[3for3]

Here is a toughie I faced this afternoon.

K9876543
KQ
3
AT

1C-1S
2H-2S
2NT-?

2H was a standard reverse. 2NT was non forcing, however, if you bid over it, you are game forced. Maybe not the best methods, but is good for this hand. So, what is your call, and planned bid next ?

Danny

[effervesce]

3♠ looks normal. Why hide an 8 card suit. If partner can raise/cue after 3♠ I'll RKCB. If partner bids 3NT after 3♠, I'm bidding 4♣.

[kenrexford]

Well, 3♠ seems obvious. 4♠ immediately would be silly, and nothing else is better as an alternative to the obvious.

So, what happens after 3♠?

[ArtK78]

I agree that 3♠ seems like the obvious call. If raised, I will RKCB. If not, I may just sign off in 4♠.

Without a spade fit, there is likely to be no slam.

[mike777]

3for3, on Jun 29 2008, 06:43 PM, said:

Here is a toughie I faced this afternoon.

K9876543
KQ
3
AT

1C-1S
2H-2S
2NT-?

2H was a standard reverse.  2NT was non forcing, however, if you bid over it, you are game forced.  Maybe not the best methods, but is good for this hand.  So, what is your call, and planned bid next ?

Danny

Given OP constraints 3s and then 4s if over 3nt.


strongly prefer 3s over 2h and then if need be....4s over 3nt.
For me 2s could be 5 spades and something closer to zero hcp if we are nv and a super max of 9 hcp if vul.

[marcD]

3♠ is obvious and post mortem proof even though it does not do justice to my hand. the only alternative is 5♠. I would reluctantly (but quickly !) bid 3♠

[nige1]

3for3, on Jun 29 2008, 06:43 PM, said:

Here is a toughie I faced this afternoon. ♠ K9876543 ♥ KQ ♦ 3 ♣ AT
1C-1S
2H-2S
2NT-?
2H was a standard reverse.  2NT was non forcing, however, if you bid over it, you are game forced.  Maybe not the best methods, but is good for this hand.  So, what is your call, and planned bid next ?

• Over 2N, 3♠ = 10, 3♣ = 4.
  
• Then, over 3N, 4♣ = 10, 4♠ = 5, _P = 2.

Granny's riddle: "What do you call an 8 card suit?"
Answer: "Trumps" ... but ...
This hand may be an exception

[ArtK78]

nige1, on Jun 30 2008, 08:59 AM, said:

3for3, on Jun 29 2008, 06:43 PM, said:

Here is a toughie I faced this afternoon. ♠ K9876543 ♥ KQ ♦ 3 ♣ AT
1C-1S
2H-2S
2NT-?
2H was a standard reverse.  2NT was non forcing, however, if you bid over it, you are game forced.  Maybe not the best methods, but is good for this hand.  So, what is your call, and planned bid next ?

• Over 2N, 3♠ = 10, 3♣ = 4.
  
  
• Then, over 3N, 4♣ = 10, 4♠ = 5, _P = 2.

Granny's riddle: "What do you call an 8 card suit?"
Answer: "Trumps" ... but ...
This hand may be an exception

This hand is not an exception. Partner bid 2NT over my 2♠ call - he is not void in spades.

The 4♣ follow-up bid over 3NT is very unlikely to be right. Are you trying to play in a 5-2 or 6-2 club fit as opposed to an 8-1 or 8-2 spade fit? I will admit that if partner holds specifically:

x
Axxx
AKQ
KQJxx

Then 6C is the winning spot. Is that what your 4♣ bid is geared to find? I just can't place partner with exactly the right cards to make 6♣ the winning contract.

[neilkaz]

effervesce, on Jun 29 2008, 08:34 PM, said:

3♠ looks normal. Why hide an 8 card suit. If partner can raise/cue after 3♠ I'll RKCB. If partner bids 3NT after 3♠, I'm bidding 4♣.

We agree..off course 3♠ next, stressing that I have lots of them.

[pclayton]

I like 3♠ now and then 4♣ over 3N. A really good partner will find a 4♦ call over 3♠ with Qx Axxx AQ KQJxx.

I can't have a great spade suit, otherwise I would have bid 3♠ the last round. So 4♣ should show something along the lines of this hand, but perhaps not promising an 8th spade.

By the way, I think folks should be careful with their constructions for 6♣. If we get a heart lead you can probably kiss the spade suit goodbye.

[ArtK78]

pclayton, on Jun 30 2008, 10:32 AM, said:

By the way, I think folks should be careful with their constructions for 6♣. If we get a heart lead you can probably kiss the spade suit goodbye.

In my construction for 6♣, which is

x
Axxx
AKQ
KQJxx

the spade suit is entirely irrelevant. All that is needed is a heart ruff in dummy and reasonably friendly breaks.

[3for3]

Good posts, most covered the important points. Anyone who dismisses clubs as the likely trump suit is missing the point of the hand, IMO. Partner could have the hands Art is suggesting, or even

x
AJxx
AQ
KQ9xxx.

Hardly a fantastic hand for the auction, yet 6C is the spot to be.

I was so interested in 6C that I bid 3C over 2nt. Partner signed off in 3NT over that.

Partner's hand for those interested is

X
AJxx
AKT
KQ9xx.

So 6 clubs is playable, but a little tough to manage.

