[jillybean]

---

I certainly contributed to this mess but I won't tell you where I sat until you've had a chance to comment, I'd hate for anyone to hold back on their critique of my bidding.

[Cyberyeti]

What is 2♠ for you presumably bad, or do you play WJS ? We play it as NF but INV and not passed often so N in context of 1♥ followed by 2♥ has a vast hand, 1♥-1♠-2♥-2♠-4♦-5♣-5♠-6♠ is not entirely impossible. This is a good contract on a non trump lead, and OK with one.

FWIW I'd start 1♥-1♠-2♣

Edit: maybe I should note we play SJS but still play 2♠ as constuctive here, we also play 4SF not GF at the 2 level so 1♥-1♠-2♣-2♦-3♥-3♠ would be a valid start too for us.

[neilkaz]

Do you play WJS and if so, what is the best hand South can have for a WJS to 2S?

[mikeh]

I really dislike 2♥. The north hand is nothing to be ashamed of and the club suit is definitely biddable, so N should bid 2♣ instead.

Over 2♣, I think S has a close decision between conservatism, based on the poor spade texture, and aggression, based on the 7th spade and the value of the clubs now that partner has bid the suit: S can choose either 2 or 3♠.

Over the 2♥ rebid, I think 2♠, altho bid with something in reserve, is not a horrible underbid...I think it is better than 3♠.

Note that if the partnership uses a direct 2♠ as a WJS, then 2♠ over 2♥ becomes constructive by definition....it shows more than a WJS. However, the 1st rule for bidding weak misfitting hands is to pass as soon as possible, so even with WJS in use, 2♠ is not a drop-dead call.

North did drop dead, metaphorically. Passing 2♠ is truly awful.

N went low initially because, despite having lots of hcp, he or she was worried that the heart suit was weak. When S bid over 2♥, he announced heart shortness in addition to announcing spade length. North's valuation should have changed accordingly. Weak hearts now are an asset, while all those delicious cards in the blacks, not to mention the stiff diamond, become enhanced in value.

I would have bid 4♠ over 2♠, rejecting the splinter in diamonds because my hand isn't quite good enough imo.

So if this were an ATB, it would be 100% N

[trevahound]

I really dislike both 2♥ and 2♠. I don't understand either of them. 2♣ seems 100% normal with the north hand.

A 2♠ rebid with the south hand doesn't even seem like a logical alternative to me. I wouldn't have considered it. I'm far far closer to a 4♠ rebid than a 2♠ rebid. When I start creating possible hands for partner, I don't need an opening hand to have good play for game, and partner's promised an opening hand. 2♠ does appear to be both sufficient and in turn, so it has that going for it. And, we're incredibly likely to be plus. ATB 85% south, but by far the worst call.

Brian Zaugg

[neilkaz]

Regardless of what has been said about and what occurred during previous rounds of bidding, South's failure to raise 3♠ to 4 is simply awful. Clearly North has 2♠ and not a dead minimum piece of garbage so game should have good play.

I'm willing to bet that East's 3D balance after this misfit auction was a very poor bid as well and could risk playing a contract where the opps have 6 or 7 trumps. In this case the balance gives the opps another chance to get to game after they'd both taken a conservative view of the hand.

If I was North I'd have raised 2S to 3S and game is then bid by South.

[MrAce]

- I agree that N should bid 2♣

- I hate 2♠ bid. I mean i really do. You have 8 card spade fit unless pd is void in spades + 10 hcp vs an opener and a 7 card suit with controls in all other 3 suits.

-I also hate the idea of raising to 4♠ with N hand over 2♠, especially if WJS was not available. South can be much weaker than what he has. North could have made another move, but not quite 4♠. I take splinter suggestions not seriously. I think Mike was trying to make a point. No one wants to ruff with their AK tide trumps.

- S should have raised to 4 ♠ after 3♠.

ATB goes to south mostly imo.

[the hog]

I think the bidding by both players is poor.
Why 2H? This is a 2C bid. South is worth 3S now. Assuming Sth is asleep and only bids 2S, why did Nth not bid 3? I don't think I would get to slam, but I would never miss game.

[neilkaz]

It is clear to me from several years of reading and learning at this forum that I like to rebid a 6 card major, bypassing a 4 card minor, more often than most here. However, N's rebid clearly should be 2♣ with his moth eaten 6 card ♥ suit and his fine 4 card ♣ suit.

[jillybean]

1♥ 2♠ would be a SJS here

[CSGibson]

1H: i like this bid, good start.
1S: Also a good start.

