[Fluffy]

♠10
♥A3
♦AKQ632
♣K763

South dealer all vul

S - N
1♦-1♠
??

[rogerclee]

2♣ seems clear to me. I would not actually be surprised if 1NT was the winning action, which I might do if you made the hand worse (but kept ♦AKQxxx).

[jdonn]

1NT? That's quite the imagination....

but 2♣ it is, wtp?

[Halo]

2C

Seems clear. Is the field really bidding 1NT? If so, I reckon I have the odds with me.

[rogerclee]

Halo, on Apr 12 2008, 03:34 PM, said:

Is the field really bidding 1NT?

I would not expect any field to look at 6-4 and think "hmm, 1NT." That said, this hand is way too good to bid 1NT anyway, even if you were that sick (I am not).

[pclayton]

2C.

1N? Wow, what are they teaching kids these days?

[kenrexford]

2♣.

If I were using an unbalanced diamond opening, where a 1♦ opening promised a stiff, and a 1NT rebid showed that the stiff was in Responder's major, I'd rebid 2♣.

Rebidding 1NT?!? LOL

[whereagles]

2♣.

I guess the reason this is here is pard passed 2♣ and 3NT would have made vs a 3♦ rebid

[gwnn]

rebidding 2♣ is only a slight problem is we open 1♦ on 4♦5♣ hands thus making partner more likely to pass. but I'd bid 2♣ even so.

[skjaeran]

This is a clear 2♣ rebid. Nothing else make sense to me. 1NT is ridiculous, and we're not strong enoug for 3♣ or 3♦. Strongly prefer 2♣ showing 9+ cards in two suits over 2♦ showing 6+ cards (maybe even only 5+) in one suit.

[Codo]

2 ♣

In SEF this has 18 points, so it is the upper limit of a 2 Club bid. The nice points (no unprotected Quacks) makes it better, the stiff in pds hand weaker.
So I have sympathy for 3 CLub as a second choice to the normal 2 Club bid.

[Winstonm]

2C

Bidding is not a perfect science and not every making game is biddable.

[whereagles]

Winstonm, on Apr 13 2008, 01:30 PM, said:

Bidding is not a perfect science and not every making game is biddable.

Indeed. A lot of people seem to forget that. Sometimes you have to play the odds instead of trying for impossible perfection.

[han]

2NT forcing wtp.

[Fluffy]

skaeran, on Apr 13 2008, 08:23 AM, said:

and we're not strong enoug for 3♣ or 3♦.

I think we are fairly strong enough for a 3♦ rebid .

Anyway, everyone agreed on first decision.

Now the auction goes on.

1♦-1♠
2♣-3♦
3♥-3♠
??

[Winstonm]

If partner held some kind of supporting heart cards, it would be imperative for him to bid 3N instead of 3S. 3S must be a suggested strain, then, as he didn't bid 4D.
Maybe he has something like: KQJxxx, xxx, Jxx, A

I am going to bid 4S, allowing the option of playing there or in 5D. With only Ax, in hearts, 3N surely cannot be right.

[CSGibson]

I think partner is cue-bidding his cheapest ace and claiming no clear heart stop with 3♠. I'm bidding key card, whatever that is in your methods, and, if we have all the key cards, asking partner to bid 7 with 3rd round control of clubs. If partner has one key card, I'm stopping at 5♦.

[han]

3NT.

[jdonn]

I bid 4♦ over 3♠, forcing (3♥ was game forcing to me). I'm very suit oriented, so if we are supposed to be in 3NT opposite a stiff spade and only the ace in hearts I'm not sure why partner didn't bid it. But I don't want to rush to keycard since there might be a problem in clubs.

[Winstonm]

jdonn, on Apr 13 2008, 11:46 AM, said:

I bid 4♦ over 3♠, forcing (3♥ was game forcing to me). I'm very suit oriented, so if we are supposed to be in 3NT opposite a stiff spade and only the ace in hearts I'm not sure why partner didn't bid it. But I don't want to rush to keycard since there might be a problem in clubs.

JDonn,

But to go back to the earlier bidding, partner only bid 3 diamonds, which I take as invitational only in this sequence - surely 3H now is forcing, but only to 3N and NOT to 5D, don't you think?

I'm not certain partner would be clear that 4D is meant as forcing here.