BBO Discussion Forums: Two More Bidding Questions - BBO Discussion Forums

Hi guys, I hope you all had a Merry Christmas!


I have pretty long clubs, but my 12 HCP + 3 distribution points made me not want to make a preemptive jump. When my RHO doubles though, I wasn't sure what it means, nor what to do.

I didn't think this was a takeout double because he has already bid a suit, but maybe he has lots of points with short clubs?

At any rate, what are my options here? I thought about jumping to 4c, but that probably promises too much when I don't know if partner can support me. Bidding 3c is probably a better option. How about redouble -- what would it mean in these spots, and would it make any sense?


I have 17 HCP opposite an 1s opening. Game seems already possible and I would want to explore slam, but how to proceed?

Here's what I thought:

Quote

If someone could comment on my thought process here, I'd greatly appreciate it.

On hand 1 I am going to choose 3C and bid them again if it makes sense to. Despite the suit we have a lot of losers and partner will surely make some noise if game is on.

On hand 2 I take a quick peek at our system card before working out what to do. In particular, what level does 2D commit us to? This information is fairly important at this point in the auction.

HI deftist!

In the 1st hand, you are right, opener is protecting. He either has short Cs (and can stand his partner transforming the X) or some extras. Your 2C was fine. Now it is time to show tou extras and prevent them finding their major fit at the 2-level. Red, 3C is probably enough and will express long clubs with some extras since you didn't preempt but I wouldnt mind partner jumping to 4C (you have 9 tricks alone in a lo tof layouts). Green, a shot at 5C first round could have had some merits.

On the 2nd hand, a general solution could be to have some artificial bids for invitational hands. This frees the 1S-2x-2S-3S as a forcing bid with slam interest. Or some systems have bids for strong but flattish fits such as your hand. Lots of major fit systems exist so be sure to be on the same wavelength as partner (!), and also do not forget when you use a system to remember the inferences on other bids / fits for majors when partner didn't use such bids.

Here your analysis is correct. Partner could still be a bit richer though and have some 15-17 HCP with unsuitable stoppers in the round suits to bid NT or with 6 spades not strong enough to jump. Even some 12 HCP could produce slam (AKxxx xx Kx Kxxx) so not all hopes are gone. After a forcing bid, partner is not obliged to bid slam anyway so he can make some negative bids (and you would respect his decision with no obvious souce of tricks of your own) pr cooperate (which would help you diagnose of clubs are controlled btw).

sfi, on 2016-December-26, 02:00, said:

Thanks for your reply!

Since 2d is forcing, aren't my hand and the level we can reach both unlimited? Or will there be cases where we will end up committed to a "wrong" level?

I'm curious to hear about other options here. I thought about Jacoby 2NT but I only had 3 spades. And if I bid 3NT, I thought partner might just pass..

deftist, on 2016-December-26, 05:29, said:

Sure, 2D is forcing. But if it is game-forcing then I can safely bid 3S now to show a good hand with 3-card support. If not, I may need to do something else. What that is depends on our agreements, but this hand is pretty good and the auction has improved it. Even playing standard american, a lot of people agree that 3S is forcing on this sort of auction, just to cater for hands like this. There is a lot of merit in that, since an opening hand opposite a 2/1 with a fit is likely to make game more often than not, but you need to agree that with partner.

Similarly, if it is forcing to at least 2NT, then 2S is still unlimited since I can't pass the bid. That means I want to encourage partner. On the other hand, if 2S is non-forcing our chances for slam aren't great and I will probably just raise to 4S. Once again, have clear agreements on what is forcing and what isn't is important, and it's hard to give a general answer without knowing this.

Finally, if it were on BBO with a random player and no agreements, I would just bid 4S here and not worry about the slam. At worst it's going to be a reached by a bunch of other people.

sfi, on 2016-December-26, 05:42, said:

That makes a lot of sense, thanks.

One more question -- would you bid 2d over 1s too, or are there alternatives?

apollo1201, on 2016-December-26, 02:19, said:

Thanks a lot for your reply.

