Back to Basics Pt.1

Post by Carl
Vulnerability and/or scoring is not given;
uncontested auction, playing 2/1.
Q1062 K83 42 K1087
Is it simply a bad choice to respond 1S or is this open to debate?
Has your answer changed over the last say, 25 years?
Thanks,
Carl

Imagine 1H - 2S. Just and idea of mine...the hand is strong enough for
the bid...in my not so humble opinion.

BR

Sid

2010-08-15 00:31:24 UTC

I bid 2H. with that hand.

However, change it to Q10632 K83 42 K108
now I go 1S, then 2H over 1NT/2C/2D.

Sid

Will in New Haven

2010-08-15 00:44:00 UTC

It is open to debate. Players of Standard American (including SAYC and
2/1) are probably divided into three camps If the hand were a bit
weaker, say QTXX - KXX - XX - JTXX, the answers would probably be.

1: The hand is too weak for a 2H bid, so I have to bid 1NT (forcing)
and then show the Hearts at my next opportunity. Bidding the Spades
would just make for a more complicated auction.

2: The hand is too weak for a 2H bid, so I would usually bid 1NT
(forcing) and then show the Hearts at my next opportunity. However, I
can bid 1S "on the way" and maybe find a good second fit.

3: The weakest bid I can make with three-card support is a raise to
2H. If I bid 1S first, partner will play me for a better hand if I bid
2H over a 1NT rebid and won't know that I have three Hearts if I bid
2H over some other rebid. If I bid 1NT, the same sort of problems
arise.

I am in the third category but it is debatable.

However, most of the people who would find the six HCP hand too weak
for 2H would find the hand you posted ok for 2H. Group 1 and group 3
would bid 2H. I don't know what Group 3 would do.

--
Will in New Haven

castigamatti

2010-08-15 00:51:10 UTC

On Aug 15, 2:44 am, Will in New Haven

It is open to debate. Players of Standard American (including SAYC and
2/1) are probably divided into three camps If the hand were a bit
weaker, say QTXX - KXX - XX - JTXX, the answers would probably be.
1: The hand is too weak for a 2H bid, so I have to bid 1NT (forcing)
and then show the Hearts at my next opportunity. Bidding the Spades
would just make for a more complicated auction.
2: The hand is too weak for a 2H bid, so I would usually bid 1NT
(forcing) and then show the Hearts at my next opportunity. However, I
can bid 1S "on the way" and maybe find a good second fit.
3: The weakest bid I can make with three-card support is a raise to
2H. If I bid 1S first, partner will play me for a better hand if I bid
2H over a 1NT rebid and won't know that I have three Hearts if I bid
2H over some other rebid. If I bid 1NT, the same sort of problems
arise.
I am in the third category but it is debatable.
However, most of the people who would find the six HCP hand too weak
for 2H would find the hand you posted ok for 2H. Group 1 and group 3
would bid 2H. I don't know what Group 3 would do.
--
Will in New Haven

Too weak for a 2H response? A group of people from your pub I suppose.
Probably Q1098 K98 42 K1098 is too weak as well in that thorp of
yours.

BR

Will in New Haven

2010-08-15 02:37:57 UTC

Post by castigamatti
On Aug 15, 2:44 am, Will in New Haven

It is open to debate. Players of Standard American (including SAYC and
2/1) are probably divided into three camps If the hand were a bit
weaker, say QTXX - KXX - XX - JTXX, the answers would probably be.
1: The hand is too weak for a 2H bid, so I have to bid 1NT (forcing)
and then show the Hearts at my next opportunity. Bidding the Spades
would just make for a more complicated auction.
2: The hand is too weak for a 2H bid, so I would usually bid 1NT
(forcing) and then show the Hearts at my next opportunity. However, I
can bid 1S "on the way" and maybe find a good second fit.
3: The weakest bid I can make with three-card support is a raise to
2H. If I bid 1S first, partner will play me for a better hand if I bid
2H over a 1NT rebid and won't know that I have three Hearts if I bid
2H over some other rebid. If I bid 1NT, the same sort of problems
arise.
I am in the third category but it is debatable.
However, most of the people who would find the six HCP hand too weak
for 2H would find the hand you posted ok for 2H. Group 1 and group 3
would bid 2H. I don't know what Group 3 would do.
--
Will in New Haven

Too weak for a 2H response? A group of people from your pub I suppose.
Probably Q1098 K98 42 K1098 is too weak as well in that thorp of
yours

Actually it is a fairly large minority of posters on this newsgroup. I
disagree with them but there you are.

--
Will in New Haven

Fred.

2010-08-15 15:12:55 UTC

Post by castigamatti
On Aug 15, 2:44 am, Will in New Haven

It is open to debate. Players of Standard American (including SAYC and
2/1) are probably divided into three camps If the hand were a bit
weaker, say QTXX - KXX - XX - JTXX, the answers would probably be.
1: The hand is too weak for a 2H bid, so I have to bid 1NT (forcing)
and then show the Hearts at my next opportunity. Bidding the Spades
would just make for a more complicated auction.
2: The hand is too weak for a 2H bid, so I would usually bid 1NT
(forcing) and then show the Hearts at my next opportunity. However, I
can bid 1S "on the way" and maybe find a good second fit.
3: The weakest bid I can make with three-card support is a raise to
2H. If I bid 1S first, partner will play me for a better hand if I bid
2H over a 1NT rebid and won't know that I have three Hearts if I bid
2H over some other rebid. If I bid 1NT, the same sort of problems
arise.
I am in the third category but it is debatable.
However, most of the people who would find the six HCP hand too weak
for 2H would find the hand you posted ok for 2H. Group 1 and group 3
would bid 2H. I don't know what Group 3 would do.
--
Will in New Haven

Too weak for a 2H response? A group of people from your pub I suppose.
Probably Q1098 K98 42 K1098 is too weak as well in that thorp of
yours.
BR- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Playing forcing NT the single raise can become semi-constructive, say
7 to 9 HCP if semi-balanced with 3-card support shading to 6 dummy
points with 4-card support or a singleton. Playing this way, I would
consider QTXX - KXX - XX - JTXX to be borderline, and raise because of
the tens and the doubleton. With only the doubleton, i.e. with QXXX-
KXX-XX-JXXX, I would bid a forcing no-trump and correct 2C or 2D back
to hearts.

Narrowing the single raise in this way decreases the number of
revealing game tries you make.

Will's reasonable point was that if your single raise is weak enough,
then you might consider the OP hand too strong for a single raise.

Fred.

Carl

2010-08-15 01:08:45 UTC

On Aug 14, 8:44 pm, Will in New Haven

It is open to debate. Players of Standard American (including SAYC and
2/1) are probably divided into three camps If the hand were a bit
weaker, say QTXX - KXX - XX - JTXX, the answers would probably be.
1: The hand is too weak for a 2H bid, so I have to bid 1NT (forcing)
and then show the Hearts at my next opportunity. Bidding the Spades
would just make for a more complicated auction.
2: The hand is too weak for a 2H bid, so I would usually bid 1NT
(forcing) and then show the Hearts at my next opportunity. However, I
can bid 1S "on the way" and maybe find a good second fit.
3: The weakest bid I can make with three-card support is a raise to
2H. If I bid 1S first, partner will play me for a better hand if I bid
2H over a 1NT rebid and won't know that I have three Hearts if I bid
2H over some other rebid. If I bid 1NT, the same sort of problems
arise.
I am in the third category but it is debatable.
However, most of the people who would find the six HCP hand too weak
for 2H would find the hand you posted ok for 2H. Group 1 and group 3
would bid 2H. I don't know what Group 3 would do.
--
Will in New Haven

I didn't mention this, but we do NOT play Flannery. So then, part of
the unasked question is whether 1S caters well to uncovering a 4-4
spade fit that might get lost if opener cannot reverse.

