[cnszsun]

1H-2C
2H-2S
2NT-4NT
6NT

---

[gwnn]

N should rebid 3H instead of eating up all that space with the quantitative 4N.

S shouldn't accept, remember partner shouldn't have much help in hearts. But of course 4N isn't exactly a good contract either. I would not call it a contract at all actually.

[Free]

Depends a lot on the meaning of 2♣, but without alerts I'd definitely say 2♣ is wrong. You can just respond 1♠. Bidding like this suggests 5+♣ and 4♠.

[billw55]

Agree, 1♠ is much better. Why go to this trouble to introduce such a crappy club suit?

How about

1H-1S
2H-3D
3S-4H

With all working cards and a pushy sequence from partner, south can try keycard now and reach 6H.

[gwnn]

disagree, I really like 2♣. it establishes a GF immediately so we don't need to look for forcing bids later.

[Fluffy]

if you wanna start with 2♣ you've got to rebid 2NT, then when partner bids 3♥ you can cuebid.

starting with 1♠ might get you stablishing a fake spade fit before using blackwood, wich is not a bad thing since ♠K is a keycard anyway and ♥KQ are already allocated. But how to find the ♣ control I have no idea.

[cphastrup]

gwnn, on Oct 14 2010, 03:50 PM, said:

disagree, I really like 2♣. it establishes a GF immediately so we don't need to look for forcing bids later.

Don't need forcing bids later: 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥ - 6♥

But... if you want forcing bids they're not hard to find. After 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥, then 3♦, 3♣, 4 NT and 4♦(available if you cuebid 2nd round controls) are forcing.

Bidding 2♣ on that may have established a GF, but it's also established a mess.

By bidding 1♠ you get more room for exploring strain and level. If partner rebids 1NT, it's more likely you belong in NT (and you can still force by using XY-NT or the like...) If partner rebids 2♥, you've found a fit at the 2-level.

And another bonus: You don't need to lie about ♣/♠ length and strength like you do when bidding 2♣ and rebidding ♠...

In my partnership it might have gone like the first sequence of my post - not the craziest of punts. An alternative: 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥ - 4♦ (denies ♣-control) - 4♥ - 4♠ - 4NT etc.

[pooltuna]

Free, on Oct 14 2010, 08:56 AM, said:

Depends a lot on the meaning of 2♣, but without alerts I'd definitely say 2♣ is wrong.  You can just respond 1♠.  Bidding like this suggests 5+♣ and 4♠.

The other positives for 1♠;
a.) partner gets a better valuation on the ♠K if he has it and tends to devalue a singleton ♠ as probable wastage

b.) if 2♥ over 2♣ is ambiguous it is less so over 1♠

[gwnn]

cphastrup, on Oct 14 2010, 03:23 PM, said:

gwnn, on Oct 14 2010, 03:50 PM, said:

disagree, I really like 2♣. it establishes a GF immediately so we don't need to look for forcing bids later.

Don't need forcing bids later: 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥ - 6♥

But... if you want forcing bids they're not hard to find. After 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥, then 3♦, 3♣, 4 NT and 4♦(available if you cuebid 2nd round controls) are forcing.

Bidding 2♣ on that may have established a GF, but it's also established a mess.

By bidding 1♠ you get more room for exploring strain and level. If partner rebids 1NT, it's more likely you belong in NT (and you can still force by using XY-NT or the like...) If partner rebids 2♥, you've found a fit at the 2-level.

And another bonus: You don't need to lie about ♣/♠ length and strength like you do when bidding 2♣ and rebidding ♠...

In my partnership it might have gone like the first sequence of my post - not the craziest of punts. An alternative: 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥ - 4♦ (denies ♣-control) - 4♥ - 4♠ - 4NT etc.

Both approaches have nice advantages and nice disadvantages. I wasn't looking to change anyone's mind, I just mentioned one of the nice advantages of the approach preferred by me. I guess if I say that I am not alone in the forums who play it this way I sound elitist or something like that. This issue is complicated and I am not interested in changing anyone's mind.

[ONEferBRID]

cnszsun, on Oct 14 2010, 08:38 AM, said:

1H-2C
2H-2S
2NT-4NT
6NT

---

What is with the 2S rebid ?
I'm assuing 2C! was a 2/1 GF ( as putrid of a suit that it is ).
Opener has denied 4s with the 2H rebid.. AND has shown 6+h ( with only 5 cards, Opener would have had a 3C or 3D or 2NT rebid -- even if one of the unbid suits were unstopped [ as Phillip Alder would say: " that's what partners are for " ] ).

1H - 2C!
2H - 3H ( now you have agreed trumps at a low level and no worry about a passout)
3S - 4D ( going past 3NT w/cue, yet denying a Cl Ctrl in his 2/1 suit; thus, have strength )
4NT - 5S ( 2 + hQ )
6H

[mike777]

cnszsun, on Oct 14 2010, 08:38 AM, said:

1H-2C
2H-2S
2NT-4NT
6NT

---

2c is fine and makes the hand easy.


if 2h promises 6 (it does for me) then 3h now...if not then 2nt now...not 2s.

-------------


btw note 1s did not save any room

[hanp]

Agree with mike777, 2C is good, 2S is bad.

[straube]

hanp, on Oct 14 2010, 03:13 PM, said:

Agree with mike777, 2C is good, 2S is bad.

I agree. Establish the GF first. Imo, one shouldn't respond 1S with a GF hand unless holding 5 spades. It's difficult to establish a GF after introducing a 4-cd spade suit, it's difficult coping with competition after doing so, and it gets really messy if opener decides to raise spades with 3.

I also think opener with a 4/6 hand should rebid 2S and then rebid hearts later. This means that 1H-2C, 2H-2S is 4S/5C.

[keylime]

1♠ for me, and it's clear of mind. Allow pard to have 4-5-x-x or 4-6-x-x to support you, and now you can reeval your hand. I disagree with 2♣ to set the GF, because you know it's your hand already; the opps are likely to stay out. Additionally, if pard finds a jump bid, the KQ of trumps, is prime cards for a slam try.

[mike777]

note how the hand can get a bit messy if you start:
1h=1s
2h=?
or
1h=1s
2s(can be 3)=?

you have not saved any space to explore for slam compared to 1h=2c=2h=3h(slam try)

[the hog]

Free, on Oct 14 2010, 08:56 PM, said:

Depends a lot on the meaning of 2♣, but without alerts I'd definitely say 2♣ is wrong. You can just respond 1♠. Bidding like this suggests 5+♣ and 4♠.

Agree. I would certainly bid 1S and it is pretty obvious. There is a school of thought on this site that bids 2C "to establish the game force", (as if you couldn't do it buy other means), and there have been a number of posts on this. For me, the bidding shows 5C and 4S.

[Cascade]

Steve Robinson said in the vugraph of the Rosenblum final yesterday that responder should not bid 1♠ over 1♥ with four spades in a balanced GF. So it appears this view is not limited to those on the forum.

[Free]

I play 2♣ as a GF relay as well, and opener will immediately show if he has 4♠ or not. Then we can relay out the entire hand, which gives us an easier auction and better judgement from the balanced responder.

HOWEVER, OP didn't say 2♣ was GF nor artificial or possibly short...

[the hog]

If you play 2C as a relay, then that is a different story altogether.

Steve Robinson also opens 1S on
xxxxx
Ax
AKQJxx
void

According to his book, not to bid a 5 card major is to deny one.

[gwnn]

Poison the well