[thepossum]

---

IMPs

What are the considerations and possible bids

A simple 1C or something else?

[DavidKok]

The hand is too strong for 1NT. Some pairs play 3♣ as this hand, but personally I use a weaker hand type for this.

I think 1♣ is the best option. 2NT is an alternative, a slight misbid but it will frequently work well. With 6 running clubs and two outside tricks a weird gambling 3NT might also work, despite officially having the wrong shape. The downside of 1♣ is that we will likely have to bid 3NT over partner's 1M response (we are still too strong for 3♣) - 2NT or 2♦ 'fake reverse' would work well too, but none of the options are very attractive.

[thepossum]

Thanks David

1C is likely to follow on 1C-(1S)-P-(2H)

Or 1C-1S-2D-2H


West has a hand I would have opened 1 or 2 spades. Probably 1S

The system doesn't have 3NT unusual. That would be taken as 25+ or something

I ended up deciding on a preempt but had no idea what level so bid 5C

If you start 1C and keep bidding clubs North will eventually bid diamonds

Forgot to say. In my system 3C is weak with long clubs and not much else

North could have opened 1D. I may have done or 2 or 3

[pescetom]

It's a good argument for not having an artificial meaning for 3NT opposite a passed hand, if you were so lucky then go for it at IMPs.
If it goes down 4 on a spades lead then tant pis, as sanst would say.

In one partnership this is an automatic 2NT, in others it should be 1♣.

[thepossum]

2NT could have worked, likely raised to 3

Almost every nS contract likely to go down 1 double dummy

[LBengtsson]

Without being influenced with the possible auctions shown in earlier comments, I would open this hand 1♣ even though I have not quite got a sensible rebid - which is always something I think about opening any hand. The problem is it could let the opps. into the auction and find a fit, and make it difficult to find your best, if not quite ideal contract.

The only alternative, I feel, is opening this with 2NT which I do not like as two suits are open. But hey, partner could have some form of stoppers in both

[thepossum]

I have a followup question

Please bear with me and don't be too distracted by the apparently ordinary bidding - as I said I would have opened 1 spade

Your partner is wondering where all the good cards are, and you have to lead

---

Bear in mind the clue that all NS contracts go down 1 double dummy

[thepossum]

Thanks for all the comments and discussion

This is the hand which should in theory have been 5C-1 but due to a favourable lead gave me all the tricks - I claim no credit for this good fortune

Other auctions ended in 4D-1 or if South and North elected to defend were able to defend 3H-2 by East

Who knows how it would have ended up with 4 good bidders

I can't tell you what would have happened after 2NT - I suspect North would have bid 3NT for 3NT-1

---

[DavidKok]

I'd have opened the West hand 2♠, and a top spade lead seems clear in your example. There are two issues with a lead other than a top spade:
1) The opponents might have a way to pitch their spade losers.
2) Partner will never assume our spades are this good if we lead anything else.

[bluenikki]

thepossum, on 2023-April-02, 12:36, said:

Forgot to say. In my system 3C is weak with long clubs and not much else

Surely not in fourth seat!!

[LBengtsson]

The problem with opening 5♣ here, even though you got a fortunate lead and made the contract +2 is that you have to make 11 tricks whereas in 3NT you have to make only 9. Only if partner turns up with some shortness in the majors and some trumps does 5♣ work - or if the opps. mess up on the defense.

Opposite a passed partner, the chances of making a slam are incredibly slim. You end up in a contract of 4♠ (that probably makes except for bad breaks) if you open 2NT and partner has ♠KQxxx ♥xxx ♦xxx ♣xx, whereas if you open 1♣, partner bids 1♠ and where do you go from there?

I think there is no easy way to bid this hand. As I said, on a opening bid I am always looking at my next bid also. It is not unusual to open 2NT with 6m332 shape, and it does save trying to find an adequate rebid if you decide to open 1♣ instead. If you open 1♣ - 1♠ - and then rebid 2NT you are undervaluing the hand: it looks more than a 18-19 (semi) balanced with 8 playing tricks in your own hand. That is just my opinion, for what it is worth.

[bluenikki]

thepossum, on 2023-April-02, 16:37, said:

Bear in mind the clue that all NS contracts go down 1 double dummy

You mean all _game_ contracts, don't you?

[thepossum]

bluenikki, on 2023-April-03, 12:04, said:

You mean all _game_ contracts, don't you?

No. All the likely (and actually bid) part scores too

Strangely the EW contact that was bid - 3H - also goes down 1 double dummy

Actual scores may vary - like the poor soul who risked 3NT and ended in 6NT-4 or the lucky person in 5C+2

Just thinking - maybe a psychy 1NT could have worked

[Gilithin]

You have an Acol 2 in clubs so you make the systemic bid for that. In Benjaminised Acol, SEF or Forum D that would be 2♣; in Reverse Benji 2♦; and in Standard American or Precision 1♣. When you play 3 weak 2 bids, you make these hands more difficult. That's a trade off. If the concept makes you uncomfortable, change the system.

[blackshoe]

Gilithin, on 2023-April-03, 16:47, said:

You have an Acol 2 in clubs so you make the systemic bid for that. In Benjaminised Acol, SEF or Forum D that would be 2♣; in Reverse Benji 2♦; and in Standard American or Precision 1♣. When you play 3 weak 2 bids, you make these hands more difficult. That's a trade off. If the concept makes you uncomfortable, change the system.

Are novices allowed to change the system? :-)

[thepossum]

blackshoe, on 2023-April-03, 17:57, said:

Are novices allowed to change the system? :-)

I reckon all Bridge players should be encouraged to be themselves

[Tramticket]

Gilithin, on 2023-April-03, 16:47, said:

You have an Acol 2 in clubs so you make the systemic bid for that. In Benjaminised Acol, SEF or Forum D that would be 2♣; in Reverse Benji 2♦

I have never played SEF or Forum D, but in Benjaminised Acol this is still some way short of a 2♣ opening, which really should promise at least nine playing tricks if your suit is a minor. This is a very normal 1♣ opening in Acol (Benjaminised or not).

[bluenikki]

thepossum, on 2023-April-03, 16:19, said:

No. All the likely (and actually bid) part scores too

How does 4♣ go down?

The auction ... 3♣ - 3♥ - 4♣ seems reasonable to me.

[thepossum]

bluenikki, on 2023-April-04, 06:45, said:

How does 4♣ go down?

The auction ... 3♣ - 3♥ - 4♣ seems reasonable to me.

Maybe but you may end in 4D and have to bid 5 C

It was called a rhetorical statement and a bit of fun too

Do we really have to quibble about such things - every contract bid (and those suggested above) were likely to go down 1 trick double dummy with a few weird exceptions - like making 5C+2

I still think the winning bid would have been 1NT

[TylerE]

thepossum, on 2023-April-04, 17:14, said:

It was called a rhetorical statement and a bit of fun too

I suspect your definition of "fun" is our "that's 5 minutes of my life I'm never getting back".