[Antrax]

---

Playing "standard" (not 2/1 and no forcing 1NT), what should my response be?

[JLOGIC]

Is this MP or imps? At MP I'd bid 1N since I don't think we can avoid to play 2D when 1N can make a good amount of tricks.

At imps I would love to bid a natural 2D, I think it is better than 1N because we don't have to guess whether to compete later (we get our fit off our hand immediately), and because we don't wrongside NT if 3N is our spot. That said there are cases when 2D will go down and 1N makes and that won't be good.

[Antrax]

MPs, sorry.
This is probably a silly question, but don't 10 HCP justify 3♦ if you're going to support diamonds? (assuming no inverted minors)

[the hog]

Agree with JL. This hand is not a 10 count unless you are a bean counter. 1NT. Would even bid this at IMPs if playing inverted minors.

[Antrax]

I'm working on my bean-counting (but yeah, my hand evaluation is terrible)
I thought concentrated strength and a good side suit are positive factors that cancel out the doubleton J. Besides, doubleton! I can ruff and stuff?
So what makes this a bad 10 hand?

[jonottawa]

I'm at least tempted to bid 1♠ at matchpoints. Is that what you did? That's kind of an ultra-high variance, probably slightly anti-percentage call but it certainly could be a big winner if rightsiding the contract is important or playing in a ♠ moyse is worth an extra trick.

[matmat]

what contract are you thinking about inviting to and trying to get to?

if you have your eye on 5♦, think about the cards your p will have to have; they need cover cards in three suits, including 4 very good or 5 good trump (while p is only promising 3 cards in the suit!). It would need to be a magical layout for you not to have three or more losers in a diamond contract; furthermore, if p does have a great hand you will hear from them again even if you do only bid 2♦ (or 1nt), at which point you will have an easy accept of all game tries, and can cooperate with slam tries.


if you're looking at getting to 3nt, a 3♦ call is incredibly inefficient, leaving you with no room to explore side stoppers. Your diamonds aren't actually that great for play in NT -- partner still needs a some luck and tops in the suit to collect tricks in ♦, not to mention they will need a stoppers in hearts and help in spades. You do have 3 (possibly 4) tricks in clubs, but there will be a ton of work to be done outside of the suit.

While 1N is a slight underbid, it is by far the most flexible; if p has extras, they'll bid on and you'll accept whatever try they make, and if they don't -- better to be playing 1nt on a combined 22-23 hcp with no long suits than tempting fate in 2n or 3n

[Cyberyeti]

Antrax, on 2011-June-13, 01:24, said:

I'm working on my bean-counting (but yeah, my hand evaluation is terrible)
I thought concentrated strength and a good side suit are positive factors that cancel out the doubleton J. Besides, doubleton! I can ruff and stuff?
So what makes this a bad 10 hand?

I don't dislike 3♦ opposite a 4 card diamond (would use an inverted minor in my world), but this will be very bad opposite a 4432 12 count.

[Antrax]

I wanted to end up in a NT contract if P can supply major-suit stoppers. Didn't want to bid 3♦ for the reason matmat said, partner will bid a major suit to show a stopper and I have no rebid.
2♦ I thought was an underbid, 1NT I was worried would wrongside an NT contract.
So, I got inventive and bid 2♣. I got away with it, partner bid NT and made (and had ♠Kx with the AJ86 over it, so the defense could cash 4 spade tricks and later take their 3 top diamonds, if I were to declare NT). However, in retrospect I'm not sure it was the good kind of creative, which is why I asked.

[mgoetze]

Antrax, on 2011-June-13, 02:07, said:

So, I got inventive and bid 2♣.

1♦-2♣ is a troublesome bidding sequence usually worth avoiding, especially in casual partnerships. There are many possible ways to interprete the following bids.

[Antrax]

This was with my regular p. What followups might be problematic? (offhand I think we'll agree on 2/3NT, 2M, 2/3♦, 3♣ and 3M)

[JLOGIC]

Antrax, on 2011-June-13, 00:48, said:

MPs, sorry.
This is probably a silly question, but don't 10 HCP justify 3♦ if you're going to support diamonds? (assuming no inverted minors)

I don't think an average balanced 10 count with 4 diamonds would usually justify a limit raise in diamonds. In a major it's enough because you know you have a 5-4 fit, and you don't need as much to make a 4M game as a 5m game.