You mentioned an artificial bid for exploring slam -- could you give me an example in this specific case?

Also, by red and green I assume you were meaning vulnerable and non-vulnerable, but this is just a wild guess. :/

deftist, on 2016-December-26, 08:20, said:

Yes, red is vul and green is non-vul.

As for artificial bids, I'm not 100% familiar with this concept as it is not commonly played in my country but someone mentionned Jacoby 2NT or stuff like that (but I believe it implies 4-cd support, so they must have sth for big hands with only 3-cd). Or Bergen raises for more limited hands.

Again, the most important is not the convention itself but drawing inferences when it is (or not) used. The following sequences must convey different types of hands:
1S-2D-2S -> 3S / 4S or 1S-> 2NT / 3NT. So it can help opener visualize if hands work well together and if slam can be safe or not.

If you decide to play a convention just to look like the good players who adpoted it and feel you're part of this "elite", but can't actually develop the subsequent bidding or draw the inferences, it is just snobism. I would say there is some pressure to do so because (at least where I live) lots of weak or average-ish players do that, just because it looks better to say I play multi 2D, etc. - but at the end of the day they didn't really learn or improve their game.

deftist, on 2016-December-25, 23:06, said:

I did! Thank you! Hope the rest of you did also.

deftist, on 2016-December-25, 23:06, said:

I generally don't answer questions involving eight-card suits because anything could be right. I like your 2C overcall. You could double and then correct to clubs to show a strong hand if you thought you had one, but with your great shape, it's not unlikely that your LHO will make a preemptive jump and partner may bid a spade or heart game expecting support. You can now bid 5C but you'll be too high if partner's game bid was also based on distribution.

deftist, on 2016-December-25, 23:06, said:

RHO's double is takeout. It makes very little sense to make a penalty double opposite a passed partner - even if East had long diamonds and long clubs and could double for penalty and fold his arms over his hand to convey a penalty double to partner (highly unethical, but I'm trying to show that the double can't be penalty), you (with a different hand) or partner could foll East and bid a major, making his big diamond-club hand almost defenseless. So East with strong clubs would pass 2C and defend rather than let you run to something you might make.

deftist, on 2016-December-25, 23:06, said:

If the pair plays negative doubles, he may be doubling with short clubs even with a minimum hand to cater to his partner having been dealt a hand that wanted to make a penalty double of 2C.

Pretend for a minute that East had opened 1H and you overcalled 2C. His double would still be takeout even though he had shown five hearts, and his partner often takes out to hearts even with a doubleton because East showed five. I can't say the same thing here when East opened 1D because East could easily be 4-4-4-1 or even 4-4-3-2.

deftist, on 2016-December-25, 23:06, said:

I think redouble shows a hand at the top of the overcall range. You might think that it would be okay to redouble and then bid clubs over any auction but if partner doubles the opponents, he will be disappointed in your defensive prospects - although you probably have 3 tricks against any contract. I probably wouldn't do this but I don't think it's terrible.

I wouldn't bid 4C undiscussed because some partners might think it was strong and others would think it was preemptive. I would probably bid 3C.

deftist, on 2016-December-25, 23:06, said:

An interesting hand. It seems like many answered as if you were playing 2/1 game forcing. If you are, this is easy. Respond 2D, then raise 2S to 3S showing three trump and slam interest.

I am going to assume that you, like most newer players, do not play 2/1 game forcing, so for you 1S-2D-2S-3S is invitational.

