[32519]

Basic system is 2/1:
Partner opens the bidding with 1♣ and you hold -

---

How should the auction proceed?

[the hog]

Well, 1D is a decent start.

[RunemPard]

1♣-1♦
1M-4SF
xy-3♣

1♣-1♦
1N-3♠ if splinter is a possibility I guess...but never really done it in this spot (is it ♦s, ♣s, both, or can be any?

1♣-1♦
1N-2♦ if playing xyz

1♣-1♦
1N-2♣ if playing NMF and agreed to play this on after 1♣-1♦

You made this pretty hard to answer by giving us one bid and one hand...

[MrAce]

32519, on 2014-March-01, 02:19, said:

Basic system is 2/1:
Partner opens the bidding with 1♣ and you hold -

---

How should the auction proceed?

Jesus, please help this guy !

[hrothgar]

32519, on 2014-March-01, 02:19, said:

Basic system is 2/1:
Partner opens the bidding with 1♣ and you hold -

---

How should the auction proceed?

I tried very hard to come up with plausible bids other than 1♦

In theory, a 3♠ splinter might work well.
It establishes a GF and makes it harder for the opponents to show their major

In a similar vein, one might consider a 2♣ inverted minor raise.

The problem with both these bids is that opener has only promises three clubs and there's a decent chance that you're setting trump in a seven card fit.

This pretty much forces you into responding 1♦.
You should be well positioned after opener's rebid.

[32519]

RunemPard, on 2014-March-01, 08:11, said:

1♣-1♦
1M-4SF
xy-3♣

1♣-1♦
1N-3♠ if splinter is a possibility I guess...but never really done it in this spot (is it ♦s, ♣s, both, or can be any?

1♣-1♦
1N-2♦ if playing xyz

1♣-1♦
1N-2♣ if playing NMF and agreed to play this on after 1♣-1♦

You made this pretty hard to answer by giving us one bid and one hand...

Thanks for this. It is the sort of answer I was looking for. Unfortunately I can't find the full hand in the OP but I did incur a similar one recently presented here:

---

3NT went down 1 went the club finesse was taken in the wrong direction. I don't think 5♣ can fail, even playing double dummy?

How is North supposed to know when to pull 3NT to the minor suit with the sort of hand he has?

[hrothgar]

32519, on 2014-March-01, 21:34, said:

How is North supposed to know when to pull 3NT to the minor suit with the sort of hand he has?

If I were North, I'd focus on more basic issues like what a reverse shows.

[johnu]

32519, on 2014-March-01, 21:34, said:

Thanks for this. It is the sort of answer I was looking for. Unfortunately I can't find the full hand in the OP but I did incur a similar one recently presented here:

---

3NT went down 1 went the club finesse was taken in the wrong direction. I don't think 5♣ can fail, even playing double dummy?

How is North supposed to know when to pull 3NT to the minor suit with the sort of hand he has?

Looks like a well oiled partnership to me.

[mike777]

32519, on 2014-March-01, 21:34, said:

Thanks for this. It is the sort of answer I was looking for. Unfortunately I can't find the full hand in the OP but I did incur a similar one recently presented here:

---

3NT went down 1 went the club finesse was taken in the wrong direction. I don't think 5♣ can fail, even playing double dummy?

How is North supposed to know when to pull 3NT to the minor suit with the sort of hand he has?

I hope you are joking:


1) 1d =fine

2) 1h rebid =fine


if we get to 3nt ok....rub of the green

perhaps:

1c=1d
1h(unbal)=2d(art/gf)
2s(often short d)=3c(*gf/nat)
?

at this point pard knows we have true game force...real diamonds and real clubs.

[FrancesHinden]

If you just look at responder's hand, then after 1C - 1D - 2S - 3C - 3NT the most likely final contract is 6C, with 7C running second. That is why passing 3NT is wrong.

The 'problem' on the two hands you posted is that opener jumped to 2S showing a game forcing unbalanced hand with insufficient strength. For the auction given, responder is entitled to look for something like AQxx AKx x AQxxx opposite.

[kenrexford]

Interesting problem. If you start with 1D and partner bids 1H like a rational partner, a 3S splinter at this point would be wonderful if it agrees clubs. But it sounds like heart agreement. Maybe it shouldn't. If Walsh treatment, maybe Responder should simply bid 2H with that hand? With no Walsh, the problem is greater.

[MrAce]

kenrexford, on 2014-March-02, 05:29, said:

Interesting problem. If you start with 1D and partner bids 1H like a rational partner, a 3S splinter at this point would be wonderful if it agrees clubs. But it sounds like heart agreement. Maybe it shouldn't. If Walsh treatment, maybe Responder should simply bid 2H with that hand? With no Walsh, the problem is greater.

How about after

1♣--1♦
1♥

2♠ =club fit and splinter in either M
3♠/4♣ = ♥ fit and splinters ?