The hand wasn't meant to open a debate on constructive raises, but I'm
interested in all opinions, so thanks for the three viewpoints you've
offered.

castigamatti

2010-08-15 01:14:58 UTC

Post by Carl
On Aug 14, 8:44 pm, Will in New Haven

It is open to debate. Players of Standard American (including SAYC and
2/1) are probably divided into three camps If the hand were a bit
weaker, say QTXX - KXX - XX - JTXX, the answers would probably be.
1: The hand is too weak for a 2H bid, so I have to bid 1NT (forcing)
and then show the Hearts at my next opportunity. Bidding the Spades
would just make for a more complicated auction.
2: The hand is too weak for a 2H bid, so I would usually bid 1NT
(forcing) and then show the Hearts at my next opportunity. However, I
can bid 1S "on the way" and maybe find a good second fit.
3: The weakest bid I can make with three-card support is a raise to
2H. If I bid 1S first, partner will play me for a better hand if I bid
2H over a 1NT rebid and won't know that I have three Hearts if I bid
2H over some other rebid. If I bid 1NT, the same sort of problems
arise.
I am in the third category but it is debatable.
However, most of the people who would find the six HCP hand too weak
for 2H would find the hand you posted ok for 2H. Group 1 and group 3
would bid 2H. I don't know what Group 3 would do.
--
Will in New Haven

I didn't mention this, but we do NOT play Flannery. So then, part of
the unasked question is whether 1S caters well to uncovering a 4-4
spade fit that might get lost if opener cannot reverse.
The hand wasn't meant to open a debate on constructive raises, but I'm
interested in all opinions, so thanks for the three viewpoints you've
offered.

All opinions? He is not open to debate, he is not 'interested in all
opinions'...so...u 2...

Sandy Barnes

2017-05-09 07:03:51 UTC

It is open to debate. Players of Standard American (including SAYC and
2/1) are probably divided into three camps If the hand were a bit
weaker, say QTXX - KXX - XX - JTXX, the answers would probably be.
1: The hand is too weak for a 2H bid, so I have to bid 1NT (forcing)
and then show the Hearts at my next opportunity. Bidding the Spades
would just make for a more complicated auction.
2: The hand is too weak for a 2H bid, so I would usually bid 1NT
(forcing) and then show the Hearts at my next opportunity. However, I
can bid 1S "on the way" and maybe find a good second fit.
3: The weakest bid I can make with three-card support is a raise to
2H. If I bid 1S first, partner will play me for a better hand if I bid
2H over a 1NT rebid and won't know that I have three Hearts if I bid
2H over some other rebid. If I bid 1NT, the same sort of problems
arise.
I am in the third category but it is debatable.
However, most of the people who would find the six HCP hand too weak
for 2H would find the hand you posted ok for 2H. Group 1 and group 3
would bid 2H. I don't know what Group 3 would do.
--
Will in New Haven

I agree with Will's analysis in general. However, with weak hands I would never call 1S, rather 1NT. I don't want to give the opponents any information, even that I have a real fit for partner.

boblipton

2010-08-15 01:35:01 UTC

Styles vary enormously, but I hew to the belief that if I have
support, I support. Happily, playing 2/1, this hand is a very clear
constructive raise,

Bob

Will in New Haven

2010-08-15 02:40:15 UTC

Post by boblipton

Styles vary enormously, but I hew to the belief that if I have
support, I support. Happily, playing 2/1, this hand is a very clear
constructive raise,

So, do you bid 1NT with a slightly weaker hand or 1S?

--
Will in New Haven

Co Wiersma

2010-08-15 09:22:47 UTC

Post by boblipton

Styles vary enormously, but I hew to the belief that if I have
support, I support. Happily, playing 2/1, this hand is a very clear
constructive raise,

So, do you bid 1NT with a slightly weaker hand or 1S?
--
Will in New Haven

and also
do you have means to reach 4S if that is the game?

Co Wiersma

paul

2010-08-15 02:03:18 UTC

To me, odds are slim that a better fit exists in spades. To take
advantage of the 4-4 generally requires that you can pull trumps,
establish hearts and control the side suits long enough to enjoy the
discards on the long suit. That's a lot to ask for a part score hand.
Far more often, partner will have 6 hearts, missing at least one major
suit Ace, and you risk a ruff any time the opening leader has a
singleton heart. (In other words, a nine card side fit is riskier than
eight.)

Also, of course, the sequence 1H-1S-2C-2H sounds like mere preference,
while 1H-1S-1NT-2H sounds like a stronger hand, though you could agree
otherwise.

Co Wiersma

2010-08-15 09:29:20 UTC

Post by paul

To me, odds are slim that a better fit exists in spades. To take
advantage of the 4-4 generally requires that you can pull trumps,
establish hearts and control the side suits long enough to enjoy the
discards on the long suit. That's a lot to ask for a part score hand.
Far more often, partner will have 6 hearts, missing at least one major
suit Ace, and you risk a ruff any time the opening leader has a
singleton heart. (In other words, a nine card side fit is riskier than
eight.)
Also, of course, the sequence 1H-1S-2C-2H sounds like mere preference,
while 1H-1S-1NT-2H sounds like a stronger hand, though you could agree
otherwise.

ok so we bid 2H
but we need still a simple and clear way to get to 4S if thats where we
need be

Co Wiersma

Sandy Barnes

2017-05-09 07:21:09 UTC

Post by Co Wiersma

Post by paul

To me, odds are slim that a better fit exists in spades. To take
advantage of the 4-4 generally requires that you can pull trumps,
establish hearts and control the side suits long enough to enjoy the
discards on the long suit. That's a lot to ask for a part score hand.
Far more often, partner will have 6 hearts, missing at least one major
suit Ace, and you risk a ruff any time the opening leader has a
singleton heart. (In other words, a nine card side fit is riskier than
eight.)
Also, of course, the sequence 1H-1S-2C-2H sounds like mere preference,
while 1H-1S-1NT-2H sounds like a stronger hand, though you could agree
otherwise.

ok so we bid 2H
but we need still a simple and clear way to get to 4S if thats where we
need be
Co Wiersma

Assuming that you play Long and Short Suit Game tries, no problem. This is an agreement everyone should have. With this method partner has the option to show spades, and so do you over his advance. I prefer to show the singleton/void immediately, so the auction would proceed:
1H-2H; 2S (relay for long suit try)-2NT; 3H (long spades)-4S. With short spades, the rebid is 2NT over 2H.

HoneyMonster

2010-08-15 02:03:22 UTC

Post by Carl
Q1062 K83 42 K1087

Assuming that we are playing 5 card majors, 2H. Anything else would be
silly.

judyorcarl

2010-08-15 02:18:26 UTC

8 losers: too strong for single raise. Which leaves the choices 1S or
1NT. But in either case the next bid is 3H. Unfortunately, the
auction 1H-1S; 2S-3H almost has to be forcing (to 3S at least).

