[DavidKok]

2♥.

[mw64ahw]

If 2♣ is GF isn't this where you bid 3♥ as SI rather than mucking around in the minors? At the moment it feels like a choice between ♥ & NT.

I find out if opener is x55x or x65x before setting ♦ as trumps.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I dont understand 2H, and this assumes, that 2H showes the fit, which is also a point
to discuss with your favourite p (*).
You decided for better or worse to bid 2C, the idea being to discover a possible 44
in the minors, and after having discovered the 44 we dont tell p, that we have a 44.

This is basically playing Hide and Seek.

And at this point MP vs. IMP playes no longer a role, I was looking to find a 44
in the minors the bidding round before, and the scoring method did not change during
the bidding round.

If I had decided to bid 2C, I would now bid 3D, even not playing 2C as GF.
After 2/1 a raise of openers 2nd suit to the 3 level should be GF, but obv. system
matters, and I may be forced to go via FSF.

(*) If I bid a suit of my own and than showing the fit, I would imply an unbalanced
hand.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[DavidKok]

 P_Marlowe, on 2025-October-09, 10:11, said:

You decided for better or worse to bid 2C, the idea being to discover a possible 44 in the minors

This was not the idea. I wanted to show a slam-positive raise. Today I can do that at the 2♥-level. Lucky me!

You could decide that diamonds are likely a better slam than hearts. Even so, I would not conceal the heart support. We want partner to evaluate their hand for us.

[P_Marlowe]

DavidKok, on 2025-October-09, 10:18, said:

This was not the idea. I wanted to show a slam-positive raise. Today I can do that at the 2♥-level. Lucky me!

You could decide that diamonds are likely a better slam than hearts. Even so, I would not conceal the heart support. We want partner to evaluate their hand for us.

Yes I agree, if the idea / plan of 2C was to show a 3 card slam going heart raise, go for it.

[mike777]

Hide and seek, good description

This is MP,
A game where we risk it all for another ten points. A game where in 2025 we just about have given up bidding clubs or 2Nt naturally..

[jillybean]

2♥, 3 card GF raise, encouraging partner to cue. WTP?

Late to this lively thread, agree with 2♣ generic gf

[Cyberyeti]

jillybean, on 2025-October-09, 11:15, said:

2♥, 3 card GF raise, encouraging partner to cue. WTP?

Late to this lively thread, agree with 2♣ generic gf

The WTP is can you get back into diamonds if partner has Qx, KQJxx, Q10xx, Qx

[mike777]

 Cyberyeti, on 2025-October-09, 13:04, said:

The WTP is can you get back into diamonds if partner has Qx, KQJxx, Q10xx, Qx

Backing into a second suit is really difficult for the vast majority of us.

If you have a habit of doing it successfully, you are well on your way to the top of bridge

[steve2005]

P_Marlowe, on 2025-October-09, 05:08, said:

Possible.

The risk is, that you will have a complicate FSF auction.

You are laying 2/1 GF, fourth suit forcing doesn't apply you are already GF.
What so complicated someone raises a minor to 3m or 4m?

[pescetom]

mike777, on 2025-October-09, 07:33, said:

2H at MP

So did my partner, over which I bid 2♠.

For us 2♥ is 2+ cards, asking Opener to further define his hand, we probably have fit but have not yet decided the strain to play in.
Whereas 3♥ is 3+ good cards with a clear sense of direction, fixes trumps and requests a control-bid.
I can imagine that there are other such distinctions out there, perhaps defining length of fit at the expense of slam interest or honour strength. Interested to here how others distinguish these two bids.
There isn't much out there written about these internals of 2/1, which is why I found the hand interesting.

[pescetom]

If you took the natural road in diamonds:
MP

---

If you took the low road in hearts:
MP

---

If you took the high road in hearts:

MP

---

[mike777]

1. 4H is clear, kickback in D NOT heart support!

I probably disagree with partners 3NT call but that is a discussion for later. Why? 3D was a slam try in D for me. Asking partner to control bid.

2. 2H agreed hearts, slam try 3 card support. I will now try 2NT encouraging partner to control bid the K of clubs.

