[jillybean]

(1♦) (P) (1♠) to you

xx
J-6th
V
J-5th

[dicklont]

2NT is enough for me.
You may call me chicken for not daring to bid 4NT.

[kfay]

If I understand the auction correctly opps bid and responded. What exactly am I hoping to accomplish right now?

I'll pass and if they come to rest in 4♠ I'll bid 4NT.

[jdonn]

These problems can't be answered without the vulnerability. But this one can, PASS.

[cherdano]

jdonn, on Mar 13 2008, 09:59 AM, said:

These problems can't be answered without the vulnerability. But this one can, PASS.

Exactly what I was thinking...

[jillybean]

jdonn, on Mar 13 2008, 08:59 AM, said:

These problems can't be answered without the vulnerability. But this one can, PASS.

Sorry I did not specify, I would like to know if you would make a move under any vulnerability.

[P_Marlowe]

2 NT.

I may not bid it red versus green, although i am not
even sure about that,
but I would bid it at any other vulnerability.

If I cant stand 2NT, bid 1NT if possible or make a t/o,
but bid.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mikeh]

I might bid (2N) if white v red, but there are a number of reasons why I might not, and why I wouldn't bid at all if the heat were otherwise.

If at favourable, we know that partner passed over 1♦. That minimizes the chances that he has a hand that will mesh well with ours... it doesn't eliminate the chances, but it does reduce them.

So we can usually expect that we are going to be (significantly) outgunned or that partner has a good hand unable to act.. which typically will hold long, strong diamonds and shortness somewhere (almost surely in one or both of our suits).

When we are significantly outgunned, we may gain from preempting their bidding space, but we lose in the play of the hand by having telegraphed the distribution.... indeed, we may even lose in the auction either because the opps have a lucky misunderstanding and avoid a contract doomed by bad breaks or because they consciously cater to bad breaks in their choice of contracts.

When partner has values, he probably has more defence than offence and we may be going for a number against air.

At other heats, the risk of LHO starting proceedings, over our 2N, with double plus the chance that partner won't take a joke, is enough, combined with these other factors, to make pass overwhelming the best call.

[Cascade]

Pass at any vulnerability.

Only white on red is there any merit at all in bidding but I still wouldn't.

[655321]

kfay, on Mar 13 2008, 10:36 AM, said:

If I understand the auction correctly opps bid and responded.  What exactly am I hoping to accomplish right now?

I'll pass and if they come to rest in 4♠ I'll bid 4NT.

Needless to say, this is a far worse option than bidding immediately.

You give them a free run to get to the best spot, then you unilaterally decide to play doubled a contract at the 5 level, when (1) perhaps they are not making, and (2) a 5 level contract is likely to go for much more than their game - at any vulnerability.

[Mr. Dodgy]

P_Marlowe, on Mar 13 2008, 11:47 AM, said:

2 NT.

[...]

If I cant stand 2NT, bid 1NT if possible or make a t/o,
but bid.

Marlowe is the only bidder to suggest anything other than 2NT. Exactly HOW one takes-out here is apparently a matter of agreements...my first instinct was to bid 2♠ (I would think 2NT suggests longer ♣s than ♥s).

So, what are everyones agreements about Dbl, 2♠, and 2NT in this situation?


Thanks,


Justin.

[rogerclee]

Mr. Dodgy, on Mar 13 2008, 02:53 PM, said:

So, what are everyones agreements about Dbl, 2♠, and 2NT in this situation?

Dbl = Exactly 4♥, 4+♣, reasonable hand.
2♠ = NATURAL! I just wanted to emphasize this since it seems many B/I players do not know this is standard.
2NT = 5+♥, 5+♣, good suits.

FWIW, I'd pass all day on this hand.

[Zelandakh]

rogerclee, on Mar 13 2008, 10:06 PM, said:

Mr. Dodgy, on Mar 13 2008, 02:53 PM, said:

So, what are everyones agreements about Dbl, 2♠, and 2NT in this situation?

Dbl = Exactly 4♥, 4+♣, reasonable hand.
2♠ = NATURAL! I just wanted to emphasize this since it seems many B/I players do not know this is standard.
2NT = 5+♥, 5+♣, good suits.

FWIW, I'd pass all day on this hand.

Doesn't that depend entirely on your methods Roger? I know of at least one top pair that use both cues to show 6-4 hands for example. FWIW with current partner we play

1NT = sandwich, 5-4(5) in other 2 suits
2♦ = stop ask (not fond of this but partner is)
2♠ = natural
2NT = 5-5(6) in other 2 suits

but in the past have also played

1NT = natural
2♦ = 6-4 ♥s-♣s
2♠ = 4-6 ♥s-♣s
2NT = 5-5 ♥s-♣s

It's just a matter of style and preference, no?