So bid 1NT and apologize if opener is 4=5=2=2.

Carl

rhm

2010-08-15 06:26:24 UTC

8 losers: too strong for single raise. Which leaves the choices 1S or
1NT. But in either case the next bid is 3H. Unfortunately, the
auction 1H-1S; 2S-3H almost has to be forcing (to 3S at least).
So bid 1NT and apologize if opener is 4=5=2=2.
Carl

I think you will not find many experts, who would consider this hand
too strong for a a single raise.
I also do not consider this an 8 loser hand, but I do not mind a
single raise with an eight loser hand. .

Rainer Herrmann

judyorcarl

2010-08-15 14:15:44 UTC

Post by rhm

8 losers: too strong for single raise. Which leaves the choices 1S or
1NT. But in either case the next bid is 3H. Unfortunately, the
auction 1H-1S; 2S-3H almost has to be forcing (to 3S at least).
So bid 1NT and apologize if opener is 4=5=2=2.
Carl

If this is not too strong for a single raise, then there really is no
problem.

If your partners give single raises with 8 losers, you are forced to
try for game *every* time you have only 6 losers. Going down in 3 far
far too often when responder has the 9 losers he's supposed to have.

Carl

Raija D

2010-08-15 06:59:53 UTC

judyorcarl

2010-08-15 14:12:19 UTC

8 losers: too strong for single raise. Which leaves the choices 1S or
1NT. But in either case the next bid is 3H. Unfortunately, the
auction 1H-1S; 2S-3H almost has to be forcing (to 3S at least).
So bid 1NT and apologize if opener is 4=5=2=2.
Carl
Am I reading this right: You choose to hide both Kxx support and the spades?

I am not taking into account the possibility of 1NT being passed. If
I have a partner who readily passes with more than the barest of
minimums, then I bid 1S and risk getting too high.

Carl

Co Wiersma

2010-08-15 09:34:58 UTC

Post by judyorcarl

8 losers: too strong for single raise. Which leaves the choices 1S or
1NT. But in either case the next bid is 3H. Unfortunately, the
auction 1H-1S; 2S-3H almost has to be forcing (to 3S at least).
So bid 1NT and apologize if opener is 4=5=2=2.
Carl

I count 9 losers
3 in spades and 2 in the other suits

Co

judyorcarl

2010-08-15 14:09:15 UTC

8 losers: too strong for single raise. Which leaves the choices 1S or
1NT. But in either case the next bid is 3H. Unfortunately, the
auction 1H-1S; 2S-3H almost has to be forcing (to 3S at least).
So bid 1NT and apologize if opener is 4=5=2=2.
Carl

" I count 9 losers
3 in spades and 2 in the other suits"

Responding to an opening bid, the "balanced by an ace" rule does not
apply. 2 losers in each suit.

Carl

Co- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Co Wiersma

2010-08-15 14:58:40 UTC

Post by judyorcarl

8 losers: too strong for single raise. Which leaves the choices 1S or
1NT. But in either case the next bid is 3H. Unfortunately, the
auction 1H-1S; 2S-3H almost has to be forcing (to 3S at least).
So bid 1NT and apologize if opener is 4=5=2=2.
Carl

" I count 9 losers
3 in spades and 2 in the other suits"
Responding to an opening bid, the "balanced by an ace" rule does not
apply. 2 losers in each suit.
Carl

Losing Trick Count is made for situations like this
( fit is found )
so all rules apply afaik

my english is not so good
so I dont know what means "ballanced by a ace"

In the book about Losing Trick Count I have read
a unsupported queen does not count at all
Obviously that is also a rather rough method
as it would make Q1062 the same as 5432 and that would be silly

But also it be completely nonsense if
Q1062 K83 42 K1087
would count the same as
A1062 K83 42 K1087

Co Wiersma

castigamatti

2010-08-15 21:02:37 UTC

Post by Co Wiersma

8 losers: too strong for single raise. Which leaves the choices 1S or
1NT. But in either case the next bid is 3H. Unfortunately, the
auction 1H-1S; 2S-3H almost has to be forcing (to 3S at least).
So bid 1NT and apologize if opener is 4=5=2=2.
Carl

I count 9 losers
3 in spades and 2 in the other suits
Co

Who knows what is right and what is wrong anyway. In here probably
just a few...some did not answer...some are just tired...many of those
tired knows the answer.

BR

Fred.

2010-08-15 14:43:01 UTC

8 losers: too strong for single raise. Which leaves the choices 1S or
1NT. But in either case the next bid is 3H. Unfortunately, the
auction 1H-1S; 2S-3H almost has to be forcing (to 3S at least).
So bid 1NT and apologize if opener is 4=5=2=2.
Carl

Playing forcing no-trump the single major raise is at least mildly
constructive, so I have no problem responding 2H on this hand. Were
the hand really too strong for a single raise, a spade raise would
improve it enough to force over 2S. Save the missed 4-4 spade fits
for the minimum hands.

Fred.

Will in New Haven

2010-08-15 17:50:39 UTC

8 losers: too strong for single raise. Which leaves the choices 1S or
1NT. But in either case the next bid is 3H. Unfortunately, the
auction 1H-1S; 2S-3H almost has to be forcing (to 3S at least).
So bid 1NT and apologize if opener is 4=5=2=2.
Carl

Playing forcing no-trump the single major raise is at least mildly
constructive,

That's a matter of partnership agreement, so you shouldn't state it as
an absolute. In standard five-card Major methods, it is common to
agree that a single raise is the weakest action one can take with
three-card support. Any other action either denies support or shows a
better hand. You don't agree with that? Fine. But it is not outre or
unusual or confined to weak partnerships or beginners.

--
Will in New Haven

so I have no problem responding 2H on this hand. Were

Post by Fred.
the hand really too strong for a single raise, a spade raise would
improve it enough to force over 2S. Save the missed 4-4 spade fits
for the minimum hands.

judyorcarl

2010-08-15 23:24:43 UTC

On Aug 15, 1:50 pm, Will in New Haven

8 losers: too strong for single raise. Which leaves the choices 1S or
1NT. But in either case the next bid is 3H. Unfortunately, the
auction 1H-1S; 2S-3H almost has to be forcing (to 3S at least).
So bid 1NT and apologize if opener is 4=5=2=2.
Carl

Playing forcing no-trump the single major raise is at least mildly
constructive,

That's a matter of partnership agreement, so you shouldn't state it as
an absolute. In standard five-card Major methods, it is common to
agree that a single raise is the weakest action one can take with
three-card support. Any other action either denies support or shows a
better hand. You don't agree with that? Fine. But it is not outre or
unusual or confined to weak partnerships or beginners.
--
Will in New Haven
so I have no problem responding 2H on this hand. Were

Post by Fred.
the hand really too strong for a single raise, a spade raise would
improve it enough to force over 2S. Save the missed 4-4 spade fits
for the minimum hands.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

If single raise is the weakest action with 3-card support, how can
this hand qualify? To me: take away one queen and I raise. Take away
both queens and I respond 1NT, pretending to have doubleton support.

