[mike777]

To be fair jump rebids in minor have quite a wide range thus the issue.

Here I would reverse with 2h, a very minimum hand for the reverse. In any event I would also end up in 3nt.

Many issues for the two of you to discuss:
1) what is the range of your minor suit jump rebids?
2) how strong is a reverse and follow up bidding by responder?
3) aggressive bidding gets you to an aggressive 23 hcp game contracts, that need not be a bad thing.

[straube]

the knr is 20.1

I would reverse into hearts.

[Vampyr]

straube, on 2014-March-30, 17:41, said:

the knr is 20.1

In this forum you might want to elaborate.

[Stephen Tu]

Cascade, on 2014-March-30, 16:32, said:

Thats fine however I think the standard for a 3♦ rebid is a six card suit and 16-18 hcp. Not 16 distributional points.

Is it? When I learned SA from Goren/Root, I was always under the impression that the books said it was 16-18 including some points for distribution. So something like a great 14 to a bad 17 hcp.

[billllbo]

20.1 knr points (Kaplan and Rubens evaluation) is quite strong. However if p expects at least 16hcps on a 3m rebid, he expects quite a few knr points. (hmm, maybe 19?) I consider this 6421 hand with great points in the long suits certainly in the range of a 3d rebid.

However, I've never run into any partner(yet) who claimed that my hand was not strong enough to reverse and that I should have jumped to 3m instead. Huge bonus to bid your second suit when p has 4 hearts.

If not you may still be able to stop below game:

1d-1s-2h-2n-3d
1d-1s-2h-3c-3d

Now partner has a choice whether to press on with 3n or 3h (holding 3 hearts) and if game goes down you're in a much better spot to win the postmortem. ;-)

[helene_t]

Cascade, on 2014-March-30, 16:32, said:

Thats fine however I think the standard for a 3♦ rebid is a six card suit and 16-18 hcp. Not 16 distributional points.

However this hand has an excellent 15 hcp so is worthy of an upgrade.

I think that's about right. 15 mediocre HCPs and a 1363 shape I would always rebid 2♦, distributional points nonwithstanding. I might add a bit for a seventh diamond, though. The point is that 1363 is the expected shape so you don't add anything for that. If you were considering opening (or rebiding) 1NT with a 2362, on the other hand, you could add a bid for the 5th/6th diamond, as those would be unexpected distributional features.

[billw55]

The hand is obviously good enough for a strong rebid. I think 2♥ is best. However, 3♦ is still much better than the gross underbid of 2♦. As it turns out, the hand is a misfit and therefore plays poorly. But that does not make a strong rebid incorrect.

Change one small heart into a small spade, and 3♦ is the only decent bid.

Since your partner claimed that the hand was not good enough, I think he was very wrong, and clearly resulting.

[bacca2002]

2♥ is what I would bid and most experts. First, this hand is worth 18 points, 15HCP+2 for a singleton + 1 for a doubleton, and after 2♥, partner would bid 2NT to show a minimum(6-10), because he shouldn't count a singleton in diamonds opposite of 6+ unless he finds a heart fit, and then 3♦ is rebid, which is passed since he doesn't have to bid again, and he he a misfit. 3♦ is also fine, but should be passed, since he has a misfit. With Qxx and even 3 less HCP, I would accept and bid 3NT. It also keeps the avenues if partner has a slightly better hand(3NT, 4♥, 5♦)open.

This post has been edited by bacca2002: 2014-March-31, 11:23

[m1cha]

smerriman, on 2014-March-28, 19:21, said:

---

I was East, playing SAYC, IMPS.

After 3NT failed miserably, the following conversation occurred:

W: You do not have the points to jump in diamonds.
E: I have 17 points.
W: I only count 15.
E: 15 HCP, plus 2 for the 6 card diamond suit.
W: Those points are worthless if diamonds are not trumps, you cannot count them. Especially when I passed initially; you must bid 2!d.

With a ♥ lead and the ♦ breaking badly, the small ♦ cards may indeed turn out to be worthless in NT. But with ♦ breaking 3-3 and the ♦Q with N, you will get 9 top tricks in NT with each of the small ♦ cards worth a trick. This is why in NT you do count points for long suits (as long as you can expected them to be established) but you do not count points for short suits.

smerriman, on 2014-March-28, 19:21, said:

The most difficult part of discussions like this is you're never sure whether your partner is correct or has no clue at all, especially when your partner has specified their skill as 'Advanced' or 'Expert' (in my experience usually this has no correlation with skill).

Well observed.

smerriman, on 2014-March-28, 19:21, said:

To me 3!d seems like an obvious bid, and whether partner has passed or not has nothing to do with it.

To me it seems at least obvious that this hand is too strong to bid 2♦. Imagine West holds ♠Axxx ♥xx ♦Qxxx ♣Axx. West may pass 2♦, and you end up playing 2♦+4.

Yet I do not think that 3♦ is the best available bid. 2♥ shows more or less the same strength. As mentioned by others already, West may still have a 4-card ♥ suit, so you should show your own 4-card ♥ suit now trying to reach full game in a major.

