[andrei]

---

IMP's

What would you bid now?
Support doubles only on up to 2♥ level, so off now

[helene_t]

3♠, this doesn't show heart support but is a Western cuebid.

[Zelandakh]

3♠ assuming the most common SNT-5 agreements and we might also have considered making a strong opening off the bat given our 9PT (although most would not). It would be a good idea to post which agreements are in play, in particular whether support doubles are on.

[andrei]

Double of 2S bid would not be support (I will also edit original post)

[gszes]

3c

The hand is not quite strong enough for 3s (change dia J to Q and then 3s is ok). This hand can still be played in a D/H/C/NT and since we do not have quite enough to bid 3s it would seem prudent to leave as much flexibility as possible while still getting across our power. IMHO

3c

fits the bill much better. If your partnerships plays this as competitive then do not bid this way gamble with 3s. Using 3c as a GF leaves a lot of options on the table especially if playing support x so responder can rebid 3h showing at least 6 (maybe 4h is best). Putting clubs in play is also right whenever responder has long clubs and short diamonds.

[Fluffy]

3c means 3♣?, that is a non forcing 5-5 for everyone I know.

3♠ seems easy for me.

[neilkaz]

3♠ with this monster and asking for a stopper while showing a big hand of course.

[rmnka447]

3 ♠

I disagree this hand is not worth a 3 ♠ bid. If we change ♦ J to ♦ Q, we'd have a 3 loser hand and enough for a strong 2 ♣ opening IMO. This is about as good a hand that you could have and only open 1 ♦.

[vang]

i think 3S is eating too much bidding space. if the support doubles are off, the perfect, double to show extra values and see part reaction

[andrei]

Fluffy, on 2015-October-28, 16:24, said:

3c means 3♣?, that is a non forcing 5-5 for everyone I know.

3♠ seems easy for me.

This was one of the discussion points after the hand: 3♣ forcing or not?

Should I assume the "standard" is non-forcing?

[helene_t]

Support doubles are not relevant here since they don't apply after a jump overcall. You clearly have to double with xxx-Kx-AKJx-AKxx.

3♠ does eat up a lot of space so maybe we should play GB2NT so that 3♣ can be forcing, and 3♦/3NT/4♣/4♦/4♥ get the same meaning as they would have had without the intervention. Then 3♠ would show pretty much this hand.

Probably GB2NT is not standard, and even if it is, it could be argued that 3♣ should be nonforcing and that 4♣ is not a splinter. That does make 3♠ a bit vague. It is still the right bid with this hand, though.

[Fluffy]

andrei, on 2015-October-29, 07:47, said:

This was one of the discussion points after the hand: 3♣ forcing or not?

Should I assume the "standard" is non-forcing?

Not forcing and not encouraging, you do it with 10 HCP hands. With good hands you will double.

Opener's strong moves: Jumps, doubles, cuebids and voluntary NT.

[Zelandakh]

Fluffy, on 2015-October-30, 06:13, said:

Not forcing and not encouraging, you do it with 10 HCP hands. With good hands you will double.

Opener's strong moves: Jumps, doubles, cuebids and voluntary NT.

This is common but not the only way. Another fairly commonly seen method is for double to be competitive and a new suit shows extras, a scheme that is often more logical for lower level players. Moving up to more advanced agreements, it is also a good spot for an artificial 2NT rebid and there are a number of ways of playing that too. Finally, transfers are a further possibility.

[kenrexford]

IMO, obvious spot for GB2NT. That said, the hand is still difficult without good agreements as to "what next?"

The way I play GB2NT in this sequence is that 2NT ostensibly is weak with either both minors or just diamonds. Responder is expected to pick which minor he prefers, and then I can correct if I have just diamonds. Immediate bids, by contrast, are natural and show extras.

The problem, though, is the diamond-club imbalance and the lacks of any spade help whatsoever.

The standout question? What is 3♠ directly, versus 2NT...3♠?

Consider the logic of that problem. 2NT...3♠ forces 3NT to be played by Opener. An immediate 3♠ switches a 3NT contract to Responder. Thus, for me 2NT...3♠ shows some sort of hand with some spade help, maybe Kx, maybe Qxx, maybe even Qx in a pinch. An immediate 3♠, in contrast, shows some sort of very strong hand, with no spade help, usually without three hearts, and usually with a diamond-club imbalance, perfect.

This gets us to the same point as many who bid 3♠, but with a lot more comfort in that the bid is more accurate/limited/defined to expectations.

[Zelandakh]

kenrexford, on 2015-October-30, 06:48, said:

The standout question? What is 3♠ directly, versus 2NT...3♠?

...to which you might add the sequence X...3♠.

[MinorKid]

3♠, this hand is like a little fitting nature in Hearts and there is no defense in Spades. So i don't prefer X or NTs.