Carl

Will in New Haven

2010-08-15 23:57:01 UTC

Post by judyorcarl
On Aug 15, 1:50 pm, Will in New Haven

8 losers: too strong for single raise. Which leaves the choices 1S or
1NT. But in either case the next bid is 3H. Unfortunately, the
auction 1H-1S; 2S-3H almost has to be forcing (to 3S at least).
So bid 1NT and apologize if opener is 4=5=2=2.
Carl

Playing forcing no-trump the single major raise is at least mildly
constructive,

That's a matter of partnership agreement, so you shouldn't state it as
an absolute. In standard five-card Major methods, it is common to
agree that a single raise is the weakest action one can take with
three-card support. Any other action either denies support or shows a
better hand. You don't agree with that? Fine. But it is not outre or
unusual or confined to weak partnerships or beginners.
--
Will in New Haven
so I have no problem responding 2H on this hand. Were

Post by Fred.
the hand really too strong for a single raise, a spade raise would
improve it enough to force over 2S. Save the missed 4-4 spade fits
for the minimum hands.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

There is only one Queen in the hand I am looking at. Take the Queen
away and the hand is still worth the raise. A single raise has a
_range_ I know that it is a very common theme that opener shouldn't be
making game tries but, frankly, I don't buy it. A single raise has
several functions besides giving opener a chance to bid a game or try
for game. It takes up their bidding room, gives partner a basis for
competitive bidding and also gives him the game/no game information.
Cutting down on its frequency gains precision, and not that much of
it, in one function but hurts the otehrs.

The hand I am looking at has QTXX - KXX - XX - KXXX and that's eight
HCP, nine dummy points and the spots are good. It is a maximum. Take
away the Queen or a King and it is a minimum.

Take away two honors and it isn't a response at all. If the remaining
honor card is the King of Hearts, a 1NT bid and a preference might be
an attractive psyche.

--
Will in New Haven

judyorcarl

2010-08-16 19:17:27 UTC

On Aug 15, 7:57 pm, Will in New Haven

Post by judyorcarl
On Aug 15, 1:50 pm, Will in New Haven

8 losers: too strong for single raise. Which leaves the choices 1S or
1NT. But in either case the next bid is 3H. Unfortunately, the
auction 1H-1S; 2S-3H almost has to be forcing (to 3S at least).
So bid 1NT and apologize if opener is 4=5=2=2.
Carl

Playing forcing no-trump the single major raise is at least mildly
constructive,

That's a matter of partnership agreement, so you shouldn't state it as
an absolute. In standard five-card Major methods, it is common to
agree that a single raise is the weakest action one can take with
three-card support. Any other action either denies support or shows a
better hand. You don't agree with that? Fine. But it is not outre or
unusual or confined to weak partnerships or beginners.
--
Will in New Haven
so I have no problem responding 2H on this hand. Were

Post by Fred.
the hand really too strong for a single raise, a spade raise would
improve it enough to force over 2S. Save the missed 4-4 spade fits
for the minimum hands.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

There is only one Queen in the hand I am looking at. Take the Queen
away and the hand is still worth the raise. A single raise has a
_range_ I know that it is a very common theme that opener shouldn't be
making game tries but, frankly, I don't buy it. A single raise has
several functions besides giving opener a chance to bid a game or try
for game. It takes up their bidding room, gives partner a basis for
competitive bidding and also gives him the game/no game information.
Cutting down on its frequency gains precision, and not that much of
it, in one function but hurts the otehrs.
The hand I am looking at has QTXX - KXX - XX - KXXX and that's eight
HCP, nine dummy points and the spots are good. It is a maximum. Take
away the Queen or a King and it is a minimum.
Take away two honors and it isn't a response at all. If the remaining
honor card is the King of Hearts, a 1NT bid and a preference might be
an attractive psyche.
--
Will in New Haven- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

The late guru Bernie Chazen was adamant never to pass an opening bid
with an ace or a king. I am sure he was right. Certainly when the
king is a full trick.

I had forgotten the deal, and thought the clubs were headed by the
queen rather than the king. Take away the club king; do you still
raise? A range that includes adding or subtracting a king (rather
than, say 3 jacks) is unplayable.

Carl

Will in New Haven

2010-08-16 19:21:40 UTC

Post by judyorcarl
On Aug 15, 7:57 pm, Will in New Haven

Post by judyorcarl
On Aug 15, 1:50 pm, Will in New Haven

8 losers: too strong for single raise. Which leaves the choices 1S or
1NT. But in either case the next bid is 3H. Unfortunately, the
auction 1H-1S; 2S-3H almost has to be forcing (to 3S at least).
So bid 1NT and apologize if opener is 4=5=2=2.
Carl

Playing forcing no-trump the single major raise is at least mildly
constructive,

That's a matter of partnership agreement, so you shouldn't state it as
an absolute. In standard five-card Major methods, it is common to
agree that a single raise is the weakest action one can take with
three-card support. Any other action either denies support or shows a
better hand. You don't agree with that? Fine. But it is not outre or
unusual or confined to weak partnerships or beginners.
--
Will in New Haven
so I have no problem responding 2H on this hand. Were

Post by Fred.
the hand really too strong for a single raise, a spade raise would
improve it enough to force over 2S. Save the missed 4-4 spade fits
for the minimum hands.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

There is only one Queen in the hand I am looking at. Take the Queen
away and the hand is still worth the raise. A single raise has a
_range_ I know that it is a very common theme that opener shouldn't be
making game tries but, frankly, I don't buy it. A single raise has
several functions besides giving opener a chance to bid a game or try
for game. It takes up their bidding room, gives partner a basis for
competitive bidding and also gives him the game/no game information.
Cutting down on its frequency gains precision, and not that much of
it, in one function but hurts the otehrs.
The hand I am looking at has QTXX - KXX - XX - KXXX and that's eight
HCP, nine dummy points and the spots are good. It is a maximum. Take
away the Queen or a King and it is a minimum.
Take away two honors and it isn't a response at all. If the remaining
honor card is the King of Hearts, a 1NT bid and a preference might be
an attractive psyche.
--
Will in New Haven- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

The late guru Bernie Chazen was adamant never to pass an opening bid
with an ace or a king. I am sure he was right. Certainly when the
king is a full trick.
I had forgotten the deal, and thought the clubs were headed by the
queen rather than the king. Take away the club king; do you still
raise? A range that includes adding or subtracting a king (rather
than, say 3 jacks) is unplayable.

Then I've played an unplayable range for fifty years.

--
Will in New Haven

Fred.

2010-08-15 03:13:40 UTC

Carl,

If you play opener's spade raise as promising 4+, I don't see any
reason not to bid 1S on this. You can play the retrurn to 2H as a
possilbe minimum, and 3H as a limit raise with 4 spades, and 4H as a
picture bid, temporizing somehow with a strong semi-balanced 4-3 in
the majors.

But, generally, opener is far more likely to be 3=5 than 4=5 in the
majors, so, I think opener's 3+-card single raise, dealing with more
urgent case when responder has 5 spades and does not have a heart fit
is better practice. Then, of course, you cannot respond 1S when 4=3
unless you are strong enough to bid 3H over 2S. You don't want to
give up a known 8-card fit for a probable 7-card fit.

