[Coelacanth]

---

NS are playing Standard American where 1♣ shows 3+ clubs. Assume EW are also playing basically standard.

The call in question is West's 2♣.

(1) Absent any specific discussion, what should 2♣ show?
(1a) Is this similar to what 2♦ would have shown on the same sequence?
(2) What would 1NT, Dbl, or 2NT show in this sequence (instead of 2♣)? Again assume generally standard methods with no specific discussion.
(3) Playing your choice of methods with your favorite partner, what does 2♣ show for you?
(4) How would this be different if West were dealer (so South was unpassed)? If North were dealer (so West was unpassed)?

[PhilKing]

My view is that, without discussion, it does not exist. West should choose a different call whatever his hand.

[kenberg]

First answer: One of the many things where, discussed, I would be uncomfortable.


But, I can always have an opinion.

It seems to me that 2♣ should be clubs. Passed hand or no passed hand. It's easy to imagine a hand with six good clubs that is not quite worth an opening bid.

2♦ is much less clear to me, but by a passed hand it seems not useful for it to be natural. If a 2♦ is naturl and weak, he can't have that hand. Moreover, the opponents largely promise (I know there is the occasional exception) four diamonds with the 1♦ call and fairly often it is on five since responder with four cards in a major could have, or was required to, bid them and he also had some number of NT available with a flat hand.
By an unpassed hand this argument is less persuasive.

So given my druthers, I guess 2♣ is natural, passed hand or not, and 2♦ is conventional. Michaels, I suppose, but whatever one wishes.


And yes, once again Phil beat me to a point I should have made. Without discussion, don't do it. I feel that way about a number of auctions. Just the other day a partner was asking me how I would take a certain undiscussed bid. As a bad bid, was basically my answer.

[manudude03]

1.Natural*
1a. Natural
2. 1N is 5-5 in the majors, stronger than 2N. Double is takeout of diamonds (inferring more defense than the NT bids).
3. Natural*
4. Same if West dealt, majors if North dealt.

* as mentioned in Q4, 2C would be majors for me if we weren't a passed hand.

[ArtK78]

Coelacanth, on 2013-March-08, 12:33, said:

---

NS are playing Standard American where 1♣ shows 3+ clubs. Assume EW are also playing basically standard.

The call in question is West's 2♣.

(1) Absent any specific discussion, what should 2♣ show?

Clubs. The usual expert agreement is that when the opponents bid two suits, our bid of either of those suits is natural. This treatment is very common, but is not universal.

(1a) Is this similar to what 2♦ would have shown on the same sequence?

2♦ would show diamonds.

(2) What would 1NT, Dbl, or 2NT show in this sequence (instead of 2♣)? Again assume generally standard methods with no specific discussion.

Double clearly shows the other two suits, probably with a near opening hand. 2NT should show 5-5 or better in the other two suits. As a passed hand, 1NT shows the other two suits, but with more distribution and typically less strength than a double. One might bid 1NT as a passed hand on the same type of hand that one would bid 2NT as an unpassed hand, but as a passed hand you can get the same message across a level lower. As an unpassed hand, some like 1NT as a strong balanced hand (typcially 15-18 HCP or so), others like it as showing the other two suits with less values than a takeout double and less shape than a 2NT overcall. As a passed hand, however, very few players would play that 1NT shows a balanced hand (I won't say none, as I have seen it played as a near opening balanced hand).

As an unpassed hand, if you play 1NT for the unbid suits, then 1NT is bid on hands with less power or more distribution than a double.

(3) Playing your choice of methods with your favorite partner, what does 2♣ show for you?

Clubs.

(4) How would this be different if West were dealer (so South was unpassed)? If North were dealer (so West was unpassed)?

From West's point of view, the fact that South is an unpassed hand is not relevent.

If North were the dealer, so that West is an unpassed hand, then 2♣ shows clubs, 2♦ shows diamonds, double is for takeout for the other two suits, 2NT is 5-5 or better in the other two suits, 1NT is a matter of partnership agreement.

[Coelacanth]

Ok, thanks everyone. I was just checking to make sure I wasn't insane, as I was the only person at the table who thought West had clubs.

I was North. West was bidding Michaels with a weak 5611 hand. East never thought it was anything but Michaels, as he bid 2♥ with 2254. My partner had clubs, so he knew West had shortness there.

<shrug>

We ended up with a 65% board for +130, but 3NT was cold for a shared top on a non-heart lead. I should have opened 1NT with ♠Qxx ♥987x ♦AQ9 ♣AQ9 and avoided this whole mess.

[lowerline]

Coelacanth, on 2013-March-08, 12:33, said:

---

NS are playing Standard American where 1♣ shows 3+ clubs. Assume EW are also playing basically standard.

The call in question is West's 2♣.

(1) Absent any specific discussion, what should 2♣ show?
(1a) Is this similar to what 2♦ would have shown on the same sequence?
(2) What would 1NT, Dbl, or 2NT show in this sequence (instead of 2♣)? Again assume generally standard methods with no specific discussion.
(3) Playing your choice of methods with your favorite partner, what does 2♣ show for you?
(4) How would this be different if West were dealer (so South was unpassed)? If North were dealer (so West was unpassed)?

(1) 5-5 in the majors
(1a) No, 2♦ would have been natural
(2) dbl is takeout, 1nt is 5-4 in the majors (lacking the distribution for 2♣ or the strenght for dbl), 2nt does not exist
(3) see (1)
(4) there is only a difference if West is unpassed (1nt natural and 2nt a stronger 2suiter than 2♣)

Steven

[Zelandakh]

Back in 4 card major land, the most common agreement seemed to be that bidding LHO's suit is artificial while bidding RHO's suit is natural. That would mean 2♣ shows the majors and 2♦ shows diamonds. Absent agreement X is takeout and 1NT is natural for an unpassed hand, Sandwich (majors) for a passed hand. A few years back, there was something of a fad of playing 1NT as Sandwich; 2♣ as 6♥4♠; and 2♦ as 6♠4♥. I quite liked it but I do not know anyone still using it, not least because the trend towards lighter responses has led to an up-surge in the usage of a natural 1NT overcall. Perhaps ideal would be to use the above scheme for a passed hand but everything natural as an unpassed hand.

[Free]

Coelacanth, on 2013-March-08, 15:07, said:

I should have opened 1NT with ♠Qxx ♥987x ♦AQ9 ♣AQ9 and avoided this whole mess.

No you shouldn't open 1NT on this trash.