[pclayton]

---

All vul, IMPs, short matches

1♦ by you, 1♥ by pard....you call?

[pbleighton]

2C, planning to rebid diamonds after any forward-going bid by pd.

This shows a good distributional hand. The hand isn't strong enough for 3D IMO, but 2D is an understatement.

Those who use 2NT to show 3H and 6D will be able to crow.

Peter

[Double !]

I would rebid 2♣ with this hand with the intention of either then rebidding diamonds to show an intermediate 6-4 or raising hearts should partner rebid them. I would rebid the 6 and then bid the 4 with a minimum 6-4 (this different sequence distinguishes the minimum from the intermediate (15-17) 6-4, and then bid out my shape if it seems warranted.

[luke warm]

phil, in your p'ship is it possible for the bidding to go 1d / 1h / 2c / pass? if so, 2c is not my bid, not when anything from 4 to 6 hearts has a shot

i bid 3c forcing, and i'd be willing to play in a 4/3 4H if i had to

[pclayton]

Sure, 2♣ isn't forcing, but if partner passes its very likely the right spot.

[han]

I would also bid 2C (that is, if 2NT is not available), followed by a heart bid.

I'm not worried about 2C being passed out, more that the auction 1D-1H-2C-2D-2H doesn't quite do justice to this hand. However, a 3H bid over 2D seems too much.

[Free]

This bidding suggests following question: WHERE ARE THE ♠S?

This is one more time where it's very interesting to play 3♦ as fit showing So I'll bid 3♦: maximum hand (I have only a few losers), 6+♦ and exactly 3 ♥s.

If you don't play this way, 2♣ is probably best, it's just semi-forcing imo.

[whereagles]

I bid 2C. This is a hand which needs a lot of investigation, so better keep the bidding as low as possible. I am not afraid of it being passed out, and even if it is, it probably makes

[Chamaco]

Free, on Feb 14 2005, 06:59 AM, said:

This is one more time where it's very interesting to play 3♦ as fit showing So I'll bid 3♦: maximum hand (I have only a few losers), 6+♦ and exactly 3 ♥s.

Agree with Frederic (only that in my strong C, I prefer to reverse the meaning of 2NT and 3 ♦, 2NT = 3 card support in major , 3 ♦ = no support)

[pclayton]

Jlall, on Feb 13 2005, 11:39 PM, said:

pclayton, on Feb 13 2005, 07:01 PM, said:

Sure, 2♣ isn't forcing, but if partner passes its very likely the right spot.

thats pretty optimistic lol. I feel well placed if pard bids over 2C, but if he passes i doubt its our best spot.

Well, OK, I'm reasonably sure we don't have a game . But give pard Axxx of clubs and out and I'm fine playing the 4-4 instead of a 6-3 ♦'s.

[inquiry]

Chamaco, on Feb 14 2005, 06:00 AM, said:

Free, on Feb 14 2005, 06:59 AM, said:

This is one more time where it's very interesting to play 3♦ as fit showing    So I'll bid 3♦: maximum hand (I have only a few losers), 6+♦ and exactly 3 ♥s.

Agree with Frederic (only that in my strong C, I prefer to reverse the meaning of 2NT and 3 ♦, 2NT = 3 card support in major , 3 ♦ = no support)

I could bid 3♦ to show this hand,...although this hand is too good for 3♦.

I don't like to revese the meaning of 3♦ and 2NT, becasue I ahve a better use for 2NT... I use that to show huge fit for hearts.... sort of jacoby 2NT by opener.. I ahve mentioned it before, the principle is this.. this 2NT takes the pressure of 1m-1M-3M, by making that very well defined (2pt range). Partner passes or bids on, as no room to invite. After 2NT, responder can try 3♣ with hands that reject game try, and opener can try again with 3♦ expanding the range of the game tries.

So that leaves me with a few choices. I think the correct bid the way I play is 2NT (which promises four card support), and a great raise. But lacking the chance to bid 2NT (say standard 2/1), I would bid 3♣ (game force), planning on raising hearts next. This hand is just too good to risk any of the normal timid rebids (2♣ can be passed, 3♦ can be passed)... The only other option is 3♠ splinter, but I don't like this splinter with a void and with only three card support.

Ben