If opener has the values for a game try and 4-spades, most methods
will allow you to locate the 4-4 fit after the single raise of hearts.

Fred.

Eric Leong

2010-08-15 03:52:44 UTC

It is not close to bid 1S first and then bid 2H versus bidding a
direct 2H.

Say the bidding goes:

1H 1S
2D 2H?

How does opener distinguish between which of the following type hands
you have below if you bid 1S on both?

S Q10xxx H Jx D xx C KJxx
S Q10xx H Kxx D xx C K10xx

Eric Leong

Co Wiersma

2010-08-15 09:48:18 UTC

Post by Eric Leong

It is not close to bid 1S first and then bid 2H versus bidding a
direct 2H.
1H 1S
2D 2H?
How does opener distinguish between which of the following type hands
you have below if you bid 1S on both?
S Q10xxx H Jx D xx C KJxx
S Q10xx H Kxx D xx C K10xx
Eric Leong

well
we Acol players do bid like this
and some times we go down in 3H with the first hand if partner has 17
points and a 2-5-4-2 split

Co Wiersma

sofos

2010-08-15 16:40:10 UTC

Post by Co Wiersma

Post by Eric Leong

well
we Acol players do bid like this
and some times we go down in 3H with the first hand if partner has 17
points and a 2-5-4-2 split
Co Wiersma- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

There are people that would bid one spade and follow it with two
hearts over partner's rebid and trust their body language to tell
partner whether the heart support showed two or three. I am not
suggesting that all that respond one spade have such a sequence in
mind but, among other things, an immediate two heart response removes
such a problem.

rhm

2010-08-15 06:32:59 UTC

Just because arguments are (more than) 24 years old does not make them
wrong.
I also like to raise partner's response on three card suits if I have
a small doubleton, but insisting on 4 cards over 1H-1S seems to me
particularly restrictive.

Rainer Herrmann

Andrew

2010-08-15 06:45:16 UTC

In a 5-card major style its an easy and obvious 2H call. You are very
unlikely to find a better fit with 1S. To score a clear win over 2H
you have to catch partner with 4-spades and a min-range opener and
spades must play better than hearts--a pretty big parlay. And if you
playing IMPs and its a difference between 8 tricks in hearts and 9 in
spades you dont care much. So the winning case for 1S is small--in
very rare circumstances you may play a better partial. In contrast,
the losing case is easy to see. Bidding 1S instead of 2H will force
you to either under- or overbid when you do show your support.
Further, if your LHO competes you may regret not showing your fit
immediately. So bidding 1S will often cause the partnership to either
stay too low or get too high in hearts.

Playing 4-card majors there is much more room for debate. The chance
of having a 4-4 fit is much higher (since now opener might be 4-4 in
the majors and minimum). Further, 1NT might be the best spot. Against
that, 2H will generally be more effective when opener has a 5th
heart.

Andrew

Charles Brenner

2010-08-15 18:46:57 UTC

Post by Andrew
Playing 4-card majors there is much more room for debate. The chance
of having a 4-4 fit is much higher (since now opener might be 4-4 in
the majors and minimum). Further, 1NT might be the best spot. Against
that, 2H will generally be more effective when opener has a 5th
heart.

Playing 4-card majors Evan Bailey claimed that you should bid 1S
rather than raising to 2H on 3 only if you have either 5 spades or 9
points. Even assuming he has exactly the right rule, it seems logical
that you are right in saying with 8 points the question is a close
one.

But would the parameters playing 5-card majors be so different? (a)
Holding 5=3 majors, when would you bid 1S? (b) Holding 4=3, how strong
must you be to bid 1S?

Charles

Andrew

2010-08-15 23:40:55 UTC

Post by Charles Brenner

Playing 4-card majors Evan Bailey claimed that you should bid 1S
rather than raising to 2H on 3 only if you have either 5 spades or 9
points. Even assuming he has exactly the right rule, it seems logical
that you are right in saying with 8 points the question is a close
one.
But would the parameters playing 5-card majors be so different? (a)
Holding 5=3 majors, when would you bid 1S?

Only when too strong to make a single raise in hearts.

Post by Charles Brenner
(b) Holding 4=3, how strong must you be to bid 1S?

Same.

Playing 4-card majors, most American experts argued that it was
percentage to raise to 2H with 3-hearts and 4-5 spades and single
raise values. A minority of experts preferred to respond 1S when their
judgement suggested it. However, everyone realized that the system
made the decision close and that therefore some significant percentage
of the time the other choice would work better.

Playing 5-card majors it is not close.

Andrew

Raija D

2010-08-15 06:58:18 UTC

This is a normal 2H raise. Bidding spades and then raising hearts implies
more values, which this hand does not have, plus it de-emphasizes the
support. I would bid 1S with Q1062-K8-432-J1087 and then correct 2m to
hearts. So how is opener to know whether I have the posted hand or this
one? Give my best buddy support when I have it.

Raija

Sandy Barnes

2017-05-09 07:12:21 UTC

Post by Raija D

I am not sure that "implies more values" applies here, since your 2H rebid over 2C/2D conceals the support that you started with. With my favorite partner, 1H-1S denies 3+ card heart support.

nullevoid

2010-08-15 07:30:07 UTC

You know you've got half the points in the deck and eight hearts between
you. You need to find out how much more, if any, you two have. To do
that, you need some room. If nobody interferes you can give yourself
that room by bidding the spades. Where's any possible downside?

Your partner hears, "one spade," and concludes you've got, what? Four
spades and at least six points? He's not going to do anything bizarre
with that innocuous information and if he supports your spades with a
single raise you're going to pass. You'll wind up playing two spades
with a four/four fit instead of his playing two hearts with a five/three
fit and either one's got about the same chance of making. In fact, it's
been my experience that the four/four is easier to play since there's
more two-way transportation (although is kinda nice to see that
five-card suit and dream that they'll each take a trick and you only
have to worry about three outside).

So, one spade is "not simply a bad choice," it's the right choice;
twenty-five years ago I like to think I'd have answered the same way.

Douglas Newlands

2010-08-15 08:05:21 UTC

The downside is your assumption that nobody interferes.
Given peace and quiet, point count bidders can fluff around with weak
raise constructive raises and other sundry shit.
The problem comes when it goes
1H-P-1S-3C
and nobody has an entirely comfortable bid.

IMHO
1. you should reach 2M as quickly as possible as often as possible to
give the opponents the problem of entering at a higher level and to
avoid problems like the above sequence.
2. if you need some science, then use trial bids after the raise rather
than a forcing 1nT before the raise.
3. you can often bash the game contract at teams without telling the
defence anything.

Post by nullevoid
Your partner hears, "one spade," and concludes you've got, what? Four
spades and at least six points? He's not going to do anything bizarre
with that innocuous information and if he supports your spades with a
single raise you're going to pass. You'll wind up playing two spades
with a four/four fit instead of his playing two hearts with a five/three
fit and either one's got about the same chance of making. In fact, it's
been my experience that the four/four is easier to play since there's
more two-way transportation (although is kinda nice to see that
five-card suit and dream that they'll each take a trick and you only
have to worry about three outside).
So, one spade is "not simply a bad choice," it's the right choice;
twenty-five years ago I like to think I'd have answered the same way.

