[ralph23]

iggygork, on Jul 20 2007, 02:37 PM, said:

Isn't 2♦ over an opp's X not forcing in BWS? Seems like a pretty common agreement here in the Pacific Northwest.

♣♦♥♠

Copied directly from the BW website re: BWS:

In responding to a major-suit opening over a takeout double

(a) a one-spade response is forcing (by an unpassed hand);

( a two-level new-suit response is not forcing;

© two notrump shows a game-invitational or stronger raise of the major (direct jump-raises are preemptive);

(d) a jump-shift is preemptive;

(e) a double jump-shift is a splinter raise;

(f) a redouble shows any other hand-type with 10-plus HCP.

Frankly I've never heard of 2/1 after a X being anything other than NF. My partner got that idea once for about a week and I had a helluva time finally convincing him that he was imagining it. But there is a place on the convention card for it to be forcing so I guess someone does play that!

[BebopKid]

3♥ or 4♥ which are not on the poll.

[ochinko]

BebopKid, on Jul 21 2007, 12:46 AM, said:

3♥ or 4♥ which are not on the poll.

That's why I voted for 2NT. I missed it on the first read, but when I read mikeh's post I realized it's the systemic bid. 3 and 4♥ mean less defense and longer hearts. Strangely enough 2NT isn't very popular choice though.

[jdeegan]

Jlall, on Jul 21 2007, 01:21 AM, said:

This hand seems all about diamonds to me, not hearts. If we are going to compete/save over spades I think partner will need a diamond fit. This hand will not play well in hearts as well unless partner has a lot of them or a diamond fit. If partner has short diamonds we have good defense. I will go out on a limb and bid 3D here. I choose 3 over two because it shows a long/good diamonds suit and noting else which is the orientation of my hand. If I bid 2D I still have no idea what to do later. I think this bid will position us well in the auction. If I was trying for points in MSC I would definitely bid 2D though and I would be very surprised if that wasn't the plurality bid.

Perfect analysis imo. Our presumed 5-3 ♥ fit is a dog's breakfast if partner has a stiff diamond. 3♦ is a great bid because it jams their spade auction, but I'm afraid it may mislead partner. What will partner take this bid to mean? The hand seems too strong to be a classic WJS.

[P_Marlowe]

mikeh, on Jul 20 2007, 02:48 PM, said:

<snip>
In my own preferred methods, I'd bid 2♦, transfer showing a constructive heart raise, and then bid diamonds if necessary, but I don't think that is BWS either.

Why not transfer to diamonds
and bid hearts later?

Just curious, because we started
currently to use transfer in this
kind of situation.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[FrancesHinden]

ralph23, on Jul 20 2007, 09:42 PM, said:

Frankly I've never heard of 2/1 after a X being anything other than NF. My partner got that idea once for about a week and I had a helluva time finally convincing him that he was imagining it. But there is a place on the convention card for it to be forcing so I guess someone does play that!

Here in the UK, the (just about) majority method is to play a 2/1 as forcing after a double. The alerting regulation says that both are sufficiently common that neither forcing nor non-forcing is alertable.

Playing 3D as weak is virtually unheard of here. It's commonly played either as strong (if 2D is non-forcing) or as fit, typically showing 4 hearts and 5 diamonds.

[Flame]

I never liked the fit jumps the way most ppl play them showing 4 cards fit, in my cc they show 6 in the suit and 3 in support and they are non forcing.
IF this isnt avaliable i think ill go with the weak 3D with second choise being 2H and third 2D.

[Halo]

2D and bid on over 4S.

I believe this works out most often. We might make and opponents might be making. I don't expect them to bid to the five level which makes this a close decision. On the whole I prefer to bid faced with such unknowns.

[kenrexford]

I almost share opinion with the Suit/Lead folks (2♣ as a transfer to 2♦). The only difference is that I believe that this is a swan hand and would likely pass 2♦. I'd compete, and I might even take a stab at some sort of swan-indicating choice call, but my focus would be diamonds if the swan-indicator is not available.

[mike777]

I thought this was a really interesting hand and the comments here and in BW this month were fascinating.

Here we have a simple every day auction and yet so many play the standard BW or standard understanding of 2d, 3d, 2h or 3h as meaning very different things.


We cannot even agree what these bids mean in a WC pickup partnership, let alone what our judgement bid is given what these bids mean.