With most newer players, it is probably safe to jump to 4S because partner has a minimum hand. In theory, 1S-2D-2S is unlimited. However, I have a story to tell:

I had the opportunity to substitute teach for a class of about 15 tables of social players; the level was mostly just beyond beginners but many had played in their home groups for years and few would ever play duplicate bridge. I had the unfortunate task of giving a lesson on standard 2/1 bidding with prepared material. At one point I had to discuss the auction 1S-2D-2S. I wanted to teach it as forcing (the "correct" meaning) but I decided to ask them who thought it was forcing. Zero hands went up. I asked how many thought it was minimum and could be passed. In a class where the normal teacher never saw more than ten hands for any question, I saw about sixty hands go up. So I told them, "The experts think this bid is forcing, and if you ever get to play with a really, really good player, they will probably expect you to bid again over 2S. However, if you're playing with your normal group, you can expect to be passed in 2S." Yes, I know it wasn't proper bridge, but I thought I would be doing this group a great disservice telling them that they had to play 1S-2D-2S as forcing because sure as heck, they would bid 2S on their 17 points "because Kaitlyn said it was forcing" and they would play in 2S. Practically, they're probably going to have that auction maybe 6 more times in their lifetime and half the time they're going to be passed in 2S so let them play it as non-forcing. At least they all understand each other. If I told them that it was 100% forcing, half of them would forget and one that remembered would bid 2S on 17 and the one who forgot would pass.

Based on this, I think it is probably safe to play 4S.

Let's assume for a minute that you are playing with a possible decent player but you aren't playing any conventions. You could jump to 5S to invite a slam but I think that shows about 18-19. You could bid another new suit and then jump to 4S, but I don't think partner will get the correct message; they may think you're short in the fourth suit, or they may think that you are avoiding notrump with weakness in the fourth suit. I do have an alternative solution for this hand.

If you and your partner have agreed to play a 3NT response as 16-18 or 15-17, I might anticipate the problem and just respond 3NT to get the strength problem right. Assuming this is not a convention, you probably will play in notrump unless partner has six spades. However, in most cases, 3NT will make when 4S does, and 6NT will make when 6S does. The nice thing about the 3NT response is that partner will place the contract at the correct level. About the only things that will hurt you is if partner has a singleton small club or diamond and raises to 6NT and the opponents lead partner's singleton.

Thank you so much for your detailed response, Kaitlyn.

On the first hand, I didn't know that you could bid takeout double after your team has already bid a suit. It makes a lot of sense, though! I think I ended up bidding 3C, not being entirely sure if I had to jump to 4C or even 5C. But then again I had no info on my partner so I chose the safe (or safer) route.

On the second hand, great points about 2/1 game forcing. My partner was a stranger to me and we didn't have much of a convention, so I couldn't assume that 2/1 was game forcing for him (=for us). Because of that, I thought of just bidding 4s although we might miss on a slam. But then again, I thought 3NT would be better because a) it describes my balanced hand better (although there was no agreement on the meaning of 3NT), and b) if he corrects to 4s (usually with 6+ spades) I can still go for the slam try.

So I bid 3NT, and unfortunately my partner passed with the following hand:


It looks like he bid 2s because he had 6 spades, but then he didn't correct to 4s when I was almost guaranteed to have at least 2 spades. Anyway, everyone passed and he immediately quit when he saw my hand. :/ Which made me wonder if I made a big mistake..

One more question to Kaitlyn: is it a mistake to bid 4NT (Blackwood) right after his 2s? I can still sign off at 5s/5NT if I wanted to, and I don't think I'll lose 3+ tricks often enough for a slam try to be futile.

deftist, on 2016-December-26, 16:51, said:

You're welcome. You're giving me lots of fodder for new problem sets. I was running out of ideas

deftist, on 2016-December-26, 16:51, said:

If you think of how seldom you would want to make a penalty double would make sense when your partner hasn't bid and they're in part score, you'll realize the merit of playing virtually all low level doubles of suit contracts when partner hasn't bid as takeout.

deftist, on 2016-December-26, 16:51, said:

Very good assumption.

deftist, on 2016-December-26, 16:51, said:

The problem is that 3NT is essentially a decision and unless partner's hand is highly unusual for his earlier bidding, he's going to leave it. After all, how would you bid this hand?