You were wrong then and you're wrong now.

doug

Player

2010-08-15 10:39:09 UTC

You know you've got half the points in the deck and eight hearts between
you. You need to find out how much more, if any, you two have. To do
that, you need some room. If nobody interferes you can give yourself
that room by bidding the spades. Where's any possible downside?
Your partner hears, "one spade," and concludes you've got, what? Four
spades and at least six points? He's not going to do anything bizarre
with that innocuous information and if he supports your spades with a
single raise you're going to pass. You'll wind up playing two spades
with a four/four fit instead of his playing two hearts with a five/three
fit and either one's got about the same chance of making. In fact, it's
been my experience that the four/four is easier to play since there's
more two-way transportation (although is kinda nice to see that
five-card suit and dream that they'll each take a trick and you only
have to worry about three outside).
So, one spade is "not simply a bad choice," it's the right choice;
twenty-five years ago I like to think I'd have answered the same way.

So with
Kxx
AKJxx
Jxxx
x
opener won't raise a 1S bid to 2S? Give me a break!

So as Eric suggests, you have a way of distinguishing between real 3
card support and a preference on Jx?
Give me a break.
1S is a beginner's mistake.

Ron

h***@yahoo.com

2010-08-15 17:14:27 UTC

You know you've got half the points in the deck and eight hearts between
you. You need to find out how much more, if any, you two have. To do
that, you need some room. If nobody interferes you can give yourself
that room by bidding the spades. Where's any possible downside?
Your partner hears, "one spade," and concludes you've got, what? Four
spades and at least six points? He's not going to do anything bizarre
with that innocuous information and if he supports your spades with a
single raise you're going to pass. You'll wind up playing two spades
with a four/four fit instead of his playing two hearts with a five/three
fit and either one's got about the same chance of making. In fact, it's
been my experience that the four/four is easier to play since there's
more two-way transportation (although is kinda nice to see that
five-card suit and dream that they'll each take a trick and you only
have to worry about three outside).
So, one spade is "not simply a bad choice," it's the right choice;
twenty-five years ago I like to think I'd have answered the same way.

After 1h 1s ?, does opener PROMISE 4 spades when he raises to 2s?
What would opener rebid with

AJx
AKxxx
xxxx
x

or

Axx
Jxxxxx
AKx
x

or

xxx
AQxxx
AKx
xx

In each case, I would raise to 2s instead of rebidding 2d (hand 1), 2h
(hand 2), or 1nt (hand 3).

Even in a 4-card major context, the standard Goren view was what with
2 biddable touching suits, the correct preparatory opening bid would
be the higher ranking suit, therefore 1s, so if opener is 4=4 majors,
his spades are bad and his hearts could be better.

I would be interested to read about any recognized bidding authority
(book, MSC, Challenge the champs, etc) who advocated hiding heart
support with a weak hand and 4=3 majors. I certainly don't know any
and I've been reading about bridge since the mid 1970s, almost 40
years now.

Henrysun909

boblipton

2010-08-15 19:02:56 UTC

You know you've got half the points in the deck and eight hearts between
you. You need to find out how much more, if any, you two have. To do
that, you need some room. If nobody interferes you can give yourself
that room by bidding the spades. Where's any possible downside?
Your partner hears, "one spade," and concludes you've got, what? Four
spades and at least six points? He's not going to do anything bizarre
with that innocuous information and if he supports your spades with a
single raise you're going to pass. You'll wind up playing two spades
with a four/four fit instead of his playing two hearts with a five/three
fit and either one's got about the same chance of making. In fact, it's
been my experience that the four/four is easier to play since there's
more two-way transportation (although is kinda nice to see that
five-card suit and dream that they'll each take a trick and you only
have to worry about three outside).
So, one spade is "not simply a bad choice," it's the right choice;
twenty-five years ago I like to think I'd have answered the same way.

Your partner will never raise you with a nice 3-card support? Say,

AJx AKxxx xxx xx? or with the minors 4-1? My goodness!

Bob

Player

2010-08-15 10:32:26 UTC

Carl, for me and everyone I know, this would be an obvious 2H bid,
with a wtp.
Ron

KimH

2010-08-15 12:54:58 UTC

2H seems correct to me.

With a modestly valued hand there is the danger that the opponents may
compete. If you start with 1S, you may have to mention your hearts at
the three-level (yuck.) It is true that you would agressively like to
be in the 4-4 fit for maximum tricks but will nine distributional
points, it seems prudence is in order. If they do compete over your 2H
bid, you have an easy 3H bid and double if they persist. :)

Since that is true, you can have a partnership agreement that bidding
spades and then hearts shows 11-12 points. You could further refine it
by deciding if you would do it with four or five spades, depending on
form of scoring and the skills of your partner.

h***@yahoo.com

2010-08-15 17:06:37 UTC

The traditional view is that when responder' hand is worth one bid,
then he raises hearts. If responder's hand is worth a second,
invitational, bid, then he bids 1s. This allows the sequence

1h 1s
1nt 2h

to show genuine values and not merely a preference.

With the advent of two-way checkback, the invitational hand can bid 1h
1s 1nt 2c 2d 2h, so that objection is removed. However, the sequence

1h 1s
2m ?

is not. With the actual hand, responder can either misbid by showing
simple, possibly false, preference to 2h, or overbid by inviting game
with 3h.

So in spite of advances in bidding over a 1nt rebid, it is still safer
to raise to 2h. I would do so even with 5=3 majors and would consider
it with 6=3 majors, e.g.,

xxxxxx
AJx
xx
xx

Henrysun909

jadelo

2010-08-15 17:23:35 UTC

1)Support with support. (auctions tend to go smoother)

2) I agree with other posters that unless partner raises spades
you will be over or underbidding on your next call

3) I think that the superiority of playing in a 4-4 fit as opposed
to the 5-3 fit below the five level is overrated.
a) unless both majors are solid you won't be able to use
your discards in time.
b)it will be easier to overcome a 4-1 trump split playing
in the 5-3

Jeff

Carl

2010-08-15 21:03:50 UTC

1)Support with support. (auctions tend to go smoother)
2) I agree with other posters that unless partner raises spades
you will be over or underbidding on your next call
3) I think that the superiority of playing in a 4-4 fit as opposed
to the 5-3 fit below the five level is overrated.
a) unless both majors are solid you won't be able to use
your discards in time.
b)it will be easier to overcome a 4-1 trump split playing
in the 5-3
Jeff

Thanks everyone. It seems given the strength of this hand (i.e. one
bid) that 2H is the preferred route. It is interesting though to see
the rationales presented for alternate bids.

KWSchneider

2010-08-16 15:49:59 UTC

1)Support with support. (auctions tend to go smoother)
2) I agree with other posters that unless partner raises spades
you will be over or underbidding on your next call
3) I think that the superiority of playing in a 4-4 fit as opposed
to the 5-3 fit below the five level is overrated.
a) unless both majors are solid you won't be able to use
your discards in time.
b)it will be easier to overcome a 4-1 trump split playing
in the 5-3
Jeff

Thanks everyone. It seems given the strength of this hand (i.e. one
bid) that 2H is the preferred route. It is interesting though to see
the rationales presented for alternate bids.

What everyone is not recognizing [Will has tried to point this out] is
that there are 2 rather different approaches to 2/1 - the Lawrence/
Bergen style where 1M-2M is a value raise with 8-10 points and 3
tickets, and the Hardy style where 1M-2M is made on 6-8 points and 3
cards - a method which I believe is superior.

