[jillybean]

Just a fun hand. No agreements other than 2♥ will be 5+♥, 10+ hcp

How do you proceed with this?

---

[DavidKok]

3♠ for now, a GF hearts raise. I wish I played 4♦ as a fit-raise of partner here, but I've never discussed this auction. If you play a bunch of good/bad 2NT gadgets here you have several ways to bid single-suited diamonds and can argue that the jump should promise fit, but I have not made that agreement.

[P_Marlowe]

As suggested 3S.

Obviously you would like to keep diamonds in the picture, but without agreements
keep it simple, you have a major suit fit, you have the strength for game, tell
those partner as fast as possible.

It is not 100% clear, that 3S is shortage, but this is not really relevant, it
could / should be a strong raise with interest for more, but maybe partner takes it
as splinter, which would be great, maybe he sees the splinter due to his own holding.

[pescetom]

I fully agree with DavidKok, wish I had the 4♦ agreement but 3♠ will do.
If partner can manage 4♣ then there is some hope, otherwise settle for game.

[mikeh]

I’m happy with 3S, but I don’t understand why that shows hearts. In my partnerships it simply shows an unspecified gf. The logic of the auction implies that it’s either hearts or a monster one suiter, likely interested in 3N opposite a spade stopper. Partner is expected to bid 3N if he wants to play there opposite the one suiter…knowing that opener will pull 3N with the heart gf hand.

In my main partnership we use good-bad 2N but that’s beyond the scope of this sub forum.

[DavidKok]

I put the monster hand without fit in double-then-3♠, on the logic that we are strong enough to double again if they raise past 3NT. If our hand is weaker we arguably don't have a GF and can just rebid 3♦.

The ambiguous treatment is also popular and only infrequently causes a problem (e.g. if partner rebids 4♥ despite not expecting support, are we strong enough to raise to 5? Which of our rebids even confirm hearts?), but I think the no-fit hands can double more comfortably.

[jillybean]

4♦ showing this diamond holding and 3 card support for partner would be nice.

If I'm playing G/B 2NT does that make 3D gf?

I chose a routine 3♠ , generic gf. Do you let partner play in NT with a spade stopper?

[DavidKok]

jillybean, on 2023-December-31, 13:14, said:

4♦ showing this diamond holding and 3 card support for partner would be nice.

If I'm playing G/B 2NT does that make 3D gf?

That depends on the version you play, so ultimately it is just partnership agreement. This topic has come up before, I'll give a quick overview.

• Regardless of which version you play, really lousy minima should just pass. So any bid here promises competitive values beyond those shown by the opening. In a system where 1NT is 10-13 there are already inferences for partner (though since every bid shows an unbalanced hand this isn't that vital, but it should change the meaning of 2♥), even more so if 1♣ contains a lot of balanced hands.
  
• I think if you put all 'bad' hands in 2NT and 'good' hands in the direct bid, accounting for partner's 10+ 2♥ bid, you simply get that 2NT shows unbal 12-14 and a direct bid shows 15+ and is GF. Weaker hands should pass even with some extra shape.
  
• I've heard of Good-Bad versions where both Bad (meaning approx 11-12) and Good (meaning GF) hands bid 2NT, while intermediate (meaning 13-14) hands bid 3m directly. This is more complicated and loses bidding space on the GF hands, but has higher resolution. Notably, it lets us show slight extras before LHO takes another bid, which can be valuable.

jillybean, on 2023-December-31, 13:14, said:

I chose a routine 3♠ , generic gf. Do you let partner play in NT with a spade stopper?

No, our hand is very suitable for hearts.

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean, on 2023-December-31, 13:14, said:

<snip>
If I'm playing G/B 2NT does that make 3D gf?

I chose a routine 3♠ , generic gf. Do you let partner play in NT with a spade stopper?

#1 depends on the version, the classical version let the the bad hand go through 2NT, i.e. 3D
would be forcing, I prefer that the strong hand goes through 2NT, which works nicely in the context
of a weak NT, opener has quite often the strong NT hand.
The classical version got developed in strong NT land, ..., and opener will have quite often the weak
NT in a strong NT system.

#2 at one point in time you should tell partner, that you have a fit for his long suit.
This the most important information partner is looking for, due to this, I prefer, that 3S showes support,
putting the big nonfitting hands in the hand, that make a X, but if you and our partner think differently, this
is fine, ..., but you still give partner this piece of informarion.
Bidding 4H now showes SI, since you could have bid 4H direct, instead you choose to go through 3S,
the SI is muted due to the lost spade values.

[jillybean]

So it's really Lebensohl over interference. I can pretty much put 2nt in the same category as 2♣ 'never natural' bids.
I have had discussions here about G/B2nt in the past, I still haven't added it to the card. I think I would tend to forget it, especially with everything I've just added.

Here's the full hand, partner ducked the club lead =

---

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I dont understand the 5H bid, unless your p assumed, 3S was fit showing.
You should clarify this.

And yes Good Bad is a Lebensohl variant.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[jillybean]

P_Marlowe, on 2024-January-01, 14:28, said:

Hi,

I dont understand the 5H bid, unless your p assumed, 3S was fit showing.
You should clarify this.

And yes Good Bad is a Lebensohl variant.

With kind regards
Marlowe

The 5♥ was plucked from somewhere! Xmas BBO bidding with a random partner, self rated expert of course.

[sfi]

jillybean, on 2024-January-01, 11:42, said:

I have had discussions here about G/B2nt in the past, I still haven't added it to the card. I think I would tend to forget it, especially with everything I've just added.

G/B 2NT is a really useful convention. It will also take a long time to really assimilate, and will mess you up while you're going through the process. I've worked with two serious partnerships to add it and it took about a year before they were fully comfortable with it.

On the other hand, once you go through the process once, you've got it for life.

So yes, you may well want to skip G/B 2NT for now if you've made a bunch of other changes.