You think you belong in 3NT and don't want to risk bidding 3C because partner might raise and take you past your best spot.

deftist, on 2016-December-26, 16:51, said:

Your partner was rude. Hopefully you don't let these things bother you because there are plenty of rude people here as well as many nice people.

deftist, on 2016-December-26, 16:51, said:

Blackwood is a tool that is used when you believe you have the strength for slam and just want to make sure you're not missing two aces. If you don't know if you have enough strength, OR if you don't know what, if anything, should be trump, Blackwood is not appropriate. Here, you aren't sure you have the strength for slam so Blackwood doesn't help.

Some more points:

This was one of the rare partners who realizes that 2S is forcing and trusts partner to know that. One of my just past beginner students would have thought that 2S was non-forcing and would have bid 3S and it would have worked out very well on this deal as you would have easily reached slam. Maybe there's something to my students' methods after all!

Also, I missed an obvious solution (although with so many players playing weak jump shifts now days, it could backfire.) If you play strong jump shifts, which probably should be standard when not discussed, the standard meaning nowdays is:

17-19 points (with 20+ you know you have a slam so you don't need a jump shift) AND one of the three following hand types:

(a) you know you are going to play in partner's suit - you jump shift and then support
(b) you know you are going to play in your suit - you jump shift and rebid your suit
© you suspect you are playing in notrump; you are showing your long suit (typically 5 cards) and then rebid notrump.

More advanced pairs have rebids by the jump shifter that show controls and either (a) or (b) by partnership agreement. However, the main reason of playing these jump shifts (called Soloway jump shifts) is to find the slams when each partner has about 17 points, as in your case.

Many experts require a five-card suit (which you don't have) or two of the top three honors (which you don't have) and some require 4 trumps for (a). However, if you relax the requirements (which help experts evaluate their hand), you can use the strong jump shifts to find slams on 17 opposite 17. When you feel your bidding judgment has reached a very high level (perhaps higher than mine ) you may put some of the requirements back in.

If you play weak jump shifts, you can ignore the whole discussion. Frankly, the jump shift solution didn't even occur to me because I usually play weak jump shifts.

Kaitlyn S, on 2016-December-26, 19:06, said:

I play weak jump shifts in competitive bidding, but strong jump shifts when opponents don't intervene. So far it didn't really matter because these situations came up like twice, or maybe 3 times..

When you said 2S in 1S-2D-2S is forcing in theory, is that because of the 2/1 game forcing, or just in general? I thought partner's 2S and my 2D can both be minimum, so technically 2S shouldn't be forcing (although 2D should be) and there might be cases where the responder should just pass 2S. If I bid 2D to "bid a new suit first and show support later," then of course I will rebid over his 2S. But isn't it also possible that I just bid 2D with a good 5-card diamond suit, yet don't want to go anywhere further after 2S because I lack points AND support in spades, as well as stoppers in other suits? Say I have a hand like 54s/T9h/AKT94d/K543c -- do I really want to not pass the 2S?

You did mention though that experts will regard this as forcing, and it would be great if you could elaborate on it.

Once again, thank you so much! I'm learning a lot.

deftist, on 2016-December-27, 07:56, said:

Let's say the opener has a hand like: S-A Q 8 6 4 3, H-A J 2 D-K 5 3 C-9. In theory your 2D response showed 11+. (You may say 10+ but you're probably talking HCP. In practice, most 10 point hands without a 5 card suit should respond 1NT so saying 11 counting length seems reasonable. I may get some disagreement on this as standard methods in Europe may be different.)

So you have 16 counting length and very likely want to be in game. If partner has a couple of spades you want to play 4S, and while your spade length may be disappointing if partner has a singleton, your club singleton will be enough of an asset that 5D might be a good contract opposite a minimum 2D response with diamond length, or 3NT might be fine if partner has clubs.

However, if you play 2S nonforcing, you have to bid more than 2S on this hand. You can bid 3S, but that will make the 3NT/5D decision much harder when partner doesn't have two spades, and almost impossible when partner has strong clubs and no heart stopper and you belong in 3NT. One of the regulars on these forums will trot out 2H, which should be absolutely forcing since 2H could be bid on an 18 count as well, and will come out all right as long as partner doesn't raise to game in hearts. However I wouldn't recommend that.

