[Flem72]

Can't help but notice how many difficult competitive situations posted in the forums turn out to be created by SJS hands bidding 1/1 or 2/1, and then opps getting in with crap. Combination of one side not announcing crushers immediately and the other side's modern willingness to compete on length.

[CSGibson]

broze, on 2012-September-17, 10:20, said:

Nice topic, but I swear half the time I have no idea what's going on in these forums because I suck at acronyms apparently. What's GBK? DSIP?

GBK = General Bridge Knowledge

DSIP = Do Something Intelligent Partner.

I agree that these are not common acronyms, and they hurt the ability of OP to get useful information from a wide variety of posters, since some will not post because they cannot figure it out. Seriously, how hard is it to type the extra 20 letters it takes to spell out what you mean and make sure your message is clear?

[Flem72]

CSGibson, on 2012-September-17, 10:41, said:

GBK = General Bridge Knowledge

DSIP = Do Something Intelligent Partner.

I agree that these are not common acronyms, and they hurt the ability of OP to get useful information from a wide variety of posters, since some will not post because they cannot figure it out. Seriously, how hard is it to type the extra 20 letters it takes to spell out what you mean and make sure your message is clear?

"original poster"

[CSGibson]

Flem72, on 2012-September-17, 12:42, said:

"original poster"

Dammit, now I'm doing it.

[aguahombre]

BTW: = rolling eyes

[Flem72]

aguahombre, on 2012-September-17, 12:55, said:

BTW: = rolling eyes

BTW = -- nah.......

[Codo]

Back to the topic, I had bid 2 NT with the north hand as my first bid to create a slam investigation. With no intentions to ruff a lot, I like to do it with 3 card support too. This had brought you to the slam too.
Bidding 1 ♠ here makes it more or less mandatory to bid something like 4sf or similar to raise hearts while looking for the slam. I would avoid it if possible...

[jillybean]

CSGibson, on 2012-September-17, 12:48, said:

Dammit, now I'm doing it.

I of course learned all the acronyms from the forum experts/regulars. At first I hated that I had to post a question..what the heck is GBK?? before I could respond to a post and swore I would not use them myself. A good reminder Bridge acronmyms are like conventions, cool to collect but often abused/misused.

[CSGibson]

I think its important to think about these hands before responding. Our goals are simple: Find the right strain, and the right level. If we project out the auction, once we respond 1♠, we have to use an artificial bid to set trump and to force to game while exploring slam auctions. Imagine the following auctions, and how they might go:

1♥-1♠, 2♥...(uh oh, what now?)
1♥-1♠, 2♦-3♣-3N...(uh oh, what now?)

Even more manageable auctions, like:
1♥-1♠, 2♣...

or

1♥-1♠, 1N

You are forced to use an artificial bid to create a game force, though the auction should be at a manageable level when you do so.

As far as looking at level, it is far better to bid a game forcing & artificial 2♣ immediately. You can still get to some spade fits (opener is not prohibited from bidding 2♠, after all), and you make it very easy to suggest a strain next by bidding hearts at the 2 or 3 level. 2♣ properly focuses the auction on level, since you already have found a playable strain in hearts.

If you didn't have a clear strain to play in, then I like 1♠ much more, but the worst slam exploration auctions with 3 card heart support almost always start 1♥-1♠ because of the difficulty in getting back to hearts at a cheap level.

I don't like 2N because I really want to promise 4 card support for that bid (allowing partner to lie about the heart Q based on length is sometimes important), but I still think its better than 1♠.

[jillybean]

Hi Chris, interesting questions. Here I think my hand is strong enough to ask for keycards after any response from partner.

1♥-1♠, 2♥ my next bid is to ask for keycards.
1♥-1♠, 2♦-3♣-3N I ask for aces.

1♠ is not ideal but I did not have the agreement that 2♣/1♥ shows a gf hand, balanced or with clubs, I'm not going to misrepresent my heart holding with 2N, so 1♠ appeared to be the best choice.

However, if I did have a 2♣ gf/bal/clubs bid available I could be making it very difficult to find a 5-4 spade fit. Opener will not bid 2♠ after 1♥ 2♣ without a King more than minimum, which is the best approach?

[CSGibson]

jillybean, on 2012-September-17, 22:16, said:

Hi Chris, interesting questions. Here I think my hand is strong enough to ask for keycards after any response from partner.

