[smerriman]

---

I was East, playing SAYC, IMPS.

After 3NT failed miserably, the following conversation occurred:

W: You do not have the points to jump in diamonds.
E: I have 17 points.
W: I only count 15.
E: 15 HCP, plus 2 for the 6 card diamond suit.
W: Those points are worthless if diamonds are not trumps, you cannot count them. Especially when I passed initially; you must bid 2!d.

The most difficult part of discussions like this is you're never sure whether your partner is correct or has no clue at all, especially when your partner has specified their skill as 'Advanced' or 'Expert' (in my experience usually this has no correlation with skill).

To me 3!d seems like an obvious bid, and whether partner has passed or not has nothing to do with it.

PS - can someone point me to a thread explaining how to insert a hand diagram from a hand played within BBO? I found one from a couple of years ago but the instructions didn't appear to work very well, so I recreated this manually via the hand editor button.

[Cascade]

I don't think 3♦ is obvious. If you are going to show a hand strong enough to bid 3♦ then 2♥ shows (roughly) the same strength and shows more of your distribution. If you had a heart fit three diamonds risks missing your fit.

[Vampyr]

 smerriman, on 2014-March-28, 19:21, said:

E: I have 17 points.
W: I only count 15.
E: 15 HCP, plus 2 for the 6 card diamond suit

This reasoning seems flawed. You need 6 diamonds to jump rebid in diamonds, so to count them back in as points is kind of circular.

[smerriman]

Hm, the conflicting advice continues. So far I'm strong enough to reverse, but not strong enough to bid 3♦

Does that mean equivalently, Vampyr, you wouldn't add a long-suit point for a 5 card major when opening, because the opening bid itself shows 5 of that major? I haven't heard of that logic before in anything I've read on point counts.

[sfi]

I don't think East's rebid is obvious. 2D, 3D, and 2H all look like alternatives, and the system after the reverse is important to know before bidding this hand. What I would like to do is show a 4-6 with extras and retain the ability to play 3D in a misfit, but if I can't do that I'll probably give up on the hearts and bid some number of diamonds (probably 3 because everything is working on the hand).

What is obvious is that West's 3NT bid is poor. Even if partner has help in clubs, West doesn't have the entries to set up and run a suit that requires giving up a club trick. And if East had enough tricks to play 3NT they would have forced the bidding.

[mikestar13]

I would prefer a 2♥ rebid on this hand as a heart fit is still possible, but 3♦ is OK on values. 3NT on a misfitting 8 HCP is out of left field unless partner visualizes you as at least a king stronger than you are. This would be true in some systems, but not in SAYC as I understand it.

[Antrax]

 smerriman, on 2014-March-28, 19:50, said:

Hm, the conflicting advice continues. So far I'm strong enough to reverse, but not strong enough to bid 3♦

Not quite. Cascade didn't say you should bid 2♥; He said that IF you evaluate your hand as strong enough for 3♦, then it's also strong enough for 2♥, and 2♥ is more descriptive.

[Cascade]

 Antrax, on 2014-March-28, 22:48, said:

Not quite. Cascade didn't say you should bid 2♥; He said that IF you evaluate your hand as strong enough for 3♦, then it's also strong enough for 2♥, and 2♥ is more descriptive.

That is correct. To be clear, for me 2♥ and 3♦ show the same hand strength one with four hearts and one without.

As it happens for me this hand is good enough for a reverse. I require around 16+ for the reverse and would add a little for the extra distribution.

However I am aware there are others with a higher standard for their reverses. You need to work out the minimum in your partnership.

[Mbodell]

I think any of 2♦ (you are slightly too strong for this), 2♥ (you are slightly too weak for this and will likely end up in 3nt), and 3♦ (you are slightly on the weak side, but about right for this, but you also lose the possible heart fit) are reasonable. I think I bid 2♥ in the theory that it is better to push slightly too high in the right strain then play too low in the wrong strain, especially at IMPs. But then I end up in 3nt also.