Playing 2S as forcing gives you room to find the best game. In fact, decent players would bid 2S with stronger hands with six lousy spades rather than jumping to 3S which sometimes leads to 4S on a 6-1 fit with lousy trumps because responder has nothing good to do.

That being said, it is playable to play 2S nonforcing here, but many experts (and apparently your partner on this hand) believe that it is inferior to do so. I agree. When the opener shows 13+ and the responder shows 11+ you almost always have enough for game, and the emphasis is finding the right game. A good percentage of the time that both partners are minimum, it will become obvious and you'll be able to get out below game, such as:

1S-2D-2H-3D-P; 1S-2D-2NT-P; 1S-2D-2S-2NT-P; 1S-2D-2S-3S-P; 1S-2D-2H-3H-P; 1S-2D-3D-P*

In each case the final bid showed a minimum for the earlier bidding and is not forcing; when the partner is also minimum, the pair stays out of a bad game. The final one is controversial - a few standard players think this is forcing.

So it might be best to stay out of game when it's obvious and get to game otherwise and once in a great while you'll be overbid. There is much to be gained by playing that 2S rebid as forcing (in 1S-2D-2S) and much of the time you don't belong in game, responder will bid 2NT, 3D, or 3S and play it there.

Don't feel bad about messing up a 2/1 auction; many bridge teachers that don't teach 2/1 game forcing tend to avoid the subject because there are a lot of disagreements among experts about the meanings of the bids. For example,

S-AQ653 H-95 D-K63 C-A74 You open 1S, partner bids 2D. Do you bid 2S, 2NT, or 3D? It's a matter of partnership agreement; there are no right or wrong answers there. The 2/1 game forcing players have the same problem. You'll find many 2/1 game forcing experts voting for each of those three choices - it's their personal preference for their partnership.

Some will say that 2S always shows six. If you do so, you must bid 2NT without a stopper sometimes or bid a 3-card suit or raise with 3.

Some will say that 2NT always shows the other two sutis stopped. If you do so, then you either have to bid 2S sometimes with 5 or make up a suit.

These potential problems exist whether you are playing 2/1 game forcing or Standard American (which implies that 2 over 1 is only a one round force.)

An expert or teacher may tell you that only one of the above approaches is correct. Don't believe it. If you can find a regular partner, you can agree which approach you take on 2 over 1 auctions. Does it surprise you that many teachers (those that know there is not any one right answer) try to avoid standard discussing 2 over 1 auctions altogether?

When we teach social players, we tend to teach that the 2S rebid shows six, not because it's superior, but because it's easier for them. It's consistent with 1 over 1 bidding (where 1H-1S-2H shows 6 for sure) and they're used to rebidding 1NT with an unbid suit unstopped so they really don't have to learn anything new. For a newer player, there's some merit in consistency; it's hard enough to remember all the bidding rules and making them inconsistent even makes them harder.

On your S-5 4 H-10 9 D-A K 10 9 4 C-K 5 4 3 example, I would raise 2S to 3S hoping that partner had 6. Sometimes the doubleton heart will be enough to make 4S.. For example, if your partner has S-AKxxxx, H-xxx, D-Qxx C-Ax, your doubleton heart makes game for him when trumps are 3-2 . If the opponents lead a club, your partner gives up a spade trick at trick 2 and your doubleton heart stops the defenders from taking 3 hearts. Now partner can draw trump and make 4 as long as diamonds run (and he can trump a diamond to set up the fifth diamond if diamonds are 4-1 the wrong way, as long as the CK is still an entry.)

deftist, on 2016-December-26, 08:18, said:

Without any specific agreements 2D is fine. However, there is a trend towards playing 2C as natural or balanced, which means 2D and 2H can now show 5 card suits. This sort of agreement helps find trump suits for slam early and means that you have a way to emphasise the balanced nature of your hand.

These agreements work best playing a system where a 2/1 bid is forcing to game. And of course, you need to have these agreements with partner.