1♥-1♠, 2♥ my next bid is to ask for keycards.
1♥-1♠, 2♦-3♣-3N I ask for aces.

1♠ is not ideal but I did not have the agreement that 2♣/1♥ shows a gf hand, balanced or with clubs, I'm not going to misrepresent my heart holding with 2N, so 1♠ appeared to be the best choice.

However, if I did have a 2♣ gf/bal/clubs bid available I could be making it very difficult to find a 5-4 spade fit. Opener will not bid 2♠ after 1♥ 2♣ without a King more than minimum, which is the best approach?

Easy enough - remove the need to have extra values to bid 2S, sort out the extra values later with non-serious 3N.

Obviously, asking for keycards isn't best on 1 in theory, since you can be off the top 2 diamonds (unless you can convince them not to lead a diamond), but it might work. On 2, how are you asking for aces? Do you really play 4C as Gerber? 5C as super Gerber? Even then, aren't you worried that you need to know more than just whether you are missing an ace?

[Codo]

jillybean, on 2012-September-17, 22:16, said:

Hi Chris, interesting questions. Here I think my hand is strong enough to ask for keycards after any response from partner.

1♥-1♠, 2♥ my next bid is to ask for keycards.
1♥-1♠, 2♦-3♣-3N I ask for aces.

1♠ is not ideal but I did not have the agreement that 2♣/1♥ shows a gf hand, balanced or with clubs, I'm not going to misrepresent my heart holding with 2N, so 1♠ appeared to be the best choice.

However, if I did have a 2♣ gf/bal/clubs bid available I could be making it very difficult to find a 5-4 spade fit. Opener will not bid 2♠ after 1♥ 2♣ without a King more than minimum, which is the best approach?

Kathryn,

If you choose your approach, in example 1 you will not find out about the diamond controls.
In your second example you cannot ask for kcs, even if you know that 4 NT is aceasking and not quantitative.

If you choose 1 ♥ 2 ♣ as GF, you will not find the 5-4 fit in spades easily and you may have trouble to show a hand with slam interesst in Heart after partner raised clubs.OF course it is perfectly playable to play 2 ♣ as GF or natural, but this needs some work. Auken /von Armin, the famous German women plays it this way, it is really nice, but not easy.

So, you need to find a way to overcome these problems. Mine is neither perfect nor mainstream, but if the worst thing to happen is that partner with Kxxxxx in hearts lies about the queen of trumps- Oh well, it could be worse.

[P_Marlowe]

#1 Reopening / TO
#2 3C

3C would be also a candidat the round before.

To enable the differentiation between good and bad 3C
2NT can help you.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[the_clown]

I would bid 2♥, at MP I could try for 200, especially if they do have weak 2 in ♦ available.

[Fluffy]

double is 100% take out, passing it is a bad gamble IMO, but hard to argue with success

[TimG]

jillybean, on 2012-September-17, 22:16, said:

1♥-1♠, 2♦-3♣-3N I ask for aces.

Is 4N quantitative, RKC for hearts, or straight ace asking?

[jillybean]

4N is Quantitative, 4♣ is 1430 min/max ace ask.

[jillybean]

Flem72, on 2012-September-17, 10:28, said:

Can't help but notice how many difficult competitive situations posted in the forums turn out to be created by SJS hands bidding 1/1 or 2/1, and then opps getting in with crap. Combination of one side not announcing crushers immediately and the other side's modern willingness to compete on length.

Without the ridiculous 2♦ bid, I don't think this is a difficult hand to bid at all. 1H 1S 1N 2C 2H , 1H 2C 3C 3H
I do think suggesting a strong jump shift with only 5 spades and 3 card support for partner is ill advised.

[Zelandakh]

If you think it is important to establish a GF straight away with spade hands after a 1♥ opening, then it is surely better to play a 1♠/1NT inversion than distorting your bidding system to accomodate 5♠(332) into a 2♣ response. An inversion is simple, just respond 1♠ as your Forcing 1NT and respond 1NT instead with a GF hand and spades. You can play exactly the same structures as after your 1♠ opening now.

Back to the OP, this double is surely to be treated as competing, typically a 5224 hand too weak to bid 3♣. You can double with values too providing you have a plan over partner's possible responses.

[Cyberyeti]

Not sure what this double is as I'd have doubled for takeout over 2♦ as we don't play support, so I show my 4 clubs.