[ArtK78]

Fluffy, on 2012-June-04, 10:59, said:

1♠-(pass)-??

♠-
♥KJ942
♦J92
♣Q10652

I can make it much worse probably.

Assuming that 1NT is natural, the 1NT response is bid on this hand not because you want to play in 1NT but because you don't have any choice. 2 of any other suit shows much more in power than you have, and you certainly can't raise spades. So, since you have to keep the bidding open, you are forced to bid 1NT. Partner understands that 1NT doesn't promise a balanced hand or any sort of spade support.

But you knew that when you posted it.

By the way, I agree with the pass of 1♠ on the original hand.

[gnasher]

[duplicate post]

[gnasher]

microcap, on 2012-June-04, 10:14, said:

It has to be a pretty good rule not to bid notrump with a void in partner's first bid natural suit...comments?

If you mean that you should never bid notrumps at any stage in the auction, that's obviously an awful rule. If it went

1♣-(1♦)-1♥
1♠-2♦
3♣

presumably you'd be happy for responder to bid 3NT with a 3550 13-count.

On the first round of the auction, a natural notrump bid should show a balanced hand, because with an unbalanced hand you should be showing your suits. As you exchange information about shape, bidding notrumps becomes less descriptive of a balanced hand, and more of a strain suggestion in the context of what has been shown already.

That applies to this sequence, given your methods. Responder already knows a lot about opener's shape, so bidding notrumps just says "Given what you've shown, I think notrumps is likely to be our best strain." As opener has promised five clubs, responder will give preference to clubs on almost all hands with three of them, and some hands with two. Hence 1NT will often have short clubs, though 1 or 2 is more likely than 0.

The main reasons for passing 1♠ on this responding hand are that game is unlikely, 1♠ is likely to make, and bidding again may get you too high. However, if you add some high cards to the responding hand without changing the shape, at some point it will become worth 1NT because of the possibility of game. Kxx KJ10xx QJ10xx -, for example, is too good to pass 1♠, so what can you bid but 1NT?

[microcap]

thank you all for pointing out that I was too glib with my comment about bidding NT with a void in partner's suit.

Perhaps better is "Try really really hard in a competitive auction not to bid NT with a void in partner's suit." I think I read that somewhere in a column in my life...

[the hog]

jdeegan, on 2012-June-02, 06:31, said:

Pass. Game our way is remote. 1♠ is NOT forcing in any system I know of. The contract of 1♠ should be reasonable. A Pass really puts pressure on LHO. If he/she does not pass, it gives you and partner good information.

Pass is forcing for me in EVERY partnership I play. I would bid 1NT now.

[the hog]

microcap, on 2012-June-03, 06:17, said:

Most of you got this right, but I suggest that the few of you who bid 1NT [as did Rex at the table] should strongly reconsider! I mentioned this argument and Rex's 1NT bid at the table to our regular teammates. They both scrunched their faces like kids eating their vegetables

I held a fun and potentially powerful collection of:

---

When my partner shows me a balanced hand, I think I can take 9 tricks in NT if he has either club honor or even 2 small and I can pick up the queen. It didnt go well for obvious reasons.

My bidding screams a misfit with 9-11 black cards, I cannot for the life of me understand a 1NT bid. If anything, a 2♠ raise on 3 cards is the only other option besides pass.

Well I cannot understand a 3NT bid. This is truly awful. 2C is fine.

[FrancesHinden]

I would have passed 1S for the same reason as everyone else.
No-one has commented on the 1H bid the first round. I think pass has a lot going for it.

[WrecksVee]

Wrecksvee AKA Rex of these misadventures.

It was pointed out that 1NT left open finding the 5-3 ♥fit. That and showing my ♦stoppers were my intention. Also IMO if partner has some extras and 3♥ than game is possible. So giving partner one more chance seems best.

I really dislike raising to 2♠as IMO that will lose the 5-3 ♥fit if it exists. Also I fail to see why this hand is much differnt than 2=5=5=1 when passing 1♠ is not a good option. The idea that the rebid shows a balanced hand seems unplayable in this sequence. In rebids NT is often balanced at the higher levels. But with less than 11 HCP 1NT is needed to keep the auction open in case partner has extras or if no other call including pass is reasonable. So the 1NT reebid by Responder can be unbalanced.

Sorry to be too lazy to look back at the other posts, but thanks to the person who pointed out that the failure to make a negative double greatly increases the chance that the 2♠ raise is on three cards.

Jay and I should be more open about our methods when we ask for opinions. We open ALL 12-16 balanced hands with 1NT. So we have either an unbalanced or semi-balanced hand for one of a suit unless we have 17-20 HCP. In a constructive auction 1♣-1♥-1♠shows an unbalanced hand as we rebid 1NT with 17-20 even with four spades. But this competitve auction might impact that if Opener lacks a ♦stopper. But save for that rare case Opener's bidding for us shows 4♠ and 5♣ since with =4=1=4=4 we open 1♦.

The 12-16 1NT may seem inaccurate. Yet IMO we make if up in one over one auctions by not having to allow for partner holding a balanced minimum. Also 1NT-3NT is harder to defend given the five point range makes it harder to count Opener's hand. That our idea at least and we have played this way for many years without considering giving it up. Of course laziness and stubborness might also be factors in not changing our agreements

[microcap]

"I really dislike raising to 2♠as IMO that will lose the 5-3 ♥fit if it exists. Also I fail to see why this hand is much differnt than 2=5=5=1 when passing 1♠ is not a good option. The idea that the rebid shows a balanced hand seems unplayable in this sequence. In rebids NT is often balanced at the higher levels. But with less than 11 HCP 1NT is needed to keep the auction open in case partner has extras or if no other call including pass is reasonable. So the 1NT rebid by Responder can be unbalanced."

Rex and I are actually not too far apart here, but I would argue that there is a huge difference between 3-5-5-0 and 2-5-5-1. As I pointed out from the beginning, I was both cognizant of and willing to take the risk that he had a singleton club-- again, if it happens to be an honor, I think i will be making 3NT, and if it isn't, I still have substantial chances. But with the void, I think 1NT is simply not an option at all. Voids have so much power-- so helpful in the right case, but big trouble in the wrong one [as here.]