Those who insist on spades should find spades 4-0 and go down in 4S

Danny

[ArtK78]

This is interesting. In my original post, I dismissed looking for a club contract even though I came up with a reasonable construction of partner's hand which made 6♣ a good contract. So I guess I was disputing my own conclusion.

I find it interesting that partner would rebid 2NT on the cards suggested in Danny's first hand. It seems to me that a 3♣ call over 2♠ is more descriptive. The 2NT call led me astray - I assumed that 4♠ would be an equal or better game contract than 3NT or 5♣. Clearly, however, spades was not an appropriate strain for slam unless partner could raise spades. But going down in 4♠ would take quite a combination of circumstances:

1) Partner has a singleton small spade.
2) We lose 3 spade tricks and an outside trick or 4 spade tricks if we play in spades.

I thought that (1) was possible but that (2) was extremely unlikely.

In the actual hand, 6♣ is playable, and the 2NT call is not unreasonable.

So, I still think that game should be in spades on this auction, and that playing in clubs when partner rebids 2NT is unlikely to be best. But I am not so sure now....

[kenrexford]

If you bid 3♠ and partner bids 3NT, 4♣, whether as a cue in support of spades or as showing support of clubs, either way gets the partnership headed in the right direction. Opener bids 4♦, you bid 4♥, and Opener leaps to 6♣.

[ArtK78]

kenrexford, on Jun 30 2008, 02:07 PM, said:

If you bid 3♠ and partner bids 3NT, 4♣, whether as a cue in support of spades or as showing support of clubs, either way gets the partnership headed in the right direction.  Opener bids 4♦, you bid 4♥, and Opener leaps to 6♣.

If 4♣ is a cue bid for spades, the idea that partner will be leaping to 6♣ holding KQJxx of clubs is a little much for me. And if the subsequent 4♥ bid confirms "support" for clubs, I suppose that the leap to 6♣ makes more sense. Still, from the point of view of the big hand, it is hard to place in partner's hand all of the cards needed to make 6♣ a good contract. The ♣A and the ♥K are a good start, but diamond shortness (or the ♦Q) and the ♥Q are also needed, with or without the ♠A.

So, this may not be as easy as you think to bid 6♣.

On the actual hand, after Danny bid 3♣ over 2NT, which clearly shows club support, his partner signed off in 3NT. And I can see why he would do that. Whether Danny's hand should take another call over 3NT is problematic.

[kenrexford]

ArtK78, on Jun 30 2008, 02:14 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Jun 30 2008, 02:07 PM, said:

If you bid 3♠ and partner bids 3NT, 4♣, whether as a cue in support of spades or as showing support of clubs, either way gets the partnership headed in the right direction.  Opener bids 4♦, you bid 4♥, and Opener leaps to 6♣.

If 4♣ is a cue bid for spades, the idea that partner will be leaping to 6♣ holding KQJxx of clubs is a little much for me.

Why?

A cue in clubs, when you are looking at KQJxx, shows the missing Ace. If you are also looking at an itty-bitty stiff spade, why don't you want to suggest clubs as the strain? If partner has spades that are playable opposite the stiff deuce, he knows what to do next.

[Echognome]

3for3, on Jun 30 2008, 08:21 AM, said:

Good posts, most covered the important points. Anyone who dismisses clubs as the likely trump suit is missing the point of the hand, IMO. Partner could have the hands Art is suggesting, or even

x
AJxx
AQ
KQ9xxx.

Hardly a fantastic hand for the auction, yet 6C is the spot to be.

I was so interested in 6C that I bid 3C over 2nt. Partner signed off in 3NT over that.

Partner's hand for those interested is

X
AJxx
AKT
KQ9xx.

So 6 clubs is playable, but a little tough to manage.

Those who insist on spades should find spades 4-0 and go down in 4S

Danny

Anyone who rebids 2NT on a 1=4=2=6 or a 0=4=3=6 type hand is missing the point. I understand that 2NT may be the best rebid on a hand that is strained (maybe A Qxxx AQx KQJxx), but I wouldn't go around worrying to much about playing in other suits once partner bids 2NT.

If spades are 4-0 onside you might possibly make on a trump coup and go down in 6♣! Or maybe they are 3-1 and it goes spade to the A and ruff and you are down then. Good thing we stopped in the making game...

[nige1]

ArtK78, on Jun 30 2008, 09:22 AM, said:

The 4♣ follow-up bid over 3NT is very unlikely to be right.  Are you trying to play in a 5-2 or 6-2 club fit as opposed to an 8-1 or 8-2 spade fit? 

Over partner's 2N, 4♣ is just a convenient and descriptive forcing bid. It doesn't commit you to a ♣ contract

[ArtK78]

nige1, on Jun 30 2008, 05:01 PM, said:

ArtK78, on Jun 30 2008, 09:22 AM, said:

The 4♣ follow-up bid over 3NT is very unlikely to be right.  Are you trying to play in a 5-2 or 6-2 club fit as opposed to an 8-1 or 8-2 spade fit? 

Over partner's 2N, 4♣ is just a convenient and descriptive forcing bid. It doesn't commit you to a ♣ contract

But it is certainly not going to lead you to a spade contract. Whereas, a 4♠ bid is certain to lead you to a spade contract (rightly or wrongly).

[han]

I think a 2NT bidder in this auction has a singleton spade about as often as a doubleton. 1435 is very common and I do think 1426 is possible (though 3C is a more likely rebid with that shape).

Anyway, we have a 3S bid now and let's worry later about what to do next.