On the first hand, a 2 ♣ overcall is fine for a first call. I'd make that bid myself.

The double by opener is fairly automatic these days if opener is short in ♣. That's because most people play negative doubles after an overcall. So there's no way to penalize the overcall when holding a trump stack except to pass and hope that opener reopens with a double. Opener will also sometimes double holding extra high values with ♣ enough to make a stack in partner's hand unlikely. In that case, opener is hoping to find responder with something that could let them find a part score to play.

Your hand is a really good playing hand. Unless you get a 5-0 trump break, you rate to have no more than 2 trump losers which leaves you with 8 playing tricks in hand. So your hand is good enough to compete further, even Vulnerable.

I think 3 ♣ is about right with this hand Vulnerable. It takes away bidding space from the opponents while doesn't rate to go down much, if at all, if the opponents defend. Your partner should realize that the additional bid is based on extra club length. With a strong (16+) and good ♣, you'd double first and rebid ♣ instead. And, because you didn't preempt in the first round, you must have some values outside of ♣.

On the second hand, barring any special agreements, 2 ♦ is the right bid to start. As others have said, how you continue depends on your specific agreements. With a random partner, I'd take 2 ♠ as 5 card minimum in balanced or a 6 card suit. After 2 ♠, you have a big problem exploring for slam. 3 NT will almost assuredly end as will 4 ♠. If you bid another new suit and ultimately support ♠, partner is likely to think you are short in the 4th suit.

With a random partner, you want to be in game, so I think your choice was between 3 NT and 4 ♠.

If you were definitely playing 2/1 game force, then you would have additional bids available that would let you explore for slam -- 3 ♠ would show a hand with 3 ♠ and some slam interest, 2 NT would also be forcing but tend to deny 3 ♠. 3 NT and 4 ♠ would definitely be signoff bids. After 3 ♠, partner would likely bid 4 ♣ showing a ♣ control and you could cue 4 ♥ showing a ♥ control. Partner should get excited about slam after that and take control.

I wouldn't be too worried about your partner abandoning the table. Your partner didn't exactly star in this auction. Partner's hand is on the cusp between a 2 ♠ rebid or 3 ♠ rebid. With partner's points virtually all prime values (As, Ks) and plenty of intermediate cards especially in ♠, I think this opener is worth a 3 ♠ rebid versus a 2 ♠ rebid. If partner bids 3 ♠, I think you'll have no trouble pushing toward slam.

In any case, I've had a lot of partner's bail on me hereabouts if they didn't like a result. It's sort of way of life and often as not it wasn't justified.

On the first hand I bid 3C. Shows 6 or more clubs and a bit extra for 2C, which is what you've got. XX shows... well, whatever you've agreed it to show:), but I would expect a maximum overcall (15-17) with perhaps 3415 or 3316 or similar - i.e. good playability in both the other suits; the sort of hand that would double if opener had bid 2D. This hand is a single-suiter so it must be right to rebid the suit. (And because you have eight, rebid it again!)

The second hand looks like a 2/1 vs standard mixup. Your partner was playing 2/1 and hence thought the partnership was forced to game (otherwise he should bid 3S). In this case 3S is the correct bid on your flat 17 with 3 card support - showing slam interest, and partner should accept.

If you were playing standard (SAYC type system) then you have a problem. You may have heard of 4th suit forcing; there is a similar idea in 1x-1/2y-2x auctions called "3rd suit forcing". Here that is 3C, which may seem odd on a 3-card suit but is fine because a) it's a minor, so partner isn't likely to get excited and b) it's forcing, allowing you to correct back to spades next round to show partner what you were getting at. Once again, partner should show some interest over that.

If 3C feels a bit risky opposite a random partner - I wouldn't blame you - then the practical 4S others have suggested is fine. Your choice of 3NT was unfortunate as it hid a key feature of your hand - the spade support. Partner's pass is obvious then. The main lesson here is - always agree a basic system, even with randoms on BBO

ahydra