[gszes]

Suitably chastened by the 44 to 1 vote when their offensive hand count 13
was not considered good enough to be considered game forcing they wondered
why (in their defense we had not yet covered hand downgrades and the less
relevance of quacks in a suit contract (hearts and even a minor suit are
still possible contracts).
They were also not aware of the many advantages of 1n forcing and the extra
bidding space one has before making a commitment to game.

Responder's hand is Ax xx QJTx QJTxx

Sorry for the delay I was on vacation.

[hrothgar]

gszes, on 2014-May-03, 17:15, said:

Responder's hand is Ax xx QJTx QJTxx

The question of the best rebid is a lot more interesting...

I expect to see discussion regarding the relative merits of Pass, 2♠, 2NT, and 3♣

I don't like 2NT. Partner probably only has three hearts and the lead versus a NT contract is going to go through his hand.
I think that the hand is too strong for a 2♠ rebid. Thankfully, its IMPs so I don't need to worry about the consideration of playing a major versus a minor.

Pass isn't unreasonable. A lot of the contructions necessary to make 5m suggest that the opps have a 10 card heart fit.
Suppressing our fit might keep them out of the auction.

However, I'm going to bid 3♣. its IMPs, we're vulnerable. I need to try for game and this seems like the best way to get there.

[neilkaz]

I'll bid the impossible 2♠ bid which shows a good raise to 3♣. Why is this called "impossible"? This is because 1NT denied a 4 card ♠ suit.

If this bid is beyond the scope of this forum and the players at the table, I'll just raise to 3♣.

[1eyedjack]

hrothgar, on 2014-May-03, 17:30, said:

The question of the best rebid is a lot more interesting...

I expect to see discussion regarding the relative merits of Pass, 2♠, 2NT, and 3♣

I don't like 2NT. Partner probably only has three hearts and the lead versus a NT contract is going to go through his hand.
I think that the hand is too strong for a 2♠ rebid. Thankfully, its IMPs so I don't need to worry about the consideration of playing a major versus a minor.

Pass isn't unreasonable. A lot of the contructions necessary to make 5m suggest that the opps have a 10 card heart fit.
Suppressing our fit might keep them out of the auction.

However, I'm going to bid 3♣. its IMPs, we're vulnerable. I need to try for game and this seems like the best way to get there.

I am confused. If you rate the hand too strong for 2S, why the choose an alternative that shows a weaker hand? For me the choice is in order of preference 2S, 2N, 3C, P.with the ordering of 2nd and 3rd choice being the only borderline aspect.

Perhaps a more difficult problem is where opener is 1S rather than 1H. No artificial sound raise available then

[diana_eva]

gszes, on 2014-May-03, 17:15, said:

Suitably chastened by the 44 to 1 vote when their offensive hand count 13
was not considered good enough to be considered game forcing they wondered
why

....

I'm surprised they all considered the hand to be 13 points worth. Are they counting HCP + shortness points for the doubletons?

[rmnka447]

I voted for the "impossible" 2 ♠ bid showing a good ♣ raise. If you are not using that bid, then my vote would be for 3 ♣.

I'd expect partner with a minimum opener to simply rebid 3 ♣. If partner has something extra and tries a NT game by bidding 3 ♠ showing a stopper, you have an easy 3 NT call. If partner shows a ♦ stopper via 3 ♦, you can ask about ♠ help with a 3 ♠ bid.

2 NT might be an alternative. You do have stoppers in each suit. However, partner has presumably already showed 8+ cards in the rounded suits. A NT contract might not be a good spot without some ♠ help.

I view the hand as a 10 pointer and wouldn't add the distribution points unless we were surely headed toward a suit contract.

[P_Marlowe]

Voted 3C, but missed, that 2S is possible.

2S, as a strong inv. club raise is certainly best, followed by 3C.
Due to the fact, that we know, that they have 8+ spades between
them, and that they will lead them, 2NT is not a good option.

