[patroclo]

---

Now what to bid: some software bid 1 spade and I don t understand why: is it forcing?
A classic 2 nt bid?
Is 2 spade in rever wrong to bid?

[Cthulhu D]

patroclo, on 2012-February-28, 00:45, said:

---

Now what to bid: some software bid 1 spade and I don t understand why: is it forcing?
A classic 2 nt bid?
Is 2 spade in rever wrong to bid?

I think some people play may 2NT there denies 4S I think (which seems like a terrible idea), it does seem like a classic 2NT bid.

[jmcilkley]

patroclo, on 2012-February-28, 00:45, said:

---

Now what to bid: some software bid 1 spade and I don t understand why: is it forcing?
A classic 2 nt bid?
Is 2 spade in rever wrong to bid?

With 19 points many would bid 3NT but maybe you are worried about missing a possible spade fit. In uk Crowhurst is now quite popular where the 1NT rebid is 15 to 18 (we play weak 1NT opening 12 to 14). This means that 2NT rebid will show exactly 19 points and allows partner to bid at the 3 level to show 5 hearts or 4 spades. 3NT seems to be the right contract.
Mike

[ahydra]

1S is not forcing there. 2NT is the right bid.

For 5-card-majorites this is a bit of a problem if you don't play checkback, unless perhaps you agree that 3S over 2NT here shows 5H and 4S so that opener can pick.

ahydra

[Zelandakh]

patroclo, on 2012-February-28, 00:45, said:

Now what to bid: some software bid 1 spade and I don t understand why: is it forcing?
A classic 2 nt bid?
Is 2 spade in rever wrong to bid?

In some countries it is normal to bid suits "up the line". If the choice of bids is 1♠ then this would be forcing. This is not the usual way of bidding in North America though.

In systems that advocate showing shape with the rebid (rather than suits) the normal rebid would be 2NT. Mike's suggestion of 3NT comes from other methods, such as old-fashioned Acol, where 3NT is used for a 19 point balanced hand. This is generally regarded as a poor method in modern bidding (even most Acolites have dropped it).

A 2♠ rebid would be wrong since this also shows 5 or more clubs. This is not a reverse but rather a jump shift. It is a game force in American (and most other) methods.

[Cyberyeti]

jmcilkley, on 2012-February-28, 04:03, said:

With 19 points many would bid 3NT but maybe you are worried about missing a possible spade fit. In uk Crowhurst is now quite popular where the 1NT rebid is 15 to 18 (we play weak 1NT opening 12 to 14). This means that 2NT rebid will show exactly 19 points and allows partner to bid at the 3 level to show 5 hearts or 4 spades. 3NT seems to be the right contract.
Mike

We take this a step further where essentially we don't get dealt 19s, they're 18s or 20s and that frees up 1x-1y-2N as a GF unbalanced bid which is extremely useful. This hand would be 1♣-1♥-1N finish for us.

[ArtK78]

I have seen some very good players advocate a 1♠ bid on the South cards. While not forcing, their thought is that if partner passes 1♠ then there probably is no game in the cards. And, even with the favorable lie of the spade suit, against good defenders you are very unlikely to make 9 (and possibly not even 8) tricks in NT on this hand.

[mikeh]

I would have thought this to be a simple situation, but I see some posters suggesting 3N over 1♥, others suggesting that 1♠ can be played as forcing, and others seeming to suggest that 2N is forcing.


As to the OP: I don't think anyone has yet invented a programme that can reliably bid well, even in reasonably simple auctions....the quirks of GIB, as used on BBO are often on display here. So don't ever look at software and expect to learn proper bidding technique.

In NA, at least, the standard treatment would be to rebid 2N, which definitely does not deny a 4 card spade suit and is definitely not forcing. It shows a balanced 18-19. Most good players routinely upgrade some 17 counts into the range and some 19 counts out of the range, but it is still 18-19.

All experienced pairs have methods to find a possible 4-4 spade fit unless responder is so weak that he will pass 2N. Note that most experienced players will stretch to respond to a minor suit opening, so it is entirely possible for responder to be so weak that game is unlikely even opposite 18-19.

1♠ is not forcing. The upper limit for 1♠ is less than 19.....and less than a good 18. With 18+ or more, opener will either rebid 2N (balanced hand) or jumpshift into 2♠ (4+ spades, longer diamonds, gf values). Note that 4=1=4=4 hands are difficult...fortunately the odds of holding specifically 4=1=4=4 18-19 are low...some would chance 2N, others would risk 1♠. While 1♠ is non-forcing, responder will not pass very often.....he'd need at least 3 spades and a weak hand. And if he does pass, the odds are that game won't be good.

I have little idea if this approach is standard in Europe but I am quite sure that it is the mainstream approach in NA. There are variants (such as playing 1♠ as forcing) but I have never seen such variants explained in a plausible manner.

[kenrexford]

Idea #1: Bid 1♠? BAD IDEA!!!


Idea #2: Rebid 3NT? BAD IDEA!!! Not only is partner allowed to be rather weak for the 1♥ response, but 3NT also preempts the partnership out of effective bidding otherwise. Partner knows that 2NT shows 18-19 and can bid accordingly. Plus, because of this, 1♣-P-1♥-P-3NT typically shows solid clubs and a "gambling" type of hand.


Idea #3: Rebid 2NT? GOOD IDEA!!! This is the classic meaning and will win the contest.



Idea #4: OPEN 2NT? That's my choice. If playing a 20-21 HCP 2NT, by possession of 19 HCP with great controls (7 if A=2, K=1) is bolstered by (1) not 4-3-3-3 shape and (2) good body (I have lots of 8's and 9's).

[Phil]

Cyberyeti, on 2012-February-28, 08:36, said:

... and that frees up 1x-1y-2N as a GF unbalanced bid which is extremely useful.

Please be mindful this is the B/I.

[Cyberyeti]

Phil, on 2012-February-28, 10:59, said:

Please be mindful this is the B/I.

I've played this since I was B/I more than 25 years ago, it's an old idea, I came across it from Landy/Horton (as she was at the time), but I think it's been around longer than that. It simplifies big hands a lot, and I tend not to play no strong bids other than 2♣ without it.