[mtvesuvius]

So I was playing a friendly team match with an expert (a real one, not BBO one) partner. We don't have too many agreements etc, but are playing 2/1 with a 14-16 NT, and produced this auction:

Where did we go wrong here? What is 1♣ - 2♣ - 3N?

---

[gwnn]

Depends on agreement

There is no clear expert standard for invmin auctions I'm afraid.

[mtvesuvius]

 gwnn, on 2010-October-31, 13:52, said:

Depends on agreement

There is no clear expert standard for invmin auctions I'm afraid.

Based on your usual agreements... Where did we go wrong then?

[gwnn]

Well I like 2♠=5-4 in the black suits at least, with 2N=forcing, 12-14 or 18-19.

I also like 2♦=waiting and a lot of artificiality but I haven't played that in a while.

Also possible is 2♦=12-14 guaranteed and 2N=18-19 balanced. It's a nice compromise in a way.

One thing I hate is opener showing stoppers.

[mikeh]

I won't play inverted minors in a casual partnership, precisely because I don't know what the 'standard' followups are....when I do play inverted minors, it is with a lot of discussion, including, explicitly, a way for opener to show a balanced gf hand (which will therefore be bigger than a strong 1N) while conserving bidding space. I last played such a method many years ago, but think that it began with an artificial 2♥ (2♦ and 2♠ were also artificial).

I may be out of touch...maybe there is an 'expert standard'....if there is, I hope it isn't about showing stoppers.....I'm with gwnn in thinking that is a waste of method.

Thus, I'd likely be in the same pickle as you....altho (again, with uncertainty) I probably would have risked 3N over 2♣ on the basis that partner will probably take this as 18-19. Where that gets us, I don't know for sure...I do think partner should bid over this and slam would then be reached somehow.

Of course, one can always hope for clubs 4-1 offside

[Cyberyeti]

We play 1♣-2♣-2♦ as our enquiry, but we guarantee 4 clubs for the opening bid which simplifies some of it, and play a weak no trump.

Our auction if we are forced to open 1♣ would be 1♣-2♣-2♦(15+bal, not clubs only, 3N is a strong no trump with ♣ only, or any 14+ 54xx with 5 clubs, 6-4 is bid differently)-3♦(GF 4♦)-3N(only 3♣, would bid the major or raise ♦ with 4)-4♣(prepared to play 4N/5♣ if I don't like where this goes)-4♦(keycard)-4♥(0/3)-4♠(Q♣?)-5♣(no)-6♣.

Partner is known to hold 4 major suit cards plus Axxx, AKxxx, so you can claim if the trumps break

[nigel_k]

I don't know if there is any standard treatment.

If 2♣ (or 2♠) created a game force then I think North should rebid 3♣ next to show the fifth club. If North had to bid 3♦ to show extras then I agree with the bidding up to 4NT. At that point North needs to consider the worst case scenario for South, e.g. KQJx Axx KQx QJx. Even that is ok if the ♥K is well placed or they don't lead one. I don't know what South would bid with KQJx AKx KQx xxx but 3♥ doesn't look right as it endplays partner out of 3NT. My feeling is that 6♣ at the end is a better guess than pass.

[Cascade]

Two questions

Was 1♣ 2+ or 3+?

Did 2♣ deliver 4 or 5 clubs as a minimum?

[mtvesuvius]

 Cascade, on 2010-October-31, 20:58, said:

Two questions

Was 1♣ 2+ or 3+?

Did 2♣ deliver 4 or 5 clubs as a minimum?

1♣ was 3+♣. 2♣ could be 4 I guess, undiscussed though.

[Cascade]

After 3♦ south can see that 7 of the 8 offsuit cards can be covered assuming five clubs and partner ikely has something in hearts extra.

Therefore south can see a slam opposite five decent clubs.

I feel over 3NT south should be more optimistic. Maybe 4♣ but that might overstate the clubs for some.

[bucky]

 nigel_k, on 2010-October-31, 18:58, said:

I don't know if there is any standard treatment.

If 2♣ (or 2♠) created a game force then I think North should rebid 3♣ next to show the fifth club. If North had to bid 3♦ to show extras then I agree with the bidding up to 4NT. At that point North needs to consider the worst case scenario for South, e.g. KQJx Axx KQx QJx. Even that is ok if the ♥K is well placed or they don't lead one. I don't know what South would bid with KQJx AKx KQx xxx but 3♥ doesn't look right as it endplays partner out of 3NT. My feeling is that 6♣ at the end is a better guess than pass.

Doesn't 3♦ imply 5th club, therefore it is a better bid than 3♣ anyway, even if 3♣ would have been forcing?

I think North should consider making a move after 4NT.

[mike777]

Wonderful convention this inverted minor stuff given there seems to be no standards.