[Cyberyeti]

Don't think points for the 3♦ rebid, the question is "do I have around 7 tricks". You are pretty close to this (if you had 10♦ you'd be there). You are too good for 2♦, not quite good enough for 3♦ but if I didn't have a decent alternative, that's what I'd bid, I'd bid 2♥ on this hand.

Presumably partner would also have moaned if you'd bid 2♦ and he'd passed with QJxx, xxx, Q, QJxxx.

[Stephen Tu]

 Cyberyeti, on 2014-March-29, 02:59, said:

Don't think points for the 3♦ rebid, the question is "do I have around 7 tricks". You are pretty close to this (if you had 10♦ you'd be there). You are too good for 2♦, not quite good enough for 3♦ but if I didn't have a decent alternative, that's what I'd bid, I'd bid 2♥ on this hand.

I don't see how one can possibly be "too good for 2♦" yet "not quite good enough for 3♦", if you are playing a standard SA based system. Only Kaplan-Sheinwold out of somewhat well-known natural systems has a quirk of this nature, where 3♦ shows a much stronger (game-forcing) hand, 2♦ is quite limited, and in between hands are handled by a light reverse (frequently into 3 cd fragment), or 2♣ rebid (F1, extras, also frequently fragment). In all other natural systems I know of, 2♦ and 3♦ form a contiguous strength range, one can just debate where exactly the dividing line should be, but there is no gap.

If it's too good for 2♦, to me it has to be good enough for 3♦, there is no "in between". But 3♦ is a misbid holding hearts. So to me this hand either meets your standards for reverse (for me it does), or it doesn't and you rebid 2♦ and it's not too good for 2♦. Otherwise if hand was say 2362 you are just defining a weird hole in your system, with ten of diamonds it's worth 3 but without you have no bid? It's either good enough or it isn't, you can't say "not quite good enough for 3" but then bid 3 anyway. If you bid 3 anyway then it was "just quite good enough for 3".

[Vampyr]

 smerriman, on 2014-March-28, 19:50, said:

Does that mean equivalently, Vampyr, you wouldn't add a long-suit point for a 5 card major when opening, because the opening bid itself shows 5 of that major?

Yes, that is right. You might give some value to, say, 5-4-3-1 shape, but anyway experienced players do not give hard point values for distribution, so don't waste too much of your head space on this.

Another thing you might want to think about when evaluating hands is the "quality" of the HCP. This hand has AK in its long suits, which is quite good. Anyway the minimum values for a reverse can be whatever you want, so long as you agree with your partner. I think that a lot of people will find your hand borderline, either a bit short of a reverse or a dead-minimum reverse.

[Cyberyeti]

 Stephen Tu, on 2014-March-29, 04:59, said:

I don't see how one can possibly be "too good for 2♦" yet "not quite good enough for 3♦", if you are playing a standard SA based system. Only Kaplan-Sheinwold out of somewhat well-known natural systems has a quirk of this nature, where 3♦ shows a much stronger (game-forcing) hand, 2♦ is quite limited, and in between hands are handled by a light reverse (frequently into 3 cd fragment), or 2♣ rebid (F1, extras, also frequently fragment). In all other natural systems I know of, 2♦ and 3♦ form a contiguous strength range, one can just debate where exactly the dividing line should be, but there is no gap.

If it's too good for 2♦, to me it has to be good enough for 3♦, there is no "in between". But 3♦ is a misbid holding hearts. So to me this hand either meets your standards for reverse (for me it does), or it doesn't and you rebid 2♦ and it's not too good for 2♦. Otherwise if hand was say 2362 you are just defining a weird hole in your system, with ten of diamonds it's worth 3 but without you have no bid? It's either good enough or it isn't, you can't say "not quite good enough for 3" but then bid 3 anyway. If you bid 3 anyway then it was "just quite good enough for 3".

