[jillybean]

---

Strong field, IMP pairs. Vul. all
1st seat

Q1. Do you open this hand?

Q2. If yes, 1♥ (P) 1♠ (P)
your bid.

[mikeh]

Yes

A losing trick count of 6, when a minimum weak 1N hand, with 12 points, might easily have 7 and be considered a routine opening hand

4 controls! Many routine opening bids have fewer than that

All my points are in my long suits. Thus the 4321 count undervalues them.

If I have 10 hcp, a LTC of 7 or less, and 3+ controls, and almost all my hcp in my long suit(s), I open. In my current partnerships, we open virtually all 11 counts anyway, so this is a good opener, not a close one. More traditional players might need a decent 12 in a balanced hand, but this is a far more powerful hand than a balanced 12 or 13 count.

In addition, I have almost no rebid issues. Even over 2D, either my partnership permits 3C on this (my partnerships dont) or you play that 2H doesn’t promise 6 hearts (as we do).

Over 1S, the only rational call is 2C.

[jillybean]

My partner will be very happy with your reply
1♥:1♠
2♣:2♦* 4sf

[Cyberyeti]

jillybean, on 2021-April-05, 01:28, said:

My partner will be very happy with your reply
1♥:1♠
2♣:2♦* 4sf

4SF forcing to game or just one round ? whatever you have an easy 3♣ bid.

[apollo1201]

Cannot add anything on what Mikeh and Cyber said.

An easy opening, an easier rebid, and an almost as easy 3rd descriptive bid, 3C to show the 55.

Yes, even if 2D (a « cheap » 4SF is not GF for all systems) didn’t commit to game, I just crossed that line with my minimal HCP strength and a possible misfit. But that will be the key to a successful C slam that it is worth having partner struggle in 3NT with his AQxxx xx Qxxx Kx.

[Douglas43]

Agree with the above posters. Even if FSF at the two level is not played as FG, 3♣ to bid out your shape. The worst hand partner can have is values for 2NT but no diamond stop, in which case they probably hold three clubs.

[jillybean]

4sGf , sorry I missed that in last post.

1♥ 1♠
2♣ 2♦ (4sgf)
3♣ 3♠

[apollo1201]

jillybean, on 2021-April-05, 13:06, said:

4sGf , sorry I missed that in last post.

1♥ 1♠
2♣ 2♦ (4sgf)
3♣ 3♠

What is the difference between 3S and 3D? 6 good S vs. question about D stop with only 5 (or 6 bad) S ?
Seems we’re scr***d.
I guess 4S is the most discouraging bid I can find now...

[mikeh]

Partner know you don’t have true spade support, yet is either worried about 3N or has very good spades with slam interest.

If he’s worried about notrump, then so are you, so 4S is the only viable call.

It is worth discussing what a new suit should be. Clubs pretty much has to be natural, since 6=6 hands may be rare but they do happen. 4H is unlikely to be an attempt to play in hearts, since with 6 hearts, even with 5 clubs, you’d bid 2H over 2D, so it’s worth discussing whether 4H shows a good hand, in context, for spades...of course you have to include in that discussion what 4D would mean. But (a) don’t make such calls without prior discussion and (b) whatever 4R should mean, you don’t have it.

I don’t know why you think you’re screwed. Cant partner hold KQJ10xx x Axx Kxx on this auction? As one example of a hand that might bid this way. He was hoping for a spade preference over 2D, after which his 3S would be a slam try.

You may in fact be doomed to a minus, but so what? Very, very few players would not open this hand, or not rebid 2 then 3 clubs, and why assume that partner has misbid? IOW, if you reach a poor contract, then unless partner has done something I’ll-advised, you’ll have lots of company at MPs and probably a push at imps.

[jillybean]

---

So the auction derailed after 3♠, we should have been able to stop in 4♠.

After 1♥ 1♠ is there any merit for South to put the brakes on by bidding 1nt 12-14 ?
Or am I masterminding?

[sfi]

jillybean, on 2021-April-05, 14:22, said:

After 1♥ 1♠ is there any merit for South to put the brakes on by bidding 1nt 12-14 ?
Or am I masterminding?

You're masterminding. South should probably bid an uncomfortable 4S over 3S, and North had no reason to move over 3NT. For that matter, North could have avoided this by giving up on the spade suit and simply bidding 3NT over 3C. Or even bid 3D to try and probe for doubleton support before settling into 3NT.

[DavidKok]

South bid well, North started fine but made a mess of things with 3♠. Sure, it shows a GF hand with 6 spades, but South can hardly be expected to hold diamond strength after having shown a 5-5, especially with ♦KJx starting at North's face. The pragmatic bid by North was 3NT over 3♣. I reserve the sequence 3♦; 3♥-3NT (over 3♣) for showing half a stopper, so that with two half stoppers excellent 3NT's are not missed (which also means North cannot make a 'free' try of 3♦ to look for a spade fit anymore).
As an aside, the 3NT by South over 3♠ looks thoroughly confused. I would expect diamond values for that bid. North has no spare values and should leave 3NT in. Also I'd note that the 2♣ bid limited South's strength (to, say, 12-17), so North requires about an ace more than they actually have to make a keycard bid.