[DavidKok]

This deserves a long classic diatribe of yours truly discussion, but I'm afraid I don't have the time. Keeping it brief:

• I have seen people play continuations on this start in multiple ways. Even more frequently, I've seen one person in a partnership invent a structure on the fly and demand that partner intuit it. There is no standard here. This is further reinforced by the large number of different starts to the auction.
  
• There are a few actually complete systems here regarding continuations. I'm thinking of Relay, Ken Rexford's Cuebidding, and arguably 'shape first'. I'm not confident that other systems really have comprehensive off-the-shelf continuations. At the very least it's murky.
  
• I like the low road in hearts and will resume shape first. 2♠ shows 3+ spades and denies 3=5=5=0 - so 4=5=4=0, 3=6=4=0 or 3=5=4=1 (with the last one being most common by far). Over this responder can bid either 2NT or 3♦ - I think here 3♦ is balanced by negative inference, but 2NT is much easier to grasp
  
• With this double red suit fit and no clubs wastage it really is starting to look like a grand - e.g. ♠Kxx, ♥KQJxx, ♦Qxxx, ♣x. But we've got space between there and here.

[DavidKok]

 mike777, on 2025-October-09, 16:03, said:

1. 4H is clear, kickback in D NOT heart support!

I probably disagree with partners 3NT call but that is a discussion for later. Why? 3D was a slam try in D for me. Asking partner to control bid.

2. 2H agreed hearts, slam try 3 card support. I will now try 2NT encouraging partner to control bid the K of clubs.

Sorry, I disagree with all of these points.

• No kickback, especially not if it's a bid in partner's long major.
  
• 3♦ is a slam try, but that doesn't make partner's descriptive 3NT a wrong bid.
  
• 2NT does not ask for controls for me. We're still bidding shape.

I think this further shows just how many different styles there are.

[mike777]

 DavidKok, on 2025-October-09, 16:07, said:

This deserves a long classic diatribe of yours truly discussion, but I'm afraid I don't have the time. Keeping it brief:

• I have seen people play continuations on this start in multiple ways. Even more frequently, I've seen one person in a partnership invent a structure on the fly and demand that partner intuit it. There is no standard here. This is further reinforced by the large number of different starts to the auction.
  
• There are a few actually complete systems here regarding continuations. I'm thinking of Relay, Ken Rexford's Cuebidding, and arguably 'shape first'. I'm not confident that other systems really have comprehensive off-the-shelf continuations. At the very least it's murky.
  
• I like the low road in hearts and will resume shape first. 2♠ shows 3+ spades and denies 3=5=5=0 - so 4=5=4=0, 3=6=4=0 or 3=5=4=1 (with the last one being most common by far). Over this responder can bid either 2NT or 3♦ - I think here 3♦ is balanced by negative inference, but 2NT is much easier to grasp
  
• With this double red suit fit and no clubs wastage it really is starting to look like a grand - e.g. ♠Kxx, ♥KQJxx, ♦Qxxx, ♣x. But we've got space between there and here.

The opponents bid 2S.

[DavidKok]

 mike777, on 2025-October-09, 16:12, said:

The opponents bid 2S.

I think that's a typo, as it's a response to partner's 2♥.

 pescetom, on 2025-October-09, 15:05, said:

So did my partner, over which I bid 2♠.

[mike777]

 DavidKok, on 2025-October-09, 16:15, said:

I think that's a typo, as it's a response to partner's 2♥.

Gotcha

Then change my bid to three clubs please.
I also prefer the low road in hearts.
As I said, I think the last time I backed into another suit, at the table,Clinton was President.

If partner rebids 3H I will continue 3S

Btw starting to look like a grand, strong inference partner has KQ of hearts on this auction

I may be able to offer 7D as an alternative contract. The problem is that is more a bidding panel quiz bid

Never having practiced it, new partner, bit unfair to spring it..

At the club I would be tempted to just leap to 7D now and discuss the hand later, smile

[jillybean]

I took the low road in hearts. now 3♣, will partner repeat the spade cue with a void?

[mike777]

 jillybean, on 2025-October-09, 18:15, said:

I took the low road in hearts. now 3♣, will partner repeat the spade cue with a void?

Unfortunately partner is probably bidding out shape with three small spades, they are on a different page, shape before control bids possibly, I don't play that