[Adam1105]

---

What do I, south, bid?
Thank you very much.

_

[Free]

North should've rebid 1NT or 2♥, not 2♣ (this shows a 6 card or unbalanced with 5♣-4♦)

[Codo]

Yes, north should have rebid different. But as you asked for south:
There seems to be two reasonable choices:
1. 2 ♦ so that you can find your possible 5/3 heart fit.
2. 3 ♣ to show your fit and your approx. strength.

The choice depends a little on your follow ups. I would chose 2 ♦ and, if partner does not raise hearts ( he will here), I will raise his clubs.

[billw55]

Codo, on 2013-July-24, 04:08, said:

Yes, north should have rebid different. But as you asked for south:
There seems to be two reasonable choices:
1. 2 ♦ so that you can find your possible 5/3 heart fit.
2. 3 ♣ to show your fit and your approx. strength.

The choice depends a little on your follow ups. I would chose 2 ♦ and, if partner does not raise hearts ( he will here), I will raise his clubs.

Well, he *should* bid 2♥ over 2♦. In practice though, this partner may well bid 2NT or maybe clubs again. Rebidding a 5-card suit for no good reason is a common mistake and an indicator of poor bidder.

[PhilKing]

Where do you find opponents who don't bid with ten good spades between them NV at the one level?

This is the kind of hand where interfence makes it easier to reach 4♥ (and then 4♠x, most of the time).

[ArtK78]

Personally, I would bid 2♥ on the North cards. But 1NT would be my second choice.

With the South hand, I would bid 3♣ over 2♣, especially if I am playing with someone who would bid 2♥ on the North hand.

BTW, since I frequenly raise on 3 cards support in this auction, I play a gadget that is fairly common in my neck of the woods. After 1m - 1M - 2M, responder can bid 2NT asking for strength and degree of support. Opener rebids:

3♣ - minimum with 3 card support
3♦ - maximum with 3 card support
3♥ - minimum with 4 card support
3♠ - maximum with 4 card support

4♥ is not a bad contract on this hand, but you have to be very aggressive to reach it.

[fromageGB]

If we are talking gadgets, this sort of problem is one of those that made me switch to transfer walsh, where the replies distinguish between 2/3 card support, and 4 card. Without that, I think you are good enough to make a forward move, and 2♦ gives the most possibilities. The worry is that opener's probable 3♦ rebid (on a 3145 shape) pushes me to 4♣ which is a little high for comfort, so I probably reject that idea and bid 3♣. Especially if my 2♦ bid were not forcing.

[mycroft]

I tend to believe in "third-suit forcing" after 1m-1M-2m. The cheapest suit (2♦ in this case) could be natural, but it could be "I don't have a bid to show my hand, you show your hand". This is the perfect hand for this - because you want partner to show you delayed heart support. Yes, if partner bids 3♦ on 3=1=4=5 (should really be 3=0=4=6, of course, but sometimes...) we might be a little uncomfortable, but I have an invite of a real opener, where everyone will be trying 3NT and failing; if partner doesn't have a real opener, oh well, that's what we get for opening like that.

I, too, hate 2♣ on the North hand; there is nothing in AQxxx that would make one believe that this is a suit to play in [edit to add: on a misfit]; there is nothing in that suit to make one believe that when partner bids 3NT on the strength of "I have Kx, so the club suit should come in for lots of tricks" that she's going to be right. I almost refuse to rebid my minor as opener without 6; I've done it with a misfit and 100 honours but I didn't like it.

I'm guessing that north bid 2♣ instead of the "obvious" 1NT (I even prefer 2♥ to 2♣!) because of those spades, or because "I could have only 3 (or, shh, 2) clubs, I need to show the real suit". Well, as a weak NT player, no, you don't have to worry about those spades - partner might have them; they may not lead them; they may lead them but not take enough tricks (even in 3NT). And as a general rule, it's not your responsibility to show 5; it's partner's responsibility to show delayed support. If North plays with people who won't do that, then I see where the 2♣ call comes from. But it's still wrong :-).

I would like to see the auction on this set of hands go 1♣-1♥; 1NT-2♦!; 2♥-3♣; 4♥. It may not make; but the double-fit means that my minimum is no longer a minimum. That's assuming that the opponents never bid their 10-card spade suit, of course.

[Cyberyeti]

Many people have switched to using 1♣-1♥-2♣-2♦ as fully artificial and I'd recommend that, but the 2♣ rebid in this case is an abomination, 1N or 2♥ are both a lot better.

If you're I/A, the best way to fix this auction is to find another partner.

[PhilKing]

Constructing auctions and agreements to cover this situation is an excercise in futilty, since it can never occur against normal opponents.

[mikeh]

The reason this is an 'oft-times bidding dilemma' is that sequences in which opener rebids 2♣ in these auctions are very poorly explored in standard methods.