[Zelandakh]

 bucky, on 2010-November-03, 15:44, said:

Doesn't 3♦ imply 5th club, therefore it is a better bid than 3♣ anyway, even if 3♣ would have been forcing?

I think North should consider making a move after 4NT.

I think 3D just shows a diamond stop and 13+ hcp. If either hand has shown extra club length then I would think it was South!

[bucky]

 Zelandakh, on 2010-November-03, 23:04, said:

I think 3D just shows a diamond stop and 13+ hcp. If either hand has shown extra club length then I would think it was South!

If 3♦ doesn't imply 5th club, what would North's shape be? 3-3-3-4?

[nigel_k]

 bucky, on 2010-November-03, 23:42, said:

If 3♦ doesn't imply 5th club, what would North's shape be? 3-3-3-4?

You aren't going to bid NT with two or three small hearts and if you are too strong for a nonforcing 3♣, then surely 3♦ could be 3244 or 2344 and maybe even 2434 with four small hearts or possibly 2254.

[bucky]

 nigel_k, on 2010-November-04, 14:27, said:

You aren't going to bid NT with two or three small hearts and if you are too strong for a nonforcing 3♣, then surely 3♦ could be 3244 or 2344 and maybe even 2434 with four small hearts or possibly 2254.

With (23)44 or 2254, why would you want to start with 2♣ instead of 1♦? I know some for awkward hands 2♣ is bid with only 4 clubs, but that should only be done when you have no good alternatives. As for 2434, I would start with 1♥ even with four small hearts -- again, the 2♣ bid should nominally show 5+, you do it with 4 only when running out of other options.

[Zelandakh]

 bucky, on 2010-November-04, 19:53, said:

With (23)44 or 2254, why would you want to start with 2♣ instead of 1♦? I know some for awkward hands 2♣ is bid with only 4 clubs, but that should only be done when you have no good alternatives. As for 2434, I would start with 1♥ even with four small hearts -- again, the 2♣ bid should nominally show 5+, you do it with 4 only when running out of other options.

I have no problem with 2C showing 5+, although you certainly need a way of showing 3334. I do have a problem with 2C showing 4+ and the later 3D showing 5+.

[inquiry]

I gave up on 1m-2m-2 new suit as stopper a long time ago.

I have seen 1m-2m, first step = balanced minimum. Simple, direct.

I prefer to play first step shows a minumum unbalanced, reason being maximum room to show shortness that might be key. I am thinking I stole this from Fred or someone else. At the moment, i don't recall where. Anyway, this is it...

1♣-2♣

• 2♦ = unbalanced minimum (singleton or void somewhere (2♥ ask, steps, lower, middle, top)
• 2♥ = balanced hand that did not want to bid 2NT, 2♠ or 3NT - generally weak and will pass 2NT
• 2♠ = balanced GF hand with 5 ♣
• 2NT = forcing to at least 3♣, balanced, can be 17-19 which will bid again, of course. If shows extra value, precisely 4♣
• 3♣ = 5+ ♣, one round force, obviously more than minimum
• jump new suit - splinter, GF
• 3NT 17-19 balanced, only 3♣'s
• 4♣ = RKCB
• 4other suit = exclusion blackwood

1♦=2♦

• 2♥ = unbalanced minimum, singleton or void somewhere (2♠ ask, steps, lower, middle, top)
• 2♠ = balanced that didn't want to bid NT, opener can pass 2NT
• 2NT = balanced, forcing to at least 3♦, if 17-19, then precisely 4♦
• 3♣ = balanced minimum with 5♦
• 3♦ = 5+ ♦, more than minimum
• 3M/4♣ = splinter
• 3NT = balanced 17-19, 3 card ♦ suit
• 4♦ = RKCB
• 4M/5♣ = exclusion blackwood

What this means for your hand, I would have REBID 3NT over 2♣, showing 17-19 and only 3♣'s. Partner can do the math for himself,and decide to force to 6♣, invite or whatever.

Perhaps the simplier way (1st step balanced minimum, other extra values) is better but this has been fairly successful for me.

[Flameous]

I think the auction was pretty good one, nicely showed all stoppers, bid quantitative and it got rejected quite reasonably. Change either of south's queens to jack, which could be for the same bidding and the slam is terrible. Some upgrading might be in place with all those aces and kings, but how to put it into the auction, I don't know.

My methods over inverted m:
1C - 2C
-> 2D = any balanced (2M by responder is 4 cards and GF)
2H/S = 4 cards, unbal (doesn't promise extra strength)
2NT/3C = descriptive minimum
3D = 15+ 4441
3H/S = splinter
3NT = Good long clubs, usually without shortness.

After 1D-2D, 2H = bal and 2S is compressed as either major.