[lycier]

Yesterday I played with my friends at table and ran into a interesting hand.

---

After opening 1♦,I respond 2♣ to promise 12hcp+ for my card, and if I respond 2nt(Jordan 2nt) to invite ,I feared my ♥ doubletons without stopper,so I decided to respond 1nt at first.However my partner rebid 2♦,I found a good way to describe my hand that I bid 2♥ to show limited raise without ♥ stopper.after 2nt,3c was a help suit for game try.
Opp lead ♠J,obviously we could get 9 tricks easily.
my impossible 2♥ was not a good idea?

[lycier]

are there others to show my hand?

[PhilKing]

It's pretty common to do it the other way round (ie natural, lol). Over 2♦, 2♠ would show values in spades, nothing in hearts and a good raise to 3♦.

[Vampyr]

 lycier, on 2012-November-25, 10:53, said:

After opening 1♦,I respond 2♣ to promise 12hcp+ for my card, and if I respond 2nt(Jordan 2nt) to invite

I think your terminology is inaccurate -- Jordan applies after the opponents have doubled.

[Fluffy]

When 2 suits are equaly avaible (2♥ and 2♠), I bid the most "natural" way, this means I would bid 2♠ with your hand, had I opted for 1NT first.

I would bid 2NT with your hand, stoppers in unbid suits is very low in my list of priorities, showing my range is fighting for first position with showing shape. I could bid 1NT if partner opens balanced 11 counts and unbalanced 10s, but that is normally under a strong club context.

[Vampyr]

 Fluffy, on 2012-November-25, 14:57, said:

I would bid 2NT with your hand, stoppers in unbid suits is very low in my list of priorities, showing my range is fighting for first position with showing shape.

Yes, 11 points is way too heavy for 1NT. Partner could easily have passed this. 2NT is best if your system doesn't permit a 2♣ bid with that strength.

[dake50]

I think your hand merits 2C: a 1 point deviation with
primes and bid the suit you have.
Certainly after 1NT, a second noise. 2H seems right.

[Zelandakh]

There are different ways of playing it when we have 2 impossible 2M bids available. One is to bid the suit where you have values as a good raise. Another is to bid 2♥ as a good hand with clubs and 2♠ as a good hand with diamonds. It does not really matter on this hand though as all roads appear to lead to 3NT.

A couple of points: it is not clear if you are playing a forcing or semi-forcing 1NT response. The 12+ comment suggests this but others have indicated otherwise. This is relevant information. Similarly you do not give a minimum length for the 1♦ opening. Normally this would be 3+ without comment but your reference to Jordan 2NT seems to suggest otherwise. For reference, Jordan 2NT is a convention after they double our opening 1 bid where a 2NT response shows a limit raise or better. Properly, Jordan refers only to the auction 1M - (X) - 2NT but many pairs play the same over a 1m opening and call it Jordan too.

Edit: Incidentally, are you posting this in the Expert forum because you are an expert yourself and want to have a discussion with other experts about unusual treatments or because you think you will get a better quality of response here? If the latter then I can promise you that you are just as likely to get a response from one on the resident experts in the other forums. Indeed, perhaps more so as I expect at least some of them choose to boycott threads about non-expert material posted in this forum.

[Vampyr]

 Zelandakh, on 2012-November-26, 06:38, said:

A couple of points: it is not clear if you are playing a forcing or semi-forcing 1NT response.

Somehow I think that a (semi)forcing 1NT over a diamond opening would be unusual enough that OP would have mentioned it.

[aguahombre]

 Vampyr, on 2012-November-26, 07:32, said:

Somehow I think that a (semi)forcing 1NT over a diamond opening would be unusual enough that OP would have mentioned it.

Perhaps. However, North's bidding is unusual enough to indicate something hasn't been told to us. I certainly wondered whether a 2D rebid after a 1NT response with a stronger than minimum 3-4-5-1 hand might be semi-forcing by undisclosed partnership agreement, in combination with the 11-count 1NT response itself.

At the club, this combination of strange bids plus the 2H rebid by responder would be accompanied by enough body language to make everything clear.

1D-1N
2D ends an auction. There is no impossible anything bid, unless something undisclosed has happened by agreement or by UI.

[Vampyr]

 aguahombre, on 2012-November-26, 08:17, said:

Perhaps. However, North's bidding is unusual enough to indicate something hasn't been told to us. I certainly wondered whether a 2D rebid after a 1NT response with a stronger than minimum 3-4-5-1 hand might be semi-forcing by undisclosed partnership agreement, in combination with the 11-count 1NT response itself.

At the club, this combination of strange bids plus the 2H rebid by responder would be accompanied by enough body language to make everything clear.

1D-1N
2D ends an auction. There is no impossible anything bid, unless something undisclosed has happened by agreement or by UI.

These two options are very possible, but it might just be that South chose a 1NT call in the Al Roth (if I can just survive this round of bidding) style and lucked out in that he didn't get the dummy and had a chance to catch up.

North was probably just confused. He does kind of seem to have got the "I have got stuff in the other suits -- can you cover hearts" message, but obviously didn't expect an 11-count opposite, since he bid 2NT and not 3NT. Now South decided he hadn't quite caught up enough?

Yes, I admit this is all rather fantastical.

[Free]

The idea was good, but 2♥ isn't the right call. In general, when there are 2 suits left to bid, you bid them naturalish. When there's only 1 suit left, you bid it to ask for a stopper (4th suit for example).

[Zelandakh]

 Free, on 2012-November-28, 14:41, said:

The idea was good, but 2♥ isn't the right call. In general, when there are 2 suits left to bid, you bid them naturalish. When there's only 1 suit left, you bid it to ask for a stopper (4th suit for example).

That is something to agree on. You can play it either way round and there is even some theoretical merit for the reverse in certain situations.