With this specific hand, we are too strong for a 1M-2M auction in the
Hardy style and the 1S response is clearly appropriate. As Henry has
already pointed out, after a 1N rebid by opener, we have many tools to
show various strength responding hands.

The issue comes when opener shows a minor on his rebid. It would seem
to me that a simple 2H bid at this juncture would define this hand
adequately. Yes it could be made on 4=2=(25) where we have 2 cards in
the minor, but then that is generally the MP spot to play. If opener
continues with 2N, then we need to decide to pass or correct to
3H...and if he rebids 3m, we can correct to 3H.

Kurt

Carl

2010-08-17 00:22:38 UTC

1)Support with support. (auctions tend to go smoother)
2) I agree with other posters that unless partner raises spades
you will be over or underbidding on your next call
3) I think that the superiority of playing in a 4-4 fit as opposed
to the 5-3 fit below the five level is overrated.
a) unless both majors are solid you won't be able to use
your discards in time.
b)it will be easier to overcome a 4-1 trump split playing
in the 5-3
Jeff

Thanks everyone. It seems given the strength of this hand (i.e. one
bid) that 2H is the preferred route. It is interesting though to see
the rationales presented for alternate bids.

What everyone is not recognizing [Will has tried to point this out] is
that there are 2 rather different approaches to 2/1 - the Lawrence/
Bergen style where 1M-2M is a value raise with 8-10 points and 3
tickets, and the Hardy style where 1M-2M is made on 6-8 points and 3
cards - a method which I believe is superior.
With this specific hand, we are too strong for a 1M-2M auction in the
Hardy style and the 1S response is clearly appropriate. As Henry has
already pointed out, after a 1N rebid by opener, we have many tools to
show various strength responding hands.
The issue comes when opener shows a minor on his rebid. It would seem
to me that a simple 2H bid at this juncture would define this hand
adequately. Yes it could be made on 4=2=(25) where we have 2 cards in
the minor, but then that is generally the MP spot to play. If opener
continues with 2N, then we need to decide to pass or correct to
3H...and if he rebids 3m, we can correct to 3H.
Kurt

Max Hardy states a range of 5+ to 9- HCP for "Responder has minimum
response values", page 153 of the green book, which is where he covers
the 1M - 2M uncontested raise. I agree that the alternate school of
thought uses a split range where this is clearly the 1M - 2M sort of
raise.

I think a weaker hand might be a good example of what you are talking
about?

Carl

Will in New Haven

2010-08-17 00:31:14 UTC

1)Support with support. (auctions tend to go smoother)
2) I agree with other posters that unless partner raises spades
you will be over or underbidding on your next call
3) I think that the superiority of playing in a 4-4 fit as opposed
to the 5-3 fit below the five level is overrated.
a) unless both majors are solid you won't be able to use
your discards in time.
b)it will be easier to overcome a 4-1 trump split playing
in the 5-3
Jeff

Thanks everyone. It seems given the strength of this hand (i.e. one
bid) that 2H is the preferred route. It is interesting though to see
the rationales presented for alternate bids.

What everyone is not recognizing [Will has tried to point this out] is
that there are 2 rather different approaches to 2/1 - the Lawrence/
Bergen style where 1M-2M is a value raise with 8-10 points and 3
tickets, and the Hardy style where 1M-2M is made on 6-8 points and 3
cards - a method which I believe is superior.
With this specific hand, we are too strong for a 1M-2M auction in the
Hardy style and the 1S response is clearly appropriate. As Henry has
already pointed out, after a 1N rebid by opener, we have many tools to
show various strength responding hands.
The issue comes when opener shows a minor on his rebid. It would seem
to me that a simple 2H bid at this juncture would define this hand
adequately. Yes it could be made on 4=2=(25) where we have 2 cards in
the minor, but then that is generally the MP spot to play. If opener
continues with 2N, then we need to decide to pass or correct to
3H...and if he rebids 3m, we can correct to 3H.
Kurt

Max Hardy states a range of 5+ to 9- HCP for "Responder has minimum
response values", page 153 of the green book, which is where he covers
the 1M - 2M uncontested raise. I agree that the alternate school of
thought uses a split range where this is clearly the 1M - 2M sort of
raise.
I think a weaker hand might be a good example of what you are talking
about?

Our range is six to nine dummy points and this hand is a good nine. I
wouldn't need much more to treat it as too good for a single raise.
Switch the Major suit honors so that I have to consider the Heart
Queen a full cover card and I would give the indirect raise, in this
case starting with a 1S response.

--
Will in New Haven

KWSchneider

2010-08-17 16:20:08 UTC

On Aug 16, 8:31 pm, Will in New Haven

1)Support with support. (auctions tend to go smoother)
2) I agree with other posters that unless partner raises spades
you will be over or underbidding on your next call
3) I think that the superiority of playing in a 4-4 fit as opposed
to the 5-3 fit below the five level is overrated.
a) unless both majors are solid you won't be able to use
your discards in time.
b)it will be easier to overcome a 4-1 trump split playing
in the 5-3
Jeff

Thanks everyone. It seems given the strength of this hand (i.e. one
bid) that 2H is the preferred route. It is interesting though to see
the rationales presented for alternate bids.

What everyone is not recognizing [Will has tried to point this out] is
that there are 2 rather different approaches to 2/1 - the Lawrence/
Bergen style where 1M-2M is a value raise with 8-10 points and 3
tickets, and the Hardy style where 1M-2M is made on 6-8 points and 3
cards - a method which I believe is superior.
With this specific hand, we are too strong for a 1M-2M auction in the
Hardy style and the 1S response is clearly appropriate. As Henry has
already pointed out, after a 1N rebid by opener, we have many tools to
show various strength responding hands.
The issue comes when opener shows a minor on his rebid. It would seem
to me that a simple 2H bid at this juncture would define this hand
adequately. Yes it could be made on 4=2=(25) where we have 2 cards in
the minor, but then that is generally the MP spot to play. If opener
continues with 2N, then we need to decide to pass or correct to
3H...and if he rebids 3m, we can correct to 3H.
Kurt

Max Hardy states a range of 5+ to 9- HCP for "Responder has minimum
response values", page 153 of the green book, which is where he covers
the 1M - 2M uncontested raise. I agree that the alternate school of
thought uses a split range where this is clearly the 1M - 2M sort of
raise.
I think a weaker hand might be a good example of what you are talking
about?

I use bad 6 to bad 9 actually - and include ANY hands with an Ace. I
upgrade trump honors by 1 point each as well.

Kurt

Will in New Haven

2010-08-17 16:27:03 UTC

Post by KWSchneider
On Aug 16, 8:31 pm, Will in New Haven

1)Support with support. (auctions tend to go smoother)
2) I agree with other posters that unless partner raises spades
you will be over or underbidding on your next call
3) I think that the superiority of playing in a 4-4 fit as opposed
to the 5-3 fit below the five level is overrated.
a) unless both majors are solid you won't be able to use
your discards in time.
b)it will be easier to overcome a 4-1 trump split playing
in the 5-3
Jeff

Thanks everyone. It seems given the strength of this hand (i.e. one
bid) that 2H is the preferred route. It is interesting though to see
the rationales presented for alternate bids.

