[Quartic]

---

What should South bid now?

[aguahombre]

3S.

[mikeh]

Quartic, on 2012-April-20, 17:09, said:

---

What should South bid now?

I had this discussion with the partner I played with last year, who is even more old-fashioned than I am. My contention is and remains that in this sequence, 2N shows a 2-suiter, while he argued that it was minors.

I am convinced that it is better as a 2-suiter, tho there will be hands on which knowing the 2 suits in question would be better.

So for me, 2N.

[nigel_k]

If the question is what to do without a specific agreement, I would rather bid 3♠ on this hand than try 2NT and hope partner works it out.

If the question is what is the best agreement, I prefer 2NT as hearts and a minor and 3♠ as both minors. This allows us to stop at the three level on two of the three possible two suiter combinations while leaving partner in a better position if the bidding gets high quickly.

[jillybean]

I have a gadget for this, 2N here shows ♥ & ♦, 3♣ shows ♣ and ♥

[mike777]

jillybean, on 2012-April-20, 17:51, said:

I have a gadget for this, 2N here shows ♥ & ♦, 3♣ shows ♣ and ♥

what do you bid with clubs? or clubs and diamonds.

I guess here I would try x with no agreements...

[the_clown]

Surely 3♠ at this vulnerability, describes the hand very well.

[Fluffy]

2NT any 2 suiter, but 3♠ shows the hand a bit better if we are to defend against 4♠. I would go with 3♠ because of the vulnerability but don´t think it is clearcut.

[neilkaz]

3♠ for me.

[jillybean]

mike777, on 2012-April-20, 17:53, said:

what do you bid with clubs? or clubs and diamonds.

we are forced to 4♣ w/clubs, 2N with clubs and diamonds

I can't say I've missed not having a natural club bid compared to the times
Ive enjoyed bidding a 3♣ 2 suiter.

[aguahombre]

IME, giving up any single suit OBAR bid after a major has been raised is a loss over the long run. It doesn't matter if it is the lowest suit or the highest suit; it is frequent enough and useful enough to keep.

[jillybean]

Yeah, I know that is the common, expert opinion however I don't miss the natural 3♣ overcall and I am having too much
fun with 3♣ 2 suiter to give it up. Some day I'll be wiser perhaps.

[Phil]

2N. Because 2N is a 2 suiter, couldn't 3♠ be a stopper ask? I've even heard of leaping michaels played here. How many ways do we need to show a heart two suiter?

[CSGibson]

2N, correcting clubs to ♦ (and really hoping partner isn't trying to bid stayman....)

[han]

Sorry for writing this in the I/A forum but I really think that hearts + minor is better than any two suits, which is of course much better than minors. It may not be politically correct to say this, but hearts are simply better than clubs or diamonds.

If the opponents bid 3S next, which suit is most important to have shown? Indeed: hearts. The argument that if the opponents have spades then the three other suits are equal is faulty, because the opponents aren't always going to bid 4S.

Minors is simply awful, nobody should be tempted to play that. It's twice (or thrice, compared to any two suits) as infrequent, and they are the wrong suits! You can play 3S as the minors.

[Zelandakh]

This is an auction I remember having a nice discussion with Ken about a little while back. A solution that was aired was

1♠ - 2♠
=======
X = 3-suited or both minors
2NT = clubs, or diamonds or hearts and competitive
3♣ = clubs and hearts
3♦ = diamonds and hearts
3♥ = hearts, constructive

If partner has a preference for hearts over double then they bid 2NT unless strong. Over 2NT the usual ParadoX-type bids would work nicely.

I would like to ask the same question now as I asked then - would this kind of structure also work over a 4♠ opening, or after auctions like 1♠ - 4♠ or 2♠ - 4♠? In these cases you lose 4NT scramble after double as well as including an extra hand type in double. In return you get better auctions on 2-suited hands. Are the trade-offs clearly better for one or the other, or is it pretty much a wash?