[broze]

Playing 2/1 with a new partner, you pick up this hand as North - how do you proceed? And what is the standard treatment for hands like these?

---

I'll post the whole hand and the actual auction later.

EDIT: I intended this topic to be a poll, but it doesn't seem to have worked. Basically then, how would you bid this?

[wyman]

I am a simple man and will start with 1C.

[Phil]

1♣.

Is the entire hand based on this one decision?

[ArtK78]

I bid clubs then hearts and then hearts again. That is my plan and I am sticking to it.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

ArtK78, on 2012-February-17, 12:31, said:

I bid clubs then hearts and then hearts again. That is my plan and I am sticking to it.

ditto

[neilkaz]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2012-February-17, 12:35, said:

ditto

Ditto to your ditto.

[broze]

Yes, I should probably add a bit more. Your partner will respond 1♠ to your opening bid and your rebid. E.g. 1♣-1♠-2♥-2♠. Now what?

[ArtK78]

broze, on 2012-February-17, 12:48, said:

Yes, I should probably add a bit more. Your partner will respond 1♠ to your opening bid and your rebid. E.g. 1♣-1♠-2♥-2♠. Now what?

3♥. As stated above.

The way that I play reverses, the 2♠ bid is a "neutral" bid - a sort of a mark-time bid. Other than the fact that responder must have 5 spades for the bid, it really doesn't say anything about strength. Responder could be weak, strong, or somewhere in between.

Nothing about the 2♠ bid changes my original plan to bid hearts twice. We will see where we are after responder's next call.

[broze]

ArtK78, on 2012-February-17, 12:53, said:

3♥. As stated above.

The way that I play reverses, the 2♠ bid is a "neutral" bid - a sort of a mark-time bid. Other than the fact that responder must have 5 spades for the bid, it really doesn't say anything about strength. Responder could be weak, strong, or somewhere in between.

Nothing about the 2♠ bid changes my original plan to bid hearts twice. We will see where we are after responder's next call.

What action do you take over 3NT, 4♣ or 3♠?

[ArtK78]

broze, on 2012-February-17, 12:56, said:

What action do you take over 3NT, 4♣ or 3♠?

I would bid 4♠ over either 3NT or 3♠. Not that I want to put this hand down as dummy, but partner is giving me no real choice. I am certainly not passing 3NT.

Over 4♣, I would bid 4♦.

[broze]

---

Here's the whole hand and the bidding. As you can see NS had somewhat of a disaster. North intended 3♦ as 4th suit game-forcing and South took it as natural with 5-4-4-0 shape. I could have made this topic into an "assign the blame" post, but that was not really the point - being a new partnership the answer is probably "both."

I do however think that with best bidding North should take pains to eschew the 4♠ game, which as you can see is (though unluckily) down 3. Your void is worthless, and it's unclear how many ♦ losers you will be able to chuck before the opponents take their winners.

I disagree with ArtK78 that you are being given no choice. Of course you can't bid 3NT, but how often do you find after picking up a big two-suiter that your best contract is in a strain outside those two suits. Bidding 4♠ after say 1♣-1♠-2♥-2♠-3♥-3NT- has the advantage of describing your hand shape perfectly but realistically 4♠ is very rarely going to be your best spot and at this point you still cannot rule out the possibility of a ♣ slam.

Obviously I am benefited with the clarity of hindsight, but it is certainly an interesting problem.

[Quartic]

I think the bidding on this hand should go something like:

1♣ - 1♠
2♥ - 2♠
3♥ - 4♣
4♦ - 5♣

With a ♠ control, South would go on with 4♠, and the ♣ slam would be found.

[Cyberyeti]

Pairs prize for 4♥ I think

1♣-1♠-2♥-2♠-3♥ is obvious, I might be tempted to bid 3N rather than 4♣ with the south hand which would not be a success.

[ArtK78]

broze, on 2012-February-18, 10:50, said:

---

Here's the whole hand and the bidding. As you can see NS had somewhat of a disaster. North intended 3♦ as 4th suit game-forcing and South took it as natural with 5-4-4-0 shape. I could have made this topic into an "assign the blame" post, but that was not really the point - being a new partnership the answer is probably "both."

I do however think that with best bidding North should take pains to eschew the 4♠ game, which as you can see is (though unluckily) down 3. Your void is worthless, and it's unclear how many ♦ losers you will be able to chuck before the opponents take their winners.

I disagree with ArtK78 that you are being given no choice. Of course you can't bid 3NT, but how often do you find after picking up a big two-suiter that your best contract is in a strain outside those two suits. Bidding 4♠ after say 1♣-1♠-2♥-2♠-3♥-3NT- has the advantage of describing your hand shape perfectly but realistically 4♠ is very rarely going to be your best spot and at this point you still cannot rule out the possibility of a ♣ slam.

Obviously I am benefited with the clarity of hindsight, but it is certainly an interesting problem.

The player who should eschew the 4♠ game is South. He should know that North has, at most, 2 spades, along with his promised 6-5. With Qxxxxx of spades, he should know that a spade game may not play very well, given the diamond tap on dummy. He is the one who should bid 5C.

North expects that South has a better spade suit. The North hand is not a terrible hand in a spade contract. Overruling partner who wants to play in spades after I show my hand is poor partnership behavior. The player who has described his hand should allow his partner to make the final decision.

[broze]

ArtK78, on 2012-February-19, 07:34, said:

The player who should eschew the 4♠ game is South. He should know that North has, at most, 2 spades, along with his promised 6-5. With Qxxxxx of spades, he should know that a spade game may not play very well, given the diamond tap on dummy. He is the one who should bid 5C.

Overruling partner who wants to play in spades after I show my hand is poor partnership behavior. The player who has described his hand should allow his partner to make the final decision.

I agree that both players should realise 4♠ will not be a good spot, and that's fine if after 1♣-1♠-2♥-2♠-3♥-3NT-4♠ 5♣ is unambiguously 'to play', especially as this is a new partnership. I hardly think it is 'bad partnership behaviour' to bid the game you think will have the greatest chance of making, over choosing to play in a contract outside your two-suiter.

Furthermore, as N I'm still thinking about 6♣ and choosing 4♣ rather than 4♠ is going to make this a lot easier.

[Bbradley62]

broze, on 2012-February-18, 10:50, said:

North intended 3♦ as 4th suit game-forcing and South took it as natural with 5-4-4-0 shape.

Anyone care to directly comment on this?

[Codo]

4sf surely

[Vampyr]

Reverses are a real problem in pick-up or casual partnerships, because there are no standard continuations. What would people here assume about responder's options without discussion -- that a 4th suit or 2NT bid showed a weak (or potentially weak) hand? That a return to a previously bid suit showed a weak hand? Something else?

[wyman]

N screwed the pooch by opening 1H. Once he does that, he needs to j/s into 3C. He has a 3 loser hand ffs.

3D is not fsf in this auction imo, opener and responder are both limited! 100% north.

[whereagles]

1H is fine. Just rebid 3C and all shall be well. Come on, it's a 3-loser hand with solid suits. It plays well even opposite 2 singletons!