[kenrexford]

MrAce, on 2014-March-02, 05:34, said:

How about after

1♣--1♦
1♥

2♠ =club fit and splinter in either M
3♠/4♣ = ♥ fit and splinters ?

I was thinking the same thing.

[nige1]

32519, on 2014-March-01, 02:19, said:

Basic system is 2/1:
Partner opens the bidding with 1♣ and you hold -
How should the auction proceed?

---

32519 seems to have posed an intriguing question. When playing a more natural system, arguably, it's best to use fit-jumps over minor openings (here you would bid 2♦). Even playing 2/1, it makes sense to play fit-jumps over a 1♦ opener. Over 1♣ it's less clear, but since opener often has four or more ♣s, IMO, fit-jumps should still work well.

[FrancesHinden]

MrAce, on 2014-March-02, 05:34, said:

How about after

1♣--1♦
1♥

2♠ =club fit and splinter in either M
3♠/4♣ = ♥ fit and splinters ?

Before we started playing T-Walsh, we used to play that the jump to 2♠ was INV+ with three clubs (allowing you to play in 2NT rather than 3C opposite, say, a 4414 minimum as well as making it easier for responder to bid on).
This treatment is particularly useful if the 1♥ rebid doesn't show an unbalanced hand. I think this is more useful than using it to promise 4-card support and a major suit singleton, which is a rarer hand type.

[aguahombre]

FrancesHinden, on 2014-March-02, 12:25, said:

Before we started playing T-Walsh, we used to play that the jump to 2♠ was INV+ with three clubs (allowing you to play in 2NT rather than 3C opposite, say, a 4414 minimum as well as making it easier for responder to bid on).
This treatment is particularly useful if the 1♥ rebid doesn't show an unbalanced hand. I think this is more useful than using it to promise 4-card support and a major suit singleton, which is a rarer hand type.

Even playing regular Walsh style responses and rebids where 1H does show an unbalanced hand and 1D denies a major unless G.F., the 2♠ jump rebid by responder is valuable as you say.

This is consistent with that other thread where we debated how 1♠ 4SF should differ from 2♠. We extend it even further (minority treatment).

1C-1D
1H-2H is also G.F. by inference, so whatever responder does after 1H the question of a possible heart fit is resolved and a 2♠ jump won't include a heart fit.

[gszes]

Bridge bidding is an exercise not just in showing ones hand
to partner but in planning how you intend to accomplish this
mission (even if you have a rockcrusher and immediately want
to take control you still need to plan how you intend to get
the information you need to make a final decision).

There are no (as in zero) set of rules on the proper way to
show a 1354 hand after partner opens 1c. The decision on how to
proceed needs to be based on a variety of factors like how
strong you are, do you have good intermediates or is your dia
suit of excellent quality. This hand is invitational in power
though the bidding may turn it into a game forcing bid. This
means you should be planning on how best to show your various
assets to your partner in the safest and most economical way
possible. Assuming standard bidding---the best start seems to
be 1d.
Partner's next bid should give us a strong idea on the best
way to proceed with this hand -- for example, if opener were to
bid 1s I would downgrade this hand to a simple 2c bid since
partner rates to have "wasted" values opposite our singleton.

In the given example 1c 1d 2s (ugh) responder should take
into consideration the extra power opener needs for this reverse
and they will have to make at least one try for slam even if
opener tries to sign off in 3n. 1c 1d 2s 3h (fsf) 3n 4c (at worst
a mild slam try) will probably propel this hand into 6c.

[aguahombre]

gszes, on 2014-March-02, 13:55, said:

In the given example 1c 1d 2s (ugh) responder should take
into consideration the extra power opener needs for this reverse
and they will have to make at least one try for slam even if
opener tries to sign off in 3n. 1c 1d 2s 3h (fsf) 3n 4c (at worst
a mild slam try) will probably propel this hand into 6c.

Except 2S was not a reverse. It was a Jump Shift rebid which commits the partnership to game even if Responder has a minimum response. After that, responder doesn't have to do anything fancy like cleverly bidding the fourth suit with three small. He merely bids 3C, thereafter cooperating or initiating slam moves.

Certainly any South which would have bid 2S on that collection will also screw up the continuations, though. He might even pass 3C, which will have an undeserved good result.

[HighLow21]

MrAce, on 2014-March-01, 08:34, said:

Jesus, please help this guy !

LOL. MrAce, to cross-reference my other post: Lifetime adjusted -0.30 IMPs average.

Amazing, the predictive power of statistics.

Other post is here.

[32519]

nige1, on 2014-March-02, 05:55, said:

32519 seems to have posed an intriguing question. When playing a more natural system, arguably, it's best to use fit-jumps over minor openings (here you would bid 2♦). Even playing 2/1, it makes sense to play fit-jumps over a 1♦ opener. Over 1♣ it's less clear, but since opener often has four or more ♣s, IMO, fit-jumps should still work well.

How do you marry your 2♦ fit jump here with Criss Cross Raise?