Many experienced partnerships have developed methods here. It is fairly common, when playing such methods, to use 2♦ as an artificial bid. In my partnerships it doesn't deny diamonds, but it certainly doesn't show them either: it merely keeps the auction alive while denying the ability to make other, natural bids.

Thus I could rebid 2♥ with 6+ in the suit, non-forcing, range constrained by whether we play weak jump shifts...if so, then I would usually hold more than the wjs, altho one would want to know whether one would wjs with 4=6 majors.

2♠ would be natural, and a gf reverse for me.

2N would be invitational.

3♦ would be a splinter, as would 3♠. 3♥ would be invitational with a good(ish) 6+ suit

and so on. Thus 2♦ is a catch all for hands that don't fit elsewhere, including game force hands with good hearts, or red 2 suiter or a non-splinter club gf raise, etc

I am not trying to peddle any particular solution. I am merely explaining that these auctions are always going to cause problems in partnerships that haven't developed a solution.

My take on it is that in a partnership between average or better players, opener should always view a 2♦ call as ambiguous and, since it is a change of suit, a one-round force.

Btw, I agree with all who criticize the 2♣ call. I would raise hearts if playing a method in which the raise could be based on 3 card support (iow, if playing a standard method, but many weak notrumpers would require 4 card support). Absent that ability, I would rebid 1N.

As it is, I recommend 2♦ by East. He'll hear a 2♥ response and, based on the double fit, he can decide whether to merely invite game or bid 4♥... I'd definitely bid game at imps but there is some justification, imo, for conservatism at mps, since we can expect some risk of being tapped in spades... and partner doesn't have to have a heart honour: playing a 5-3 fit with xxx opposite KJxxx, and the long suit probably getting tapped early is no way to make a living.

[Cyberyeti]

mikeh, on 2013-July-24, 12:30, said:

Btw, I agree with all who criticize the 2♣ call. I would raise hearts if playing a method in which the raise could be based on 3 card support (iow, if playing a standard method, but many weak notrumpers would require 4 card support). Absent that ability, I would rebid 1N.

Many weak no trumpers (with the exception of those that play a 12-15 or similar 1N rebid) will open this 1N or pass, never 1♣ it's either a balanced 12 or it's a balanced 11, this means that 1♣-1♦-2♣ is always 6+ and 1♣-1♥-2♣ is either 6+♣ or 5♣/4♦.

[mikeh]

Cyberyeti, on 2013-July-24, 12:44, said:

Many weak no trumpers (with the exception of those that play a 12-15 or similar 1N rebid) will open this 1N or pass, never 1♣ it's either a balanced 12 or it's a balanced 11, this means that 1♣-1♦-2♣ is always 6+ and 1♣-1♥-2♣ is either 6+♣ or 5♣/4♦.

I wasn't referring to the hand: I was referring to an auction. IOW, I was suggesting a 2♥ raise on the actual hand but pointing out that for some partnerships, that raise wouldn't be permitted. So in std, responder could expect 3-4 card support, but for other methods, most notably weak notrumpers, responder's approach would depend on whether opener promised 4 cards. While in my view non-weak notrumpers should never guarantee 4 card support for the raise, I have played against some (weak) players who do. This being I/A, I catered to that.

You will note that I didn't agree with the 2♣ rebid, and I think it fairly clear that, since I suggested 1N as a possible rebid, I wasn't treating the actual hand as arising in a weak 1N context.

[mike777]

btw the opp have 10 spades...half the hcp and are at fav vul...yet they are silent?

as others say prefer north rebid 1nt or 2h.

[mycroft]

The difference is, in a weak NT context, it's safer to bid 1NT with a 15-17 balanced hand that has a spade flaw, never mind much less likely to *have* a spade flaw (this hand with another King I would never think about raising, for instance; it's the 1=3=4=5 hands that are killers); that apart from those worries, it's dangerous to potentially miss a 5-3 fit by bidding NT when partner passes (which is more likely when partner has less than invitational values (vs. being in a 4-3 fit with a ruffing value when partner has less-than-invitational values). It's *much more likely* that responder has invitational values when INV is a good 8, having promised 6, than when it's a good 11 (having promised the same)); and, at least in NA, everyone else has already bid 1NT and will play the 5-3, and won't play the 4-3.

I like the weak NT, because of what it does to the rest of the system; but I know that when I am in a different spot from the strong NTers, I'm playing top-and-bottom bridge (even more than the wrongsiding) rather than going (more or less) with the field. I don't find this one to be a place where I want to do that, and it isn't one I feel or the system needs me to do it. It's also why I solve your issue on this hand with another king by almost never passing 1NT with 5M - everyone else will be in 2M (albeit the other way up), why gamble more than I have to? And therefore I don't have to raise on 3 to solve this problem (but also why the (13)(45)s are a big problem because I can't rebid NT), because we'll still be in the right spot.