[Swammerdam]

Both vul, I am 3rd to speak with

♠AQT943
♥A85
♦K32
♣T

The bidding proceeds

1♣ . 1♥ . 1♠ . Pass
1NT. 2♣ . ?

What call should I make now? (Partner has no profile so assume SAYC. But I hope to also learn what established partnerships would do.)

I felt that I should force to game, but with suits splitting badly 4S could be in trouble (opening heart lead might even be ruffed), especially with some BBO'ers who might bid 1NT with a singleton spade (or even void!)
Anyway, would 3♠ be forcing? I didn't think so.
But the 2♣ but has given me worries about clubs so I'm reluctant to bid 3NT. (Anyway 2NT is too weak and 3NT gives up on spades.)

What are my best choice(s)?

[DavidKok]

I would normally bid 4♠, but I'm very reluctant to rebid 1NT with a singleton. Playing without many agreements I think 4♠ also has the benefit of simplicity. We have a spade fit, we have the values for game, we most likely don't have the values for slam. Time to keep it simple.

If you are more sympathetic towards 1NT rebids on e.g. 1=4=3=5 or 1=4=4=4 on this auction you might want to bid one of the opponents' suits to ask for partner's input. However, I think this is more likely to sow confusion than to resolve your choice of game dilemma, especially as partner will only give a preference to spades with 3-card support, not 2-card support.

Lastly, avoid doubling here at all costs. Normally this is more flexible (though this hand still isn't suitable, in my opinion). Here it has several ways to lose: partner might not know what to do, partner might think it's penalty-oriented, and partner might think they've already described their hand so you are in charge. With so many ways to lose and few ways to win I think this is about as self-sabotaging as you could get, so watch out for that.

[Stephen Tu]

You could always try 2H followed by spades which should be forcing. If playing traditional neg doubles, 1s already should have shown 5 so partner should have already raised with 3 and should show 2 next round.

Only if playing a double denies spades style, 1s only shows 4 or more, then you may have to bid 3s on third round to show 6

[mw64ahw]

I guess 3♠ would be forcing if 1♣-(1♥)-3♠ is invitational

[pescetom]

I don't think 3♠ should be forcing, but if your 1♠ already promised 5+ then it shows an unhappy partner.

What do the 4SF advocates have to say about this situation?

[mike777]

4S wtp,?

If partner has a stiff spade we can discuss that later after the session

I don't think 1NT need guarantee a heart stopper. He can bid his shape and limits the hand

[jillybean]

Keep it simple, 4♠. If partner has a stiff spade, he has misbid his hand.

[Swammerdam]

Thanks for the responses. 4♠ was the consensus, though I'd like to hear more about a 2♥ call.

May I repeat my question with slightly worse spades?

Both vul, I am 3rd to speak with

♠AQ8643
♥A85
♦K32
♣T

The bidding proceeds

1♣ . 1♥ . 1♠ . Pass
1NT. 2♣ . ?

What call should I make now?

- - - - - - - - - - - -

As for rebidding NT with a singleton in partner's suit:
* I almost never do this, but many "pick-up partners" do so very often, sometimes even with a VOID.
* It might seem "least of evils", especially after being confounded by the opponent's over-call.
* What about a 4-4-4-1 (with weak diamonds) when partner responds 2♣ to your 1♦? If reverse shows extra values, and 2♦ shows a better suit than you hold, isn't 2NT your only choice?
* Lacking good spade spots and with suits breaking badly, do you still want to try 4♠ even if partner has two small?

[DavidKok]

With the right shape and total hand strength I would bid 4♠ pretty much regardless of suit quality. If anything you want the good suit for 3NT, not for 4♠. More crucially though, these asking auctions don't actually solve your problem: there is no good way to let partner in on your decision struggles.

I think in advanced partnerships there is room for debating this. Playing 3NT with an 8cM fit is an interesting topic, and a lot can be said about it. However, this normally relies on clear agreements, establishing the fit and then offering the choice of games after. I would not worry about this topic in less experienced partnerships - trying to conceal a fit or offer partner a choice is much more likely to cause problems than to solve any.

On 1♦-2♣ I do not play that 2M shows extras. I find it more valuable to show my shape. If you do play that 2M promises a strong hand you'd likely do well to make 2♦ a punt, and not a shape bid.

[awm]

I think there are a couple options here:

1. Just bid 4♠. I like this on the original hand, as even if partner has singleton spade your spots are enough that the spade game ought to play well.
2. Start with 2♥ (cue-bid, artificial game force) and then bid spades at next opportunity. This is what I’d do on the later example with weaker spots, to reach 3nt if partner has singleton spade.

Note that partner having singleton spade may be more likely than usual since he will normally raise here with three spades (since 1♠ showed five) whereas without competition he might bid 1nt with three spades and a balanced hand (especially 3334/3433).

[smerriman]

 jillybean, on 2025-July-29, 16:13, said:

If partner has a stiff spade, he has misbid his hand.

What are you bidding with a 1435 hand, with clubs that don't look close to rebiddable?

[jillybean]

Ugly, unlucky hand, perhaps I would be better opening 1D?

[smerriman]

That would seem significantly more of a misbid than a 1NT rebid, especially if partner gives you an inverted raise, or later an almost certain preference to your "longer" diamond suit..

[WasWinM]

Don’t complicate the game; it’s hard enough as is. 99% of the time you’ll have at minimum a 6-2 spade fit so bid your most likely game: 4S

Sometimes it really is that simple.

[DavidKok]

 smerriman, on 2025-July-30, 12:44, said:

What are you bidding with a 1435 hand, with clubs that don't look close to rebiddable?

This is, of course, the main question. My personal opinion is that the notion of 'rebiddable' hurts more than it gains, and I like to relax suit quality requirements in favour of shape and range descriptions. But opinions on this are divided, and there's always hands extreme enough that people allow for exceptions.

[mycroft]

Answer: you do what your partner expects you to do.

If that's 1NT, fine; partner will be disappointed, but not upset, when you put dummy down in 4♠.

If that's not 1NT, fine; some auctions will be less comfortable when you rebid ♣Q8432, or you will be at a disadvantage when you choose to pass the "unrebiddable" 12-count, or...but partner will not be upset when you put dummy down in 4♠ because you have the 2 you promised with 1NT.

Now, if you get to the point where you have an agreement, and you think and violate it "because on this hand it's best", and partner is okay with it (perhaps you have a meta-agreement that "if I violate system because 'it's right', then 'my fault if it's wrong' and I won't say another word" (like The Emperor, "even if partner revokes later")) then also fine, until it becomes disclosable (if that ever matters).

If you get to the point where "the system is secondary to Mah Great Judgement, deal with it", and partner is not on your side - things tend to deteriorate very quickly in my experience. Either that or your system soon becomes "you describe your hand to me, and I place the contract. Here, have this catcher's mitt, you'll need it" - which can work very well, if you're good enough. But it does restrict your choice of partners somewhat.