2H: I think 2C is clear. This is not close to a minimum opener (where you might go 1H-2H-3C).

2S: This is also a really poor bid imo. You have a 7 bagger and a 10 count. Because the suit doesn't play well opposite a singleton, and because partner hasn't stopped bidding my void, I might be inclined to bid 3♠ instead of 4, but I think it really is a question of one of those two bids.

North's 1st Pass: Also a poor bid. Partner apparently doesn't even have 2 hearts, your AK of spades and club cards, as well as the diamond shortage, should all be welcome additions to partner's hand. 3♠ should be bid now, IMO, though 4S is not unreasonable.

South's final pass: Eureka, partner has a spade fit, let's go to game! is the thought of a reasonable player. South was not reasonable.

In the end, I give 100% of the blame to North and 100% of the blame to South, and tell both to bid more.

[Cascade]

jillybean, on 2013-October-31, 20:21, said:

1♥ 2♠ would be a SJS here

You havent got that hand so that mistake was avoided

[jillybean]

Cascade, on 2013-October-31, 22:51, said:

You havent got that hand so that mistake was avoided

I can't upvote your post

[jillybean]

I was north here, realized I had misbid as I was placing 2♥'s on the table and then failed to reevaluate my hand after partner bid 2♠

[kenberg]

Meta-thought: If I can't stand for partner to raise 2♠ to 3 (or 4) when s/he has spades, I pass 2♥ even with a void. So, for me, 2♠ shows at least something. I can play 2♠ if you have junk and mostly nothing in spades, and I can do more if you can help. That sort of thinking is useful here since it relieves South of the obligation to rebid 3♠ over 2♥. On a different layout, 2♠ may be plenty. I like 2♠ followed by a raise to 3♠ and a bid of 4♠. I think I will leave getting to slam to the experts.

[ggwhiz]

CSGibson, on 2013-October-31, 21:19, said:

1H: i like this bid, good start.
1S: Also a good start.

As for the rest of the auction...... believe it or not, I've had worse and started to improve when "oops" temporarily ended the conversation until our senses of humor returned. With your attitude I fearlessly predict good things in your future. Mind you the true test is when only one of you goes off the rails.

[jillybean]

mikeh, on 2013-October-31, 17:27, said:

N went low initially because, despite having lots of hcp, he or she was worried that the heart suit was weak. When S bid over 2♥, he announced heart shortness in addition to announcing spade length. North's valuation should have changed accordingly. Weak hearts now are an asset, while all those delicious cards in the blacks, not to mention the stiff diamond, become enhanced in value.

I would have bid 4♠ over 2♠, rejecting the splinter in diamonds because my hand isn't quite good enough imo.

So if this were an ATB, it would be 100% N

I need to keep reading this.

---

[rmnka447]

I think everyone has the right idea preferring a 2 ♣ bid to 2 ♥. The big problem with 2 ♥ IMO is when partner has a bad hand with a stiff small ♥ where you might be playing 2 ♥. You could lose as many as 3 or 4 heart tricks. So in this rare instance, it seems right to treat the 6 card suit more like a 5 card suit.

After 2 ♣, it's fairly easy to rebid at least 3 ♠ with the responding hand.

After 2 ♥, the hand offers a great deal more probability of a misfit which makes it more difficult to bid 3 ♠. The fear of playing opposite a stiff ♠ is a concern. I think if partner opens very lightly on a consistent basis then maybe 2 ♠ is a consideration. However, opener likely holds some values outside of ♥s that would be useful. So I agree with a 3 ♠ invitational rebid by responder.

But I think responder still has a chance when opener competes to 3 ♠ over the opponents 3 ♦ bid. Opener must have something like ♠ honor doubleton for that bid because opener has no idea what responder's 2 ♠ rebid spade suit is like. Opposite that holding, 4 ♠ is aggressive, but not reasonable. Note that South behind the 3 ♦ bidder also should count a little extra for his ♦ K.

[Cascade]

jillybean, on 2013-November-01, 07:54, said:

I was north here, realized I had misbid as I was placing 2♥'s on the table and then failed to reevaluate my hand after partner bid 2♠

Rebidding with six-four shape can be difficult. Whilst I am not generally a fan of rules of thumb when I was learning I read some advice from Mike Lawrence where he suggested rebidding the stronger suit with six-four. What this does illustrate though is there needs to be some judgement exercised when rebidding with six-four.

Here your first suit is poor, you second suit reasonable and you have a near maximum for 2♥. All of these things point to bidding your second suit which will be more flexible and more descriptive.