What I'm saying is it's absolutely borderline, and I'd stray to the 3♦ side if I had to choose between 2 and 3, but fortunately I don't due to the heart suit. In my system not playing a strong no trump I have the 1N rebid available for the 2362 if I don't fancy 2/3♦, other people might open a strong notrump.

[1eyedjack]

I don't have a strong opinion on East's rebid. I do think that it is sufficiently marginal that West's comment is unwarranted, even if a narrow majority would agree with him.


That factor alone would suggest that his expertise may be overrated. Neither his manners nor conviction are compatible with that self assessment.

[MrAce]

 smerriman, on 2014-March-28, 19:21, said:

---

I was East, playing SAYC, IMPS.

After 3NT failed miserably, the following conversation occurred:

W: You do not have the points to jump in diamonds.
E: I have 17 points.
W: I only count 15.
E: 15 HCP, plus 2 for the 6 card diamond suit.
W: Those points are worthless if diamonds are not trumps, you cannot count them. Especially when I passed initially; you must bid 2!d.

The most difficult part of discussions like this is you're never sure whether your partner is correct or has no clue at all, especially when your partner has specified their skill as 'Advanced' or 'Expert' (in my experience usually this has no correlation with skill).

To me 3!d seems like an obvious bid, and whether partner has passed or not has nothing to do with it.

PS - can someone point me to a thread explaining how to insert a hand diagram from a hand played within BBO? I found one from a couple of years ago but the instructions didn't appear to work very well, so I recreated this manually via the hand editor button.

Welcome to BBF!

Among the replies Cascade, Vampyr and Antrax explained very well already. If i were you i would reread them again and ask more questions (or read more topics about the same issue in forums which were posted in past and pinned) about REVERSE and opener's jump rebids.

15 HCP is bottom of a medium range strength. Still, it is not a minimum hand. Having said that this particular 15 hcp is one of the best ones. Your longest 2 suits are decorated by AK and AKJ. This is huge compared to another 15 hcp, such as;

AQ
Kxxx
Qxxxxx
A

Which i would rebid 2♦ with while i would bid 2♥ with your original hand. I also disagree with your pd regarding your strength of the hand. I think you had an adequate hand for 3♦ if you did not hold 4 card ♥. Now there may be exceptional hands to that some would prefer to skip the ♥ suit and bid 3♦ but this is not one of them, at least not for me.

[helene_t]

Both players took reasonable but somewhat aggressive views so it is not surprising that you end up in a shaky contract. Still, 3NT has chances, especially if you don't get a heart lead.

Like what most others have said I believe that 3♦ promises the same values as a reverse bid so that 3♦ essentially denies four hearts. Personally I think East is strong enough to bid 2♥(or 3♦) but it is close. With the West hand I would have gone to game over a reverse (knowing that I don't have to worry about the heart suit) while I would have passed a 3♦ bid.

[tobycurtis]

 helene_t, on 2014-March-30, 08:09, said:

Both players took reasonable but somewhat aggressive views so it is not surprising that you end up in a shaky contract. Still, 3NT has chances, especially if you don't get a heart lead.

Exactly what I was thinking. When the queen of diamonds is onside, they split and 3NT makes, I'm sure the conversation would've been:

W: I'm sure glad you took an optimistic view and jumped to 3D, partner.
E: Thank you.

[neilkaz]

I also require the same strength to reverse or jump rebid 3♦ and like most here, feel this is a min for that. I'd reverse 2♥ with that decent 4 card suit.

[jdgalt]

I'm with the original poster. If I'm bidding a suit and you take me to notrump, the fact that some of my points may be distribution is your worry; they're quite proper for my bid.

[Cascade]

 jdgalt, on 2014-March-30, 15:21, said:

I'm with the original poster. If I'm bidding a suit and you take me to notrump, the fact that some of my points may be distribution is your worry; they're quite proper for my bid.

Thats fine however I think the standard for a 3♦ rebid is a six card suit and 16-18 hcp. Not 16 distributional points.

However this hand has an excellent 15 hcp so is worthy of an upgrade.