[msjennifer]

Very first BOARD 7.

---

. South opens 1H and North replies 2 Club..What would be Souths appropriate rebid ?

[smerriman]

Director!

(I only have 12 cards.)

[msjennifer]

SRY.Typiing mistake.Please read S-J985

[gordontd]

2NT unless you've agreed that reverses don't show extra.

[Tramticket]

Same considerations as the other hand that you posted. We play a weak NT and would have opened 1NT. Playing a strong NT, you presumably rebid 2NT to show the weak NT type hand

[fromageGB]

As always it depends on system agreements. What would North reply with a GF hand with 4 spades and 5 or 6 clubs? If he always bids 1♠ then now 2NT is natural and best. If he could bid 2♣, then you need to bid 2♠.

Having said that, 2♣ is often a multiway bid, to cover a number of awkward hands, such as an invitational or GF hand with 3 or 4 hearts as well as the natural 2/1 in clubs. I play that it could also be a 16+ hand with no 5 card suit for a 2/1, therefore my reply is always a relay of 2♦.

Without any agreements, 2NT is safest.

[nige1]

msjennifer "Very first BOARD 7"
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Depends on agreements. For example ...

If you've agreed weak NT, 4-card major openers, and 15-19 2N rebid, then, I rank
1. 2♥ = NAT. Faute de mieux.
2. 2♦ = NAT. Risky. Hope for the best.

Playing 2/1. with 14-16 or 15-17 NT openers, you might rebid 2N

---

[FelicityR]

Quote

If you've agreed weak NT, 4-card major openers, and 15-19 2NT rebid then I rank 2♥ = NAT. Faute de mieux.
2♦ = NAT. Risky. Hope for the best.

No! My apologies, Nigel, but this hand is the one exception where I would open 1NT weak with 5-4 majors as I haven't got a suitable rebid over 1♥ - 2♣/2♦. I would treat that poor ♥ 5 card suit the same as a 4 card one with an honour.

Other than that if you have a 2♦/2♥ Flannery opener (or should that be Flattery with this hand?) on your convention card....

[HeavyDluxe]

Assuming strong NT and normal-ish agreements (or not discussed), this is a 2NT bid IMO.

[akwoo]

I prefer agreements where you rebid 2♥ (no matter what natural-ish system we're playing - for a strong club system, this is a max in context and worth 2♠). This might not be everyone's cup of tea.

[Zelandakh]

It depends on system:-
In SA/5+S Acol: rebid 2NT.
In SEF/Forum D: rebid 2♥.
In Acol/Prec/Fantunes: open 1NT.

2/1 is probably the most interesting case. Playing 14-16 I would open 1NT but the rebid in a 15-17 system is less clear. Do we really want to emphasise our major suits in a strong auction? I think some input from the stronger players experienced in 2/1 would be useful there. Using the traditional rules ("don't bid bad suits in strong auctions") a NT rebid might be best even here.

[mikeh]

We’re not going to resolve the ‘does 2H promise 6 or may it be rebid on 5’ here dispute on this or any other hand. I am firmly in the ‘doesn’t promise 6’ camp, for many reasons.

I’m also a member of the ‘2S shows extras’ school. 2S doesn’t show ‘reversing values’ but, for me, promises roughly a king value over a minimum rebid. This is because I believe that it is useful to have the partners try to limit their values early, if that can be done safely, even or especially in strong constructive bidding.

I also, with this hand, do not want to face responder bidding 3S over a 2N rebid. I have to raise spades, and who could ten blame partner for expecting more than 1 hcp in the majors? It’s not that my preferred sequence, when he has spades, of 2H 2S 3S is much better, but we have an extra round of bidding space, which is always useful.

Thus for me this is an easy 2H. I will raise 2N to game, and bid 3N over 3H. Other, less common, continuations will usually sort themselves out.

If 2H promised 6, then I’d bid 2N, rather than the seemingly descriptive, but fundamentally misleading 2S, and hope he doesn’t bid 3S.

Btw, I don’t know if any good pairs who, in a standa d or 2/1 context, respond 1S with game values and longer clubs. That way madness lies.

[KingCovert]

For me, it depends on whether 2♣ is game-forcing. If it is, then I'm able to bid 2♠. But, from my experience, partner would be pretty mad at me for having 1 point in my two bid suits, as Mikeh says.

I think that pragmatically, I'd bid 2NT here, because I feel like I want to play 3NT opposite like 70-80% of partners hands that have game interest, even with fit in a major. Not sure if that's an accurate judgement, but, this hand just looks gross in this auction so far. I just don't know if I can make 10 tricks with this hand. How many heart ruffs can I really take in spades for example while still collecting spades for not too many losers? Partner doesn't figure to have many small spade spots, and if partner does... Well.... I have some quick losers in spades to battle now. Either way, yikes.

My problem here is, I just don't play 2/1 precisely because of sequences like this. So, I can't have a good agreement for a sequence that I can't encounter. My auction goes 1♠, 2♣, 2♥ (I play Canape), and partner will still be made at me for having 1 point in my two suits, but, partner will know my shape and I won't have promised extras.

[helene_t]

Zelandakh, on 2020-January-28, 10:49, said:

Using the traditional rules ("don't bid bad suits in strong auctions") a NT rebid might be best even here.

I am not sure if rule applies here. 2♥ is not bidding hearts, it is just a convention saying that I have nothing particular to say. I think that if we played the cheapest step (2♦ here) as the catch-all instead of 2♥, people would be quite happy to bid that.

On the other hand, 2♥ could easily be a 6-card suit, and opener may not bid a mediocre 6-card a 3rd time. So it's not very satisfactory.

So I think you have to bid 2♥ if 2NT systematically shows more than this. If it is a shape issue, I still think 2NT is better than 2♥, although I suppose you need to have the agreement that it doesn't deny spades.