Here we have no diamond honors and a Jx, our hand just doesn't seem that good to me. I would want 5 diamonds and a balanced 10 count to make a limit raise in diamonds.

[P_Marlowe]

1NT.

After a opening in a minor, there is no big difference between
standard and 2/1.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[helene_t]

Antrax, on 2011-June-13, 01:24, said:

I'm working on my bean-counting (but yeah, my hand evaluation is terrible)
I thought concentrated strength and a good side suit are positive factors that cancel out the doubleton J. Besides, doubleton! I can ruff and stuff?
So what makes this a bad 10 hand?

You are right, it is a quite good ten count. Still, it is not quite good enough to invite opposite a balanced 12-14. I'd rather have p pass 2♦ with 14 than bidding 3NT over 3♦ with 13.

Quote

What followups might be problematic?

In SAYC, 2♣ promises a rebid so opener is supposed to rebid 2♦ with a minimum, presumably even with only three diamonds (although this interpretation of SAYC is controversial). In other styles, 2♦ and/or 2NT and/or 3♣ rebids by opener are nonforcing, which may seem more natural but it does create an issue about what opener must do with various ranges of balanced hands. Maybe 2NT is 12(13) and 3NT is 13(14), then opener has to fake a reverse with 18-19. And if 3♣ is nonforcing, opener needs another bid to show a forcing club raise.

The simplest agreement is probably that 2♣ is a game force so with invitational strength, responder has to bid 2NT or 3♣. But both of these bids are forcing in SAYC so it is something that requires discussion.

[Antrax]

Thanks, I had no clue that 2♣ promises a rebid from responder. I wonder if partner knew

[cherdano]

Antrax, on 2011-June-13, 01:24, said:

I'm working on my bean-counting (but yeah, my hand evaluation is terrible)
I thought concentrated strength and a good side suit are positive factors that cancel out the doubleton J. Besides, doubleton! I can ruff and stuff?
So what makes this a bad 10 hand?

Your partner's most likely hand-type is a weak NT. Would you consider inviting with 10 hcp opposite a weak NT? Of course not. Does the expected 4-4 diamond fit improve our hand enough to change that? Usually not.
In this case, we additionally have weak trumps.

Edit: Sorry now I see Helene already made the same point.

[mgoetze]

Antrax, on 2011-June-13, 03:10, said:

This was with my regular p. What followups might be problematic? (offhand I think we'll agree on 2/3NT, 2M, 2/3♦, 3♣ and 3M)

How many diamonds does 2♦ promise? Does 2M show a stopper or a 4-card suit? Does 2M promise extra strength or not? Does 3♣ promise extra strength, is it forcing? What range does 2NT show? What do you do with 18-19 points and 3343 shape?

[Bbradley62]

jonottawa, on 2011-June-13, 01:37, said:

I'm at least tempted to bid 1♠ at matchpoints. Is that what you did? That's kind of an ultra-high variance, probably slightly anti-percentage call but it certainly could be a big winner if rightsiding the contract is important or playing in a ♠ moyse is worth an extra trick.

Probably not right for the B/I forum.

[Antrax]

mgoetze, on 2011-June-13, 10:22, said:

How many diamonds does 2♦ promise? Does 2M show a stopper or a 4-card suit? Does 2M promise extra strength or not? Does 3♣ promise extra strength, is it forcing? What range does 2NT show? What do you do with 18-19 points and 3343 shape?

Four+ diamonds, 2M shows a four-card suit with 15+ HCP, 3♣ is a minimum opener with 3-card support for clubs, 2NT is minimum balanced opener, and as for the last, improvise? I would bid 4NT with that hand, though we never discussed it.

[mgoetze]

Antrax, on 2011-June-14, 00:50, said:

Four+ diamonds, 2M shows a four-card suit with 15+ HCP, 3♣ is a minimum opener with 3-card support for clubs, 2NT is minimum balanced opener, and as for the last, improvise? I would bid 4NT with that hand, though we never discussed it.

So in this case you risked playing 3♣ in a 4-3 fit, surely not an optimal contract.

Anyway, your response structure is missing a few hand types (18-19 balanced, intermediate hands with club support, e.g. 2254), and it seems to me you'll get to several pretty bad 2NT contracts. But as I said, this is a tough sequence and it's almost impossible to cover everything, so as long as you're on one page with your partner, that's good. Just be aware that other people might bid quite differently here.