[mikeh]

3N over 3S showed a lack of understanding about the auction, but in reality was going to work out well (if bad bidding never gained, we’d all give up the game...it would be too tough), but North, who showed an even greater lack of understanding with 3S then made matters much worse with an egregious 4S bid.

North needs to learn to pay attention to what partner is saying.

Over 3C, partner is at least 5-5, and definitely does not have 3 spades. If south is 2=5=1=5, then 3N may turn out badly, but we do have two working cards in partner’s suits and the opps may have trouble establishing diamonds

More importantly, with our KJx in diamonds, expecting partner to usually hold 2 of them, can we really expect partner to bid 3N on Qx or worse? Yes, I see that partner did exactly that....but 3N was a terrible bid. Of course, North had, it seems, no intention of actually listening to what south’s bidding was saying...

So North should heed S J Simon’s advice: don’t worry about getting to the best possible contract....try, instead, to get to the best contract possible. Please, no posts arguing that these two statements mean the same thing. Good bridge players have understood the difference for 70 years.

3N may not be the single dummy contract of our dreams opposite say Jx AJxxx x AJxxx but partner will usually hold better suits than that, and even opposite that, 3N is not down yet.

Bidding 3S was bad. Bidding 4S was far, far worse. She deserves dummy to have Void KJxxx Axx Axxxx

Btw, and this is surely too esoteric for North, but there is nothing wrong with bidding 3D over 3C. This should NOT be understood as an attempt to play in diamonds but as a probe in an effort to find the right contract. South should bid 3S with 2=5=1=5, 3N with a diamond stopper and 3H with the actual hand, over which North bids 3N, secure in the knowledge that she’s not missing a 6-2 spade fit.

[jillybean]

mikeh, on 2021-April-05, 17:27, said:

3N over 3S showed a lack of understanding about the auction, but in reality was going to work out well (if bad bidding never gained, we’d all give up the game...it would be too tough), but North, who showed an even greater lack of understanding with 3S then made matters much worse with an egregious 4S bid.

The auction isn't clear, North bid 4♣/3N

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2021-April-05, 19:06, said:

The auction isn't clear, North bid 4♣/3N

Thanks. I was reading this on a small screen.

4C is how one bids something like AKJ10xx x Axx Kxx

[jillybean]

mikeh, on 2021-April-05, 17:27, said:

More importantly, with our KJx in diamonds, expecting partner to usually hold 2 of them, can we really expect partner to bid 3N on Qx or worse? Yes, I see that partner did exactly that....but 3N was a terrible bid. Of course, North had, it seems, no intention of actually listening to what south’s bidding was saying...

North suspects South has little, or no values in ♦, however after the 3N bid, is it unfair for North to picture South with ♦Ax?

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2021-April-05, 20:05, said:

North suspects South has little, or no values in ♦, however after the 3N bid, is it unfair for North to picture South with ♦Ax?

North absolutely should think that south has something in diamonds. Void AJxxx Axx Axxxx would be bid exactly as south bid it.so too would 1=5=2=5 with Ax or 0=5=3=5 with Qxx

0=5=3=5 with nothing in diamonds is a true nightmare but 3N is probably the least of evils, tho I’ve raised partner’s announced long, strong major to game on a void more than once and it might well be the best call. Why can’t north hold something like AKxxxxx x Kx Kxx?

[jillybean]

mikeh, on 2021-April-05, 17:27, said:

Btw, and this is surely too esoteric for North, but there is nothing wrong with bidding 3D over 3C. This should NOT be understood as an attempt to play in diamonds but as a probe in an effort to find the right contract. South should bid 3S with 2=5=1=5, 3N with a diamond stopper and 3H with the actual hand, over which North bids 3N, secure in the knowledge that she’s not missing a 6-2 spade fit.

Hasn't North has already asked for a ♦ stopper with 2♦? If so, should 3♦ be asking for half a stopper or 2 card ♠ support?

[DavidKok]

jillybean, on 2021-April-06, 14:49, said:

Hasn't North has already asked for a ♦ stopper with 2♦? If so, should 3♦ be asking for half a stopper or 2 card ♠ support?

Without prior discussion 3♦ asks "I heard you when you rebid clubs, now tell me something more". This can be a half stopper or a spade 'fragment', such as Jx or better. It is a matter of partnership agreement if 3♣ is 'patterning out' and can still contain a (good) diamond stopper, or if it denies a full stopper, or if it denies a stopper if weak but can contain one with extra values, or something else. As I said I don't like 3♦ by North because in my system partner is expected to pull 3NT if North bids it on the next round (we just bid 3NT or 4NT directly depending on strength, sacrificing the potential 6-2 spade fit). But this too is a matter of partnership agreement.