On the given hand I'd bid 2NT against weaker opponents or in fun/pub bridge, and pass when being more serious, unless w/r with a suitable partner.

[rogerclee]

Zelandakh, on Mar 13 2008, 03:40 PM, said:

rogerclee, on Mar 13 2008, 10:06 PM, said:

Mr. Dodgy, on Mar 13 2008, 02:53 PM, said:

So, what are everyones agreements about Dbl, 2♠, and 2NT in this situation?

Dbl = Exactly 4♥, 4+♣, reasonable hand.
2♠ = NATURAL! I just wanted to emphasize this since it seems many B/I players do not know this is standard.
2NT = 5+♥, 5+♣, good suits.

FWIW, I'd pass all day on this hand.

Doesn't that depend entirely on your methods Roger? I know of at least one top pair that use both cues to show 6-4 hands for example. FWIW with current partner we play

1NT = sandwich, 5-4(5) in other 2 suits
2♦ = stop ask (not fond of this but partner is)
2♠ = natural
2NT = 5-5(6) in other 2 suits

but in the past have also played

1NT = natural
2♦ = 6-4 ♥s-♣s
2♠ = 4-6 ♥s-♣s
2NT = 5-5 ♥s-♣s

It's just a matter of style and preference, no?

On the given hand I'd bid 2NT against weaker opponents or in fun/pub bridge, and pass when being more serious, unless w/r with a suitable partner.

Obviously you can agree to play whatever you'd like in this position. I was trying to be careful by saying that this is "standard", but I guess I should've said this is "standard in the ACBL area."

I'd never heard of the cueing idea before. It sounds playable, but I think you are giving up a lot of information on a deal which is probably not yours.

[awm]

Everything in bidding is a matter of agreements.

But some agreements are standard and other agreements are not.

And some agreements are better than others.

The point is that in the auction 1X-P-1Y, it is standard for 2X or 2Y to be natural. This is part of SAYC, and also part of most standard systems. Obviously you could agree to whatever you want; heck you could agree that 1♣-1♠ overcall is artificial if you want.

There's also a good point to having 2X/2Y be natural. People often open one of a minor on a three-card suit. They often respond to it with a weak four-card suit. It is not infrequent that you have a hand where you'd actually like to bid one of their suits. If you don't have 2X/2Y natural you can't do this and your scores will suffer substantially. Comparatively, I think 6-4 hands in the two unbids are quite rare, and you usually will do fine to just bid the six-bagger.

[mikeh]

The 'standard' treatment in NA is that a 'cue' of RHO's suit after (1x) P (1y)... 2y by us is NATURAL.

There are very good reasons for this. With most playing 5 card majors, responders these days will respond 1Major on 7532 or worse... so we may well have a suit/hand worth bidding and there is no way to get into the auction on such hands unless we use the bid as natural.

There is some disagreement amongst NA experts as to the strength of the suit/hand shown. This was the subject of a BW MSC hand several years ago. If I recall correctly, Rodwell said that his preference is that it can be quite a weak hand, with a decent 6+ suit... say, the equivalent of a not overwhelming weak 2 bid.. .the idea is primarily obstructionist, while other expert panel members suggested a decent hand, of near-opening values or more.

There is less consensus on what a 'cue' of opener's suit shows, altho I suspect that the majority would, these days, take it as natural as well. Certainly, given the growing number of players who open 1♣ on doubletons (with 4=4=3=2), there is a powerful argument that 2♣ should be natural, while the same movement suggests that maybe 2♦ is better as takeout, since many players promise at least 4 diamonds for 1♦, rendering the overcall more dangerous.

In addition, we really don't need a cue of responder's suit as takeout, even when playing, as most experts do, 1N as strong and natural. We still have double and 2N, and for some, a cue of opener's suit... just how many ways do we need to show a takeout at the 1 or 2 level?

[Cascade]

rogerclee, on Mar 14 2008, 11:06 AM, said:

Mr. Dodgy, on Mar 13 2008, 02:53 PM, said:

So, what are everyones agreements about Dbl, 2♠, and 2NT in this situation?

Dbl = Exactly 4♥, 4+♣, reasonable hand.
2♠ = NATURAL! I just wanted to emphasize this since it seems many B/I players do not know this is standard.
2NT = 5+♥, 5+♣, good suits.

FWIW, I'd pass all day on this hand.

This is what I play except that occasionally, although it will be an exception, I will have five hearts when I double. It will be a bad suit like Jxxxx or something.

[Wackojack]

2S at green showing 6-4 or better H+C. I play this method with several partners. Having spades makes it worthwhile. Certainly dont wait till opps reach game and then come in.