bid 2 ♥. Isnt 4 ♥ just an impossible bid here, suggesting ♦ and ♥, after we've bid 1nt??

This is a possible interpretation. You'd want to make sure partner wouldn't take it as a (presumably void) splinter for diamonds, though, with 2-0-7-4 shape or some such.

Another possibility to throw into the works is a hand that was going to rebid 3♥ (inv) over partner's 2♣ response but decided to upgrade opposite the 2♦ response. (I see now that whereagles has suggested the same thing.)

Andy

[awm]

This is the kind of hand that usually gets Elianna and me a top board in a 2/1-GF-playing field.

Anyways, if someone forced me to play 2/1 GF, I would much prefer to play invitational jumps. This unloads at least a few of the possibilities from the 1NT response (and lets you play semi-forcing without missing too many games). If 1♠-3♥ would be invitational, then it seems like 1♠-1NT-2♦-3♥ can't be a one-suited invite. Fit-showing makes a lot of sense, and would solve this hand pretty easily.

If you're playing "vanilla" 2/1-GF with no discussion, this is the kind of hand that pretty much fixes you. I'd bid an unhappy 3♦ and wish I had better methods.

[Winstonm]

If partner has enough controls and shape to bid over 3D the heart suit should not be lost as he should bid out his shape - I wouldn't take this as game forcing either, but only as a game try. If he makes a try with 3H showing 3 hearts I probably give him a boost. If he can't bid 3H, 3D is probably high enough.

Winston

[Double !]

Bid 3 diamonds

without some toy, i don't know what else to do. It sounds like you are playing limited openers. If so, then wouldn't 3D be invitational anyway as you could pass 2D with less than a GI hand knowing that opener was limited?

DHL

[djehuti]

---

These were the hands (not that it metters too much).
The openings arent limited, just 2 ♦ is because of gazzili, but we usually raise these rebids as purely courtesy and for tactical reasons so 3♦ wouldnt promise much...
If partner had a 5-3-3-2 he wouldnt move over 3♦ and we'd all like to be in 4 ♥...maybe not. I was trying to see if 4 ♥ could be plausible at all. tks

[jdeegan]

Assuming we are not playing 1NT forcing, I would call 4♦, a simple value bid over partner's 2♦ rebid. On the actual hand, partner would see his hand as a well above average 2♦ rebid, esp. since I figure to be short in spades. A lift to five is called for. It looks cold to me, and will make six with a few breaks, mostly the heart ace onside.

My first thought was to construct a typical doggie minimum for partner, say
KJ972
6
KQ87
QJ8
Guess what! Partner will pass 4♦ and it rolls.

Bridge is a simple game. Why worry about a motheaten five bagger to the king emptyness when partner has bid two other suits? The odds are considerably against his being 5-3-4-1 or the like.

[HeartA]

Hannie, on Jun 19 2006, 12:31 PM, said:

This is quite a heavy 3D raise, but 5D seems too much. Anybody for 4D?

Yes, I am for 4D (assume it is forcing, otherwise why would I big beyond 3NT?).