[Coelacanth]

Matchpoints, all vul, your partner is very strong but you don't have an experienced partnership, you pick up

---

Partner opens 1♥ and your RHO bids 1♠.

You do not have any firm agreements on the forcingness (if that's a word) of 2♣. You have agreed that a cuebid normally shows a limit raise or better of partner's suit.

On the actual hand, if you bid 2♣ partner will bid 2♦. If you bid 2♠ partner will probably bid 2NT. In either case the opponents will make no further bids (not surprising as partner has opened and you have 20 HCP).

So, plan your auction after 1♥-(1♠)-

What if your RHO had bid 2♠ or 3♠, which would be more in line with her actual hand?

[mtvesuvius]

I'd start with 2♣, then 2♠ over 2♦. My plan is to eventually bid RKC in ♣ unless partner shows a stiff club. In that case, I'd probably just blast 6N at some point after some ace asking sequence...

[mike777]

yes.....2c and then 2s
....ditto.

When faced with a tough hand and no clear bid very often think of making a double(takeout, forcing) or cuebid(general force)

[mikeh]

2♣ is easy...it is a one round force (assuming not playing negative free bids, and that is definitely a minority style, probably endorsed more on the forums than in real life from my (mostly NA) experience).

Then we have an easy 2♠ cue, to establish the game force. This is an important principle. A lot of beginners are taught the Western Cue (at least in NA, I don't know about the rest of the world) and this is a very bad thing. A cuebid in this type of auction, where the cue is not a conventional raise of partner (as it would have been had it been made over 1♠) is simply a way to force to game...partner is expected to do something descriptive, and his 2N call suggests 3=5=4=1, altho the additional comments on the post make it probable that he is 2=5=4=2 (we aren't entitled to this info when discussing the followups to 2♦).

I suspect that I will drive this hand to a slam. What I really want to do is to give partner both a chance and a reason to show me Qx in clubs.....I can do that by bidding a forcing 3♣ over 2N. I expect to go to slam anyway...this AK109xx suit rates to play for one loser opposite as little as the stiff deuce (all 3-3s and any Hx)


I appreciate that in a B/I context, there may be concern about whether this is forcing, but seeing it get passed is one way to begin educating partner....seeing it getting passed, then posting in this forum and telling partner to read the responses is another

[Coelacanth]

Thanks for all the well-considered responses.

I bid 2♣ on the first round of the auction. Absent explicit discussion to the contrary, I assumed this was forcing. I guess it's possible to play it NF but I know we hadn't discussed any such treatment.

I wish I had considered the 2♠ cue on the 2nd round of the auction. Holding ♠AJ, I definitely wanted notrump played from my side. Had I bid 2♠, I don't know if my partner would have found a club bid with her ♣Qx. (I would like to think so, but maybe she'd interpret 2♣ followed by 2♠ as a strong hand with some clubs but uncertain about final strain, which is not what I have.)

Partner's actual hand, as divined by mikeh, was 2=5=4=2. It was something like

---

Back to the actual auction, over partner's 2♦ call I just bid 6NT. The grand is makeable double-dummy, but the clubs are 5-0 on your left so you have to start the suit by leading low to the 8 (or running the 10 or 9, I guess), finessing into the overcaller. Yeah, right.

This might be a more interesting problem if my RHO had not been insane. She bid 1♠ on essentially ♠Q-seventh and out. If she had passed we could have a simple constructive auction, but if she'd bid 3♠ I have to pretty much commit to slam without knowing much about partner's hand. Or do I?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

If I am unsure, that 2C is forcing, than bidding 2C is garbage.

If you have agreed, that 2S showes a limit raise in hearts, thats fine, do it,
You will get the information, if p has a min or a max, that is basically, what
you are looking for, and if you should end up in hearts, say in 4H if p is pleading
for merci, than than the 5-2 fit will be playing ok.

Over 2NT - which should show a stopper, I have just wrong sided an NT contract,
that is live, I will bid 6C, that should be an offer to play, if p converts to 6H, I will
correct to 6NT. Now I have basically forced to slam regardless of opener haveing a
min / max.

If they intervene with 2S, I guess I am also not sure, if 3C would be treated as
forcing? If I am sure, than 3C is the bid, otherwise X.
Over 3S, I will start with 4C, which should now be forcing.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: I dont advice playing 2C as NF, although I prefer it, but that is something
you should shortly discuss with your p.
In N/A you can assume 2C as forcing, in Europe this is a bit unclear.

[the hog]

Coelacanth, on 2010-November-08, 16:17, said:

Thanks for all the well-considered responses.

I bid 2♣ on the first round of the auction. Absent explicit discussion to the contrary, I assumed this was forcing. I guess it's possible to play it NF but I know we hadn't discussed any such treatment.

I wish I had considered the 2♠ cue on the 2nd round of the auction. Holding ♠AJ, I definitely wanted notrump played from my side. Had I bid 2♠, I don't know if my partner would have found a club bid with her ♣Qx. (I would like to think so, but maybe she'd interpret 2♣ followed by 2♠ as a strong hand with some clubs but uncertain about final strain, which is not what I have.)

Partner's actual hand, as divined by mikeh, was 2=5=4=2. It was something like

---

Back to the actual auction, over partner's 2♦ call I just bid 6NT. The grand is makeable double-dummy, but the clubs are 5-0 on your left so you have to start the suit by leading low to the 8 (or running the 10 or 9, I guess), finessing into the overcaller. Yeah, right.

This might be a more interesting problem if my RHO had not been insane. She bid 1♠ on essentially ♠Q-seventh and out. If she had passed we could have a simple constructive auction, but if she'd bid 3♠ I have to pretty much commit to slam without knowing much about partner's hand. Or do I?

So why is the light overcall "insane"? It caused you problems.

[Coelacanth]

the hog, on 2010-November-08, 18:03, said:

So why is the light overcall "insane"? It caused you problems.

Good point.

Not insane in terms of its tactical value, obviously. I just don't know anyone else who thinks Qxxxxxx, xx, Qxxx, void is a normal 1♠ overcall of 1♥.

[Fluffy]

You shouldn't worry about who plays NT when you have ♠AJ tight and LHO has zero points.