[jillybean]

Playing standard 2/1 systems, what is your plan here?

---

[Cyberyeti]

I can see no alternative to 2♣ then 3♦ (yes I might bid 2N over 2♠), this hand is just too good to open at the 1 level

[mikeh]

I don’t see this as ugly as much as I see it as awkward, and I know I’m arguing semantics. What else from a former lawyer😀?

As it is, and I’ve opened 23 at the one level before (with a stiff king), I open this 2C despite the horrors that may await.

I can almost surely count 9 tricks in notrump unless they run 5+ spades first so I can’t stomach 1D…although it could definitely work out…imagine LHO bidding spades and partner raising diamonds.

[jillybean]

Ugly 23 count was simply to make the title interesting. Hell, I don't come across many ugly 11 counts.

Out on my phone, will continue with the hand a little later.

[P_Marlowe]

1D, if you start with 2C, the first time you finished showing all your suits, will be after 4C.

[Cyberyeti]

P_Marlowe, on 2023-December-10, 12:57, said:

1D, if you start with 2C, the first time you finished showing all your suits, will be after 4C.

May depend on methods, after 2♣-2♥ (positive) I may never show my suits

[bluenikki]

jillybean, on 2023-December-10, 10:33, said:

Playing standard 2/1 systems, what is your plan here?

---

2♣ followed by 3♦.


The crucial fact is no positional advantage to this hand's declaring 3NT.


If you replace the ♥ ace with king-jack, you have to open 1♦.

[pescetom]

Huge two-suiters with a longer minor are always awkward. Our agreement is that they will never go through 2♣, where 3m is imposition of trumps and invites control-bids: perhaps imperfect, but clear and effective. So they either take their chances in 1m (not here, and not just because of lack of positional advantage) or in some degree of 2NT (here).
Looks too good for a simple 2♣-2♦;2N so it goes through Kokish showing 24-25.

[jillybean]

---

I'm worried that this will stall in 3NT

[mw64ahw]

jillybean, on 2023-December-10, 20:13, said:

---

I'm worried that this will stall in 3NT

West has enough to go beyond 3NT and support for ♦ albeit with a flat hand so why stall in 3NT
This hand is one of the reasons I moved away from standard so I get to show xx(54) via 2NT [weak xx55./22+ xx(54)]-3♣ (preference)-3♦ xx54.
You now have an extra level for investigating slam, although may be a bit tenuous from West's perspective, but if you don't invite then you do stall

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

one big issue with the given seq. is, that responder could still be broke, even if he bids 3NT.
And 3NT wont make opener happy, the risk are useless spade values.
I dont know how common this is, but we play the 2D relais as pos, with 2H being complete broke,
i.e. 2D showes at least 1 trick.
This will allow opener to bid 3NT, opener can still contemplate, if he passes or bids on.
It works reasonable well without being overly complicated.
But it wont help here, you dont have the 33HCP power, you only have 30, i.e. a purely quantitative
auction wont cut it.

An alternative option would have been to bid 2NT instead of 2D, ... you only have 7HCP,
but kings. Not sure, if this would help, the 5-3 diamond fit is hard to discover after 2NT.
2NT may promise more, ...
If 2NT promises more than you have, 3NT should end the auction, you are limited by your failure
to bid 2NT.

My guess is also you play MP, and bypassing 3NT without being sure to be able to stop in 4NT
is a big problem.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[AL78]

What would 4♣ mean after West bids 3NT in that sequence? If it is natural and a slam try that would allow West to sign off in 4NT if they are not interested, else show a control.

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2023-December-10, 20:13, said:

---

I'm worried that this will stall in 3NT

Why?

Without, and this is important, seeing the NS cards, where would you want to play?

[bluenikki]

jillybean, on 2023-December-10, 20:13, said:

---

I'm worried that this will stall in 3NT

Wouldn't 3NT be the second negative?

I don't know what West *should* bid here, but 3NT is excluded.

[jillybean]

mikeh, on 2023-December-11, 09:35, said:

Why?

Without, and this is important, seeing the NS cards, where would you want to play?

3nt, anything else needs a 3-3 club break and spades onside. The awful start to auction is going to make it difficult to get to 3nt

[mikeh]

bluenikki, on 2023-December-11, 10:40, said:

Wouldn't 3NT be the second negative?

I don't know what West *should* bid here, but 3NT is excluded.

I have no idea where you picked up these ideas, but please drop them. 3N is NOT a second negative

[mw64ahw]

mikeh, on 2023-December-11, 11:55, said:

I have no idea where you picked up these ideas, but please drop them. 3N is NOT a second negative

I guess you bid 3♥ as a 2nd negative?

[DavidKok]

I don't play a second negative over 2♣ at all and recommend that approach.

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean, on 2023-December-11, 10:43, said:

3nt, anything else needs a 3-3 club break and spades onside. The awful start to auction is going to make it difficult to get to 3nt

No, West has a simple 3NT bid over 3D, what else?

[bluenikki]

mikeh, on 2023-December-11, 11:55, said:

I have no idea where you picked up these ideas, but please drop them. 3N is NOT a second negative

My source was a course from Bernie Chazen.

What do *you* think the second negative is after 3♦? And what is *your* source?