Anything else is no option at all.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[neilkaz]

P_Marlowe, on 2014-May-05, 14:40, said:

Voted 3C, but missed, that 2S is possible.

2S, as a strong inv. club raise is certainly best, followed by 3C.
Due to the fact, that we know, that they have 8+ spades between
them, and that they will lead them, 2NT is not a good option.

Anything else is no option at all.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Can't you change your vote in the poll? I see a delete your vote button. Perhaps you could delete it and vote again?

[P_Marlowe]

neilkaz, on 2014-May-05, 16:27, said:

Can't you change your vote in the poll? I see a delete your vote button. Perhaps you could delete it and vote again?

Done.

Was not aware, that this option existed.

[PhilKing]

Am I the only one who assumed it was the mentee that bid 1NT?

[diana_eva]

PhilKing, on 2014-May-06, 05:24, said:

Am I the only one who assumed it was the mentee that bid 1NT?

LOL no. jjbr said he'd be surprised to find 3 people in the same room to bid 2c with that. I'm thinking they have a serious flaw at bean counting level. It's really hard to imagine why they'd count it as 13 so my guess is they do the mechanical HCP + distribution points on every hand. 10HCP + 2 doubletons + a 5-carder = 13.

[mcphee]

Passing is out, we are far too good. When I am constructive and game is possible 2S covers this option nicely. How a partnership continues should be discussed.

[gordontd]

It took me ages to find the auction - the title is not the ideal place for it.

[gszes]

diana_eva, on 2014-May-04, 01:58, said:

I'm surprised they all considered the hand to be 13 points worth. Are they counting HCP + shortness points for the doubletons?

The method they are using counted the usual 10 hcp + 1/2 for the 5th
club + 1/2 for the 2 supported tens and + 2 for the high degree of
probability the club suit will be worth 4/5 tricks in a NT contract.
As I said they had not learned to downgrade potential misfits and
the quacks are overvalued in suit contracts=============== I made this
post because I think it is a great teaching hand for beginning 2/1 players.

[diana_eva]

It is a good hand, particularly for following up with the impossible 2S raise, but I think it's not right to count the clubs twice. 2 points and a half for holding 5 clubs is too much IMO.

[mr1303]

I initially voted 3C, but for some reason after hrothgar's comments I thought opener had opened 1S and considered my hand too strong for a 2S preference.

I have now changed to an impossible 2S, but have sympathy with a 3C raise, particularly if partner likes to open light.

[hrothgar]

mr1303, on 2014-May-07, 04:30, said:

I initially voted 3C, but for some reason after hrothgar's comments I thought opener had opened 1S and considered my hand too strong for a 2S preference.

I have now changed to an impossible 2S, but have sympathy with a 3C raise, particularly if partner likes to open light.

I misremembered the opening and thought it was 1♠ rather than 1♥

[jjbrr]

gszes, on 2014-May-06, 16:40, said:

The method they are using counted the usual 10 hcp + 1/2 for the 5th
club + 1/2 for the 2 supported tens and + 2 for the high degree of
probability the club suit will be worth 4/5 tricks in a NT contract.
As I said they had not learned to downgrade potential misfits and
the quacks are overvalued in suit contracts=============== I made this
post because I think it is a great teaching hand for beginning 2/1 players.

I think the only useful lesson here is that upgrading a balanced hand with no fit by THREE points is insane.

I would call this a "good 10" even though it has a lot of queens and jacks.

[gszes]

jjbrr, on 2014-May-07, 09:57, said:

I think the only useful lesson here is that upgrading a balanced hand with no fit by THREE points is insane.

I would call this a "good 10" even though it has a lot of queens and jacks.

When 3n has a good chance to make opposite as little as KJx Kxxxx Kxx Kx it might
be time to possibly reconsider how much to upgrade (just a thought) free* booklet
available (only 1.50 shipping and handling:) so you can stop languishing in 1/2N
making 3 so much.