What everyone is not recognizing [Will has tried to point this out] is
that there are 2 rather different approaches to 2/1 - the Lawrence/
Bergen style where 1M-2M is a value raise with 8-10 points and 3
tickets, and the Hardy style where 1M-2M is made on 6-8 points and 3
cards - a method which I believe is superior.
With this specific hand, we are too strong for a 1M-2M auction in the
Hardy style and the 1S response is clearly appropriate. As Henry has
already pointed out, after a 1N rebid by opener, we have many tools to
show various strength responding hands.
The issue comes when opener shows a minor on his rebid. It would seem
to me that a simple 2H bid at this juncture would define this hand
adequately. Yes it could be made on 4=2=(25) where we have 2 cards in
the minor, but then that is generally the MP spot to play. If opener
continues with 2N, then we need to decide to pass or correct to
3H...and if he rebids 3m, we can correct to 3H.
Kurt

Max Hardy states a range of 5+ to 9- HCP for "Responder has minimum
response values", page 153 of the green book, which is where he covers
the 1M - 2M uncontested raise. I agree that the alternate school of
thought uses a split range where this is clearly the 1M - 2M sort of
raise.
I think a weaker hand might be a good example of what you are talking
about?

I use bad 6 to bad 9 actually - and include ANY hands with an Ace. I
upgrade trump honors by 1 point each as well.

When I have a borderline decision, I use in/out evaluation and would
notice that the Queen of trumps along with an out King is better than
the other way around. I don't change the point count. I just
overbid.

--
Will in New Haven

judyorcarl@verizon.net

2017-05-06 19:20:13 UTC

1)Support with support. (auctions tend to go smoother)
2) I agree with other posters that unless partner raises spades
you will be over or underbidding on your next call
3) I think that the superiority of playing in a 4-4 fit as opposed
to the 5-3 fit below the five level is overrated.
a) unless both majors are solid you won't be able to use
your discards in time.
b)it will be easier to overcome a 4-1 trump split playing
in the 5-3
Jeff

Thanks everyone. It seems given the strength of this hand (i.e. one
bid) that 2H is the preferred route. It is interesting though to see
the rationales presented for alternate bids.

What everyone is not recognizing [Will has tried to point this out] is
that there are 2 rather different approaches to 2/1 - the Lawrence/
Bergen style where 1M-2M is a value raise with 8-10 points and 3
tickets, and the Hardy style where 1M-2M is made on 6-8 points and 3
cards - a method which I believe is superior.
With this specific hand, we are too strong for a 1M-2M auction in the
Hardy style and the 1S response is clearly appropriate. As Henry has
already pointed out, after a 1N rebid by opener, we have many tools to
show various strength responding hands.
The issue comes when opener shows a minor on his rebid. It would seem
to me that a simple 2H bid at this juncture would define this hand
adequately. Yes it could be made on 4=2=(25) where we have 2 cards in
the minor, but then that is generally the MP spot to play. If opener
continues with 2N, then we need to decide to pass or correct to
3H...and if he rebids 3m, we can correct to 3H.
Kurt

Max Hardy states a range of 5+ to 9- HCP for "Responder has minimum
response values", page 153 of the green book, which is where he covers
the 1M - 2M uncontested raise. I agree that the alternate school of
thought uses a split range where this is clearly the 1M - 2M sort of
raise.
I think a weaker hand might be a good example of what you are talking
about?

So your "dummy points" do not promote trump honors.

Carl

Sandy Barnes

2017-05-09 07:36:54 UTC

1)Support with support. (auctions tend to go smoother)
2) I agree with other posters that unless partner raises spades
you will be over or underbidding on your next call
3) I think that the superiority of playing in a 4-4 fit as opposed
to the 5-3 fit below the five level is overrated.
a) unless both majors are solid you won't be able to use
your discards in time.
b)it will be easier to overcome a 4-1 trump split playing
in the 5-3
Jeff

Thanks everyone. It seems given the strength of this hand (i.e. one
bid) that 2H is the preferred route. It is interesting though to see
the rationales presented for alternate bids.

What everyone is not recognizing [Will has tried to point this out] is
that there are 2 rather different approaches to 2/1 - the Lawrence/
Bergen style where 1M-2M is a value raise with 8-10 points and 3
tickets, and the Hardy style where 1M-2M is made on 6-8 points and 3
cards - a method which I believe is superior.
With this specific hand, we are too strong for a 1M-2M auction in the
Hardy style and the 1S response is clearly appropriate. As Henry has
already pointed out, after a 1N rebid by opener, we have many tools to
show various strength responding hands.
The issue comes when opener shows a minor on his rebid. It would seem
to me that a simple 2H bid at this juncture would define this hand
adequately. Yes it could be made on 4=2=(25) where we have 2 cards in
the minor, but then that is generally the MP spot to play. If opener
continues with 2N, then we need to decide to pass or correct to
3H...and if he rebids 3m, we can correct to 3H.
Kurt

Interesting conversations, but it seems that we are getting lost here, based on system, and possibly advanced agreements. it matters little if your immediate raise is 6-9, or 8-10, or based on losing trick count (8.5 with my style of LTC). When it comes to bidding games and slams, it is always about the fit, and the location of your honors. This is why the immediate raise, playing 5 Card Majors, is so important. Opener can rebid if he has game ambitions, and responder can judge the fit of his cards. unless Opener shows shortness in spades or clubs, I'm agreeing to game with this hand. If opener is short in either black suit, I sign off short of game.

m***@gmail.com

2017-05-06 02:15:32 UTC

Douglas Newlands

2017-05-06 04:52:38 UTC

yes, no, no.

For those who don't agree, consider the auction
1H P 1S 2C
P 3C ?

Does 3H now overstate your values?
(the answer is "yes" if you're not sure).
There used to be a concept that responding hands were
classified into 1 bid (typically 6-9), 2 bid (10-12) and
3+bid hands but that idea seems to have gotten lost.
This one looks like a one bid hand so choose the appropriate auction.

doug

jogs

2017-05-07 13:16:57 UTC

Post by Douglas Newlands

Post by Carl
uncontested auction, playing 2/1.
Q1062 K83 42 K1087

For those who don't agree, consider the auction
1H P 1S 2C
P 3C ?
Does 3H now overstate your values?
doug

Yes, 3H does overstate your values.

E(tricks) = Trumps + (HCP-20)/3

Your expected trick is 8.
But the CK is probably misplaced.
Therefore your expected tricks is less the 8.

There is a good chance 3C is going down.
Also neither side will make more than 8
tricks in any strain.

John Hall

2017-05-06 09:31:49 UTC

Not just "Back to Basics" but back to 2010.

--
John Hall
"One can certainly imagine the myriad of uses
for a hand-held iguana maker"
Hobbes (the tiger, not the philosopher!)

Lorne Anderson

2017-05-09 10:37:28 UTC

2H for me - I only bid 1S if I am strong enough to bid 3H next round as
merely bidding 2H next round shows 2 hearts.

If partner has 4S+5H he can make a long suit try in spades and I will
bid a forcing 3S as choice of games.

m***@gmail.com

2017-05-06 02:17:18 UTC

Sandy Barnes

2017-05-09 06:59:08 UTC