There is yet another good point in favor of this bid. By bidding 3♦ you show just 6 cards, and West may still hope you hold something like ♠Axx ♣Kx which could substantially support the West hand. By bidding 2♥ you show at least 9 red cards describing your hand much better. Now West should expect neither length nor honors in any black suit - which renders the West hand virtually worthless. The only helpful card for East is the ♣A. There is no other entry into the West hand for finessing or whatever. The thing to do for West after 2♥ is sign off in the lowest contract possible. Bid 2NT to show minimum without fit if it does. More common in SAYC and also suitable here is 2NT as Lebensohl, then pass the conventional ♦ rebid. If East happens to rebid ♣, I would also pass, probably driving East crazy at the time but it may turn out to get a top score. At least from the point of view of the East hand, 3♣ in 6-0 looks better than 3♦ in 5-1. With both hands as shown, 3♦ looks slightly better to me with the chances to make marginally below 50 %.

With distributional values you have to bid strongly (particularly with a long major) or you will never reach full game when you have a fit. If you do not have a fit, signing off in a part score is an art.

[Vampyr]

bacca2002, on 2014-March-31, 11:19, said:

2♥ is what I would bid and most experts.

Maybe this is so. But how many experts have you polled?

Quote

First, this hand is worth 18 points, 15HCP+2 for a singleton + 1 for a doubleton, and after 2♥, partner would bid 2NT to show a minimum(6-10), because he shouldn't count a singleton in diamonds opposite of 6+ unless he finds a heart fit, and then 3♦ is rebid, which is passed since he doesn't have to bid again, and he he a misfit. 3♦ is also fine, but should be passed, since he has a misfit. With Qxx and even 3 less HCP, I would accept and bid 3NT. It also keeps the avenues if partner has a slightly better hand(3NT, 4♥, 5♦)open.

And do these experts count points for shortness before a fit is found, or at all?

[the hog]

Vampyr, on 2014-March-31, 22:20, said:

Maybe this is so. But how many experts have you polled?



And do these experts count points for shortness before a fit is found, or at all?

Perhaps his eggspurts do.
By the way, the hand is worth 2H - barely.

[Stephen Tu]

Vampyr, on 2014-March-31, 22:20, said:

And do these experts count points for shortness before a fit is found, or at all?

Some experts advocate counting points for length before a fit is found, then adding additional points for shortness on top of that if a fit is found. Since length is correlated with shortness elsewhere, for those who only count shortness points and not length, I suppose it's roughly equivalent to counting points for shortness before fit, although on a lower scale.

[stevenagy]

This is strong enough to jump in diamonds or reverse for a couple of my partnerships as well. I would reverse into hearts (even though a spade bid by partner denies 4 hearts) to show the shape, and rebid 3♦ over a probable 2 nt (I doubt I would hear 3♣ as that would be gf for us, and I don't think most of my partners would want to force with what they have after hearing about my shape) to finish the description.

[billw55]

stevenagy, on 2014-April-01, 12:00, said:

This is strong enough to jump in diamonds or reverse for a couple of my partnerships as well. I would reverse into hearts (even though a spade bid by partner denies 4 hearts) to show the shape, and rebid 3♦ over a probable 2 nt (I doubt I would hear 3♣ as that would be gf for us, and I don't think most of my partners would want to force with what they have after hearing about my shape) to finish the description.

Interesting. What will your partner bid with 5-4 majors? How about 6-4?

[Cascade]

Stephen Tu, on 2014-March-30, 19:00, said:

Is it? When I learned SA from Goren/Root, I was always under the impression that the books said it was 16-18 including some points for distribution. So something like a great 14 to a bad 17 hcp.

You may be correct. I just remember the 16-18 numbers from Ron Klinger's Bridge Basics which our club used for years as a beginner's book. But I went and checked and he does say to add two points for the six card suit when opening the bidding so effectively his range is 14-16 hcp. This seems a little light to me.

Truscott's Bidding Dictionary gives a range of +15-18 which means some hands can be upgraded at the lower end. He also notes that the four-card side suit is normally not held.

Crowhurst in Precision Bidding in Acol and Acol Index describes the hand as seven playing tricks.

On many hands, with scattered honours, seven playing tricks is less easy to determine and the more rigid hcp ranges may be better to use for a novice or beginner. But certainly a hand like Ax xx AKQJxx xxx would be suitable for a jump 3♦ rebid.

In practice I use the 16-18 hcp with reasonably frequent upgrades with 15 hcp and the exception 14 hcp as shown above. I would also upgrade a little with a seventh or eighth diamond. My style maybe slightly more conservative though as we respond reasonably light. So Stephen's range from Goren/Root of a great 14 to a bad 17 is probably a sound working range. Perhaps I would not upgrade many 17s so great 14 to 17hcp.

[bacca2002]

Yes, you count distribution always, unless you are sure that you are going to play notrump(I follow Richard Pavlicek), and you would rebid 3 diamonds to show a minimum. A reverse shows 17-22(maximum opening), and you have 18, and next turn, the 3 diamonds shows 17-18(with 19+ you would have jump reversed, showing a 6-4 shape).

[Vampyr]

bacca2002, on 2014-April-01, 20:34, said:

(with 19+ you would have jump reversed, showing a 6-4 shape).

A jump reverse is normally a splinter.