[theo_16]

Playing at IMPs and 5 card majors, 2/1, Strong NT and better minor, your partner opens 1♣, your RHO overcalls 1♥, over to you:

---

[Cyberyeti]

I'd call 3♦ fit (which for us would be normal with these values in competition) initially which should warn partner off doubling 4M without it beat more or less in his own hand, I will then show that I have a lot of spare diamonds if partner doesn't double with 4♦ over 3M or 4N over 4M if partner hasn't doubled.

[FelicityR]

I think there are lots of silly bids to consider, and just a few sensible ones. It looks like the opponents have ♠s or ♥s here. Partner could well be 4315, 4423 or 4414 shape, and perhaps a bare minimum. I'm taking that partner hasn't got 5♣/5♠ as most players now open 1♠ with 2/1 on this hand.

Therefore, except if you have anything in your bidding armoury (as per Cyberyeti's reply) to confirm the ♣ fit, too, I would plump for 2♦ as the most sensible bid available, especially vulnerable. The hand has a lot of playing strength but virtually no defence. Not bidding the 8 card ♦ suit on the first round is just not in my equation. You know the auction could well get very frisky very quickly but you're be in a better position to judge it next time round.

Most players advocate '2/1 system off' when the opponents intervene. (With my regular partner we quantify 2♦ further as a negative free bid with 8-11 HCPs specifically and a reasonable 6+ ♦ suit.) Given the distribution the auction is hardly going to stop there.

[nige1]

Theo_16 writes "Playing at IMPs and 5 card majors, 2/1, Strong NT and better minor, your partner opens 1♣, your RHO overcalls 1♥, over to you:"
+++++++++++++++++++++ I rank
1. 4♦ = F/J 5+ ♦ 4+ ♣.
2. 3♦ = F/J Ditto.
3. 2♦ = NAT F/1.
4. 2♥ = UCB usually good ♣ raise.
5. 3♥ = SPL.
6. 5♣ = NAT If doubled, would probably pull.
7. 4♣ = PRE.
8. Pass = NAT.
9. 5♦ = NAT "Put your trust in the long suit"

---

[hrothgar]

I have an 8 card suit and a fit for partner

There is no way that I am going to let the opponent's play 4M or 4MX

Nor are we ever going to play in Clubs

I'm bidding an immediate 5D.
Hopefully we don't have six

[Cyberyeti]

hrothgar, on 2020-June-30, 16:46, said:

I have an 8 card suit and a fit for partner

There is no way that I am going to let the opponent's play 4M or 4MX

Nor are we ever going to play in Clubs

I'm bidding an immediate 5D.
Hopefully we don't have six

My partner has 6+ clubs and no diamonds when I do that

[DavidKok]

I see no mention of 4NT, showing the minors. In this situation I would bid this with as little shape as 6/4 (although on this vulnerability 6/5 or 7/4 is more likely). The downside is I don't get to show the full length of my diamond suit, but then again most other bids have the same issue. I'm not sure if this is at all a good bid but I was curious what others would think.

I think there is a lot to be said for bidding 3♦ initially and taking out the opps' 4M with 4NT on the second round. Let's hope they don't jump to 6, because then I'll have to bid 6NT and pray partner understands (or 7♣ if that's too risky).

[johnu]

DavidKok, on 2020-July-01, 01:43, said:

I see no mention of 4NT, showing the minors.

If you have the agreement that this shows 8 diamonds and 4 clubs, why not Otherwise, I don't see how you can have any confidence you will end up in the right suit.

[DavidKok]

johnu, on 2020-July-01, 15:20, said:

If you have the agreement that this shows 8 diamonds and 4 clubs, why not Otherwise, I don't see how you can have any confidence you will end up in the right suit.

It certainly wouldn't, as I said it would show a good 6/4 or 7/4 here. But arguably you will have trouble showing your exact shape regardless of which bid you choose.