[dustinst22]

K9 AKQJ2 954 K96

With partner opening, it goes (without interference) 1C 1H ; 2C __

What bid do you make here?

[mtvesuvius]

2♦ - A general purpose force, pretty much like New Minor Forcing. I don't have any plans to bid slam on this hand unless partner shows extras at some point.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

Scoring?

Assuming you play IMPs, and absent any add. agreement, I would bid 4C,
I have a fit, I know I want to play game, I show the fit and make clear,
that p understands, that we wont stop below game.
If you play IMPs, than you dont need to worry too much about by passing
3NT, and you also dont need to care to much about major contracts scoring
more than minor contracts.

The alternative is a heavy 3NT, which should show roughly 13-15 and a bal.
shape, you have 16HCp, ... worth 17 or 18, so 3NT would be underbid, but
there was a comment, that one should be conservative if it comes to slam
bidding, so ...

Of course if you have agreements, like a artificial 2D in this seq., than
you have the answer - 2D.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[dustinst22]

mtvesuvius, on 2011-July-18, 09:33, said:

2♦ - A general purpose force, pretty much like New Minor Forcing. I don't have any plans to bid slam on this hand unless partner shows extras at some point.

Thanks, makes sense. I'll add this to what we use.


Does anyone play 3C here as showing extras?

[ArtK78]

I play that 1♣-1M-2♣-2♦ is artificial; the same goes for 1♦-1M-2♦-3♣. In fact, this treatment was written up in The Bridge World many years ago as Extended PLOB (PLOB for "Petty Little Odious Bid," the term given to New Minor Forcing by Sonny Moyse).

So, on this auction, 2♦ is clear.

I can't imagine that anyone would play 3♣ on this auction as forcing. The usual meaning of 3♣ is invitational - responder has fair values, about 9-11 HCP, and a club fit.

If I were not playing Extended PLOB, I would still bid 2♦, just to keep the auction going forward. Bidding 4♣ over 2♣ is right on values, but going past 3NT seems a bit much.

[Phil]

This isn't really appropriate for the BI, but there was a discussion on here a few years ago about something that was developed called "NSI". I think it gives you a good perspective about these types of auctions and some of the potential solutions.

NSI

[dustinst22]

Phil, on 2011-July-18, 10:16, said:

This isn't really appropriate for the BI, but there was a discussion on here a few years ago about something that was developed called "NSI". I think it gives you a good perspective about these types of auctions and some of the potential solutions.

NSI

Thanks Phil, looks interesting. Looks like it utilizes a 3C bid as I was wondering about.

[VM1973]

What do I know? I'll bid 3NT (matchpoints).

[pooltuna]

2♠ I prefer to bid controls and ♦ have none. With sufficient controls we probably should be in slam expecting to take 6♣ and 5♥ plus a pointy suit trick