[ralph23]

FrancesHinden, on Jul 21 2007, 05:07 AM, said:

ralph23, on Jul 20 2007, 09:42 PM, said:

Frankly I've never heard of 2/1 after a X being anything other than NF. My partner got that idea once for about a week and I had a helluva time finally convincing him that he was imagining it.  But there is a place on the convention card for it to be forcing so I guess someone does play that!

Here in the UK, the (just about) majority method is to play a 2/1 as forcing after a double. The alerting regulation says that both are sufficiently common that neither forcing nor non-forcing is alertable.

Playing 3D as weak is virtually unheard of here. It's commonly played either as strong (if 2D is non-forcing) or as fit, typically showing 4 hearts and 5 diamonds.

♣♦♥♠

That's really very interesting. Live and learn I guess. On the ACBL conv. card, 2/1 forcing after the X isn't alertable either, which leads me to believe that people in the US must play this way, because if it were considered really weird it would be alertable.

We still play Bergen is on after a double, so 3♦ by responder over the X would just be a conventional ♥ limit (or better! ) raise with 4 trumps, saying nothing about ♦. We reserve Jordan 2NT to show exactly a 3-card limit ♥ raise.

[foo]

mike777, on Jul 20 2007, 01:17 PM, said:

North,Both,IMP,
2,J62,AQT8652,32

1H=X=?
Your call and plan?

Unless you play Negative Free Bids (NFBs), a 2 level bid of a new suit in a Contested Auction shows 5+ cards in suit and the playing strength of 10+ HCP. Such a 2level bid is 100% forcing if Advancer passes.

This hand has 10 playing points in support of ♥'s, and that ♦ suit is 9 of them.

I'm bidding 2D and then supporting ♥'s.

[mike777]

foo, on Jul 24 2007, 01:12 AM, said:

mike777, on Jul 20 2007, 01:17 PM, said:

North,Both,IMP,
2,J62,AQT8652,32

1H=X=?
Your call and plan?

Unless you play Negative Free Bids (NFBs), a 2 level bid of a new suit in a Contested Auction shows 5+ cards in suit and the playing strength of 10+ HCP. Such a 2level bid is 100% forcing if Advancer passes.

This hand has 10 playing points in support of ♥'s, and that ♦ suit is 9 of them.

I'm bidding 2D and then supporting ♥'s.

Foo,
You may wish to double check the BW site that is listed in this thread.
If I understand BWS 2d is not forcing.

Of course you may still choose 2D and assume the bidding will never die there.

[Gerben42]

In continental Europe (Netherlands, Germany, Poland, that kind of places) 2♦ is normally played as non-forcing, 3♦ as fit-showing jump (as in if you would sit down with an expert from these countries, that's how they'd take it)

[ArcLight]

Why isn't this a good hand for hearts?
We are short in spades and pard can ruff them in the short hand. Diamonds can work out, but its possible pard has just 1.
What if the opps compete to some level of Spades? Do we want to then bid 4♥, down 1?

[ArtK78]

First, after a double, the "standard" treatment in North America is that a 2/1 is natural and non-forcing. Furthermore, when I say non-forcing, it is not encouraging and TENDS to deny a fit.

Second, while this hand does have a heart fit and a shortness, I do not believe it will play as well in hearts as it will in diamonds. If partner has a good fit for diamonds, hearts will play well if he can maintain control of the heart suit. However, if his fit for diamonds is only minimal or marginal, the diamond suit will be almost worthless to him in a heart contract. On the other hand, even opposite a small singleton diamond a diamond contract is very playable.

So, if I had no special methods, I would bid 2D over the double intending it as natural, non-forcing and non-encouraging. However, as I mentioned above, I would like to be able to bid 2C as a transfer advance showing diamonds with the intention of supporting hearts at the two level.

Finally, I don't understand why so many posters seem to think this hand is going to produce a lot of tricks in hearts. It might, but there is no way you can tell that is the case. Those who bid 4H are just taking a wild stab in the dark, and it could be very wrong.

[whereagles]

I'll bid a Truscott 2NT, followed eventually by some diamond bid.

[benlessard]

1♠ is my bid except against strong opps. This classic psych simply work often enough and the risk is minimal.

Against strong opps at imp ill bid 2♦ if partner raise or rebid ♥ i might sacrifice otherwise i prefer to tell partner what to lead.




PS

2♦ could be quite weak it just show a decent suit