[CSGibson]

Scoring: MP

(1♦)-1♥-(p)-1N,
(p)-2♣-(p)-2♥,
(p)-?

---

1N is generally 9-11ish as a response to an overcall in this partnership. Two questions on this hand.

1). 2N would be the lower two unbid suits, and you've agreed only to do that with good playing hands at this vulnerability. With those partnership agreements forced on you, do you agree with 1♥?

2). Having been forced to have this auction up to this point, what would you bid now?

[mich-b]

On the first round I think 2NT would be ok with this hand (I am not sure what "good playing hand" means for you), but I have no problems with 1♥ either.

On the 2nd round , I think 2♣ is a serious underbid. I think 3♣ is a much better description of both shape and strength.

On the 3rd round , I (having, wrongly IMO, decided on the previous round that I am not good enough for 3♣) would bid 3♣, which is still an underbid, but consistent with my previous bidding.

[jukmoi]

I like 1♥ on first round. I would prefer better suits for 2NT.

Agree that 2♣ is clear underbid. Getting second chance I try 3♦ and 4♣ if partner doesnt try 3NT. Hopefully this is a choice of game sequence and I will be happy what ever choice partner makes.

[655321]

You will know best whether this is a 2NT bid in your partnership, but 1♥ seems fine to me.

And yes, 2♣ is silly, why not 3♣?

[hanp]

Agree with 3C as second bid.

[peachy]

Opposite a 9-11 NT from partner, this hand must bid 3C. 2C isn't forcing, we might miss game. Not sure what "good playing hand" means. This is a good playing hand but perhaps your definition could be tightened up to say "good playing hand with good suits" if that is what it really means. I am ok with 1H overcall, either way.

[mcphee]

I would not consider 2NT and 1H is perfectly fine with me. I feel to bid 3C is a gross overbid after partner passed 1NT. Not knowing how you play double of 1NT (responsive is what I would prefer) our partner does not have much and we may well step into a deep hole. I would not bid again after 2H from pard.

[Phil]

2♣. Really? This is an underbid by an Ace, and my entire hand could be nothing more than ♥AKTxx / ♣xxxxx.

3♣ would have led to a raise or a ...3♥...3♠ sequence.

I have no idea what to do now, sorry.

[hanp]

Do people think that 3C is forcing? If not, shouldn't we actually bid 2D first?

[Phil]

hanp, on Jun 1 2010, 07:07 AM, said:

Do people think that 3C is forcing?

I do.

[CSGibson]

mcphee, on Jun 1 2010, 04:27 AM, said:

I would not consider 2NT and 1H is perfectly fine with me. I feel to bid 3C is a gross overbid after partner passed 1NT. Not knowing how you play double of 1NT (responsive is what I would prefer) our partner does not have much and we may well step into a deep hole. I would not bid again after 2H from pard.

partner did not pass 1N; partner is the 1N bidder.

[Jlall]

hanp, on Jun 1 2010, 07:07 AM, said:

Do people think that 3C is forcing? If not, shouldn't we actually bid 2D first?

no and yes

[aguahombre]

Given the conditions about what a direct 2NT would have been, the 3C rebid certainly wouldn't show that same hand. But 3C should certainly show THIS hand.

1) 1H overcall fine, because 2NT under the conditions would be better if the same strength were more concentrated in the two suits.
2) With a 9-11 (given) 1NT advance, 3C seems descriptive and forcing with this hand. Outside HCP are implied because of "1)" above.
3) This would leave a 2D rebid as a strong overcall with hearts and diamonds. Hard to imagine needing it as some kind of cue, where another descriptive call is not available.
4) After the given auction (2C rebid), I don't know how to unscrew it.

[Bbradley62]

In the given auction and with your partnership agreements, would 2♠ over 2♥ show a concentration of values, giving partner a choice of 3NT and 4♥?

[neilkaz]

Noting that pard is showing 9-11 with D stopped and that you have a good 16..yes quite good on the bidding since LHO is likely almost broke and your Q♠ and K♣ seem very useful and you have good ♥ spots which may provide tricks even vs a poor split.. you seriously want to be in game here.

The 2♣ rebid is a serious underbid and could be passed. I'd have either cue bid 2♦, forgetting about ♣ at MP or my slight preference to jump 3♣ which seems quite forcing to me.

I also don't like the 3♣ rebid as it seems NF to me and could be a weaker 5-5 or 5-6 (6 weak ♣).

To untangle this mess rather than 3♣, 2♠ is possible, but I prefer 3♦ forcing game, IMHO, and asking pard about his ♦ stop. You'll play either 4♥ on the 5-2 or 3NT.

Alternately just bid 3NT for your 3rd call since I see many hands where both ♥ and NT take the same number of tricks noting the 5-2 fit.

[dealmegold]

This is a stronger hand than I would usually make a simple overcall with, but admittedly that's not based on any deep insight. So if your agreement for overcalling on strong two suiters involves using 2NT for bottom two, then that's what I'd do here. OK, the clubs aren't great but with a club fit and a diamond stopper, isn't p going to put us in NT?

I also think 3♣ is the best way to express the strength of the hand and should be forcing here, but that comes with the understanding that you're going to bid 1♥ with this hand in the first place, which isn't clear from your agreements.

[whereagles]

I would try 3♦ here, stop ask. Would raise a 3♥ reply to 4. Definitely not 3♣ as that might give pard a headache lol.

[pooltuna]

Jlall, on Jun 1 2010, 10:23 AM, said:

hanp, on Jun 1 2010, 07:07 AM, said:

Do people think that 3C is forcing? If not, shouldn't we actually bid 2D first?

no and yes

Perhaps what we should make clear is why 3♣ shows extras. IMO partner having already limited his hand and then made a preference bid of 2♥ has the right to expect the extras in this hand when you call 3♣ as you would normally, almost always pass 2♥ with a minimal opener.