[Cyberyeti]

Matchpoints:

---

You open 1♥ (12-14 NT, 4 card majors but 4m4M open the minor so most often 5), partner bids 1♠ (2/1 not GF, and 2♣ always 4+ cards)

You have a choice between:

2♥ something of an underbid, 6+♥
3♥ stating your values correctly and your heart length, but partner will expect a better suit (you have a stronger alternative sequence for the death hand, so min a tad lower than is normal)
1N 15-bad19 which is what you'd do if the 6th heart was a club

What do people reckon ?

[DavidKok]

3♥ seems fine to me, especially since it denies a third spade in this system.

[mike777]

I will try 1NT rebid

option2=3H

[Cyberyeti]

DavidKok, on 2025-November-28, 10:12, said:

3♥ seems fine to me, especially since it denies a third spade in this system.

It's not entirely clear it does here, there is a range between a minimum opener and a GF where it's difficult to show 6♥/3♠ give me xxx, AQJxxx, AK, xx I'm too good for 2M and not good enough to GF so probably rebid 3♥

[DavidKok]

The death hand is any hand that is too strong for a simple rebid or 3-card raise with the 6-3 pattern. I think I misunderstood your methods if this hand type might be folded into 3M in your system.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I think it is a min 3H at best, I would go with 2H.
But 1NT? Why not? It would not occur to me at the
table, but why not.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Cyberyeti]

DavidKok, on 2025-November-28, 10:40, said:

The death hand is any hand that is too strong for a simple rebid or 3-card raise with the 6-3 pattern. I think I misunderstood your methods if this hand type might be folded into 3M in your system.

I tend to think that the death hand is stronger than that where if partner has a near minimum response with 5 in his suit you now want to force to game. Our alternative sequence is GF

[TMorris]

2 ♥ for me. Partner will expect a better suit if I bid 3♥.

[akwoo]

I think twice about 1N because my hearts are so terrible I'm worried about setting them up at notrump, but I have a lot of side entries, so 1N it is.

[mw64ahw]

3♥ works for me, but how do you differentiate a 15 hand vs an 18 hand?

[Cyberyeti]

mw64ahw, on 2025-November-28, 11:47, said:

3♥ works for me, but how do you differentiate a 15 hand vs an 18 hand?

We play a 15-bad 19 1N rebid and good 19-21 2N opener, this leaves the 2N rebid free for really big unbalanced hands, bad 18 we probably rebid 3♥, good 18 probably bites the bullet and bids 2N.

[Huibertus]

I don't see why this hand would be too strong for 2♥? That's what I'd bid.
I'd consider 1NT before considering 3♥.

[Tramticket]

3H is traditionally 7 playing tricks. This is a little bit short. I go with 2H.

[P_Marlowe]

mw64ahw, on 2025-November-28, 11:47, said:

3♥ works for me, but how do you differentiate a 15 hand vs an 18 hand?

There are various structures, but the one we are using (our range is 14/15 ... 18/19)
can be found in

https://www.amazon.d...e/dp/0575061146

Basically
2C is a ask, showing a hand with a good 7 onwards
#1 2D says opener is min, i.e. 14/15
#2 answers on the 2-level are mid range, i.e. 16/17, telling something about the
major, 2NT denies certain major holdings
#3 answer on the 3-level are max range

The seq.

1C / 1D - 1H
1NT - 2S

showes exactly 4-4, 8+

Jumps to the 3 level by responder show add. distribution, usually 5-5

2NT by responder is a relay to 3C, 3C can be passed by responder, i.e. with max. and good clubs
opener has to break the xfer

after 3C, responder showes shape, 5-4.
Rebidding his suit, showes 5 in his suit and 4 clubs bidding NT showes 5332

It works, and is not overly complicate.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Cyberyeti]

Tramticket, on 2025-November-28, 16:46, said:

3H is traditionally 7 playing tricks. This is a little bit short. I go with 2H.

As I explained, for us the minimum is a bit lower, I evaluated this as 6.5 which is fine, just the suit isn't what you'd expect

[mike777]

 Cyberyeti, on 2025-November-29, 03:51, said:

As I explained, for us the minimum is a bit lower, I evaluated this as 6.5 which is fine, just the suit isn't what you'd expect

Which raises the important question in bidding theory. Should we ignore, or at least downgrade the potential impact of suit quality?

Bergen told us points schmoints! And
Vulnerability is for children..

Next throw suit quality out...

[mikeh]

A 1N rebid is 15-19? As soon as I read that, I wanted nothing to do with this method. A 5 point range for a 1N rebid is unplayable. Yes, I saw that it was up to a ‘bad’ 19, but it’s still a 5 point range. Responder has a 7 count. Bidding over 1N will sometimes lead to a minus score but passing may sometimes lead to missing a game. And if responder makes an invitational bid, opener has too wide a range. Is 17 enough to accept?

If we are going to be touting non-standard methods, the hand fits very well in mine, lol. Playing an opening 2M as 6 cards and. 10-13 hcp, this is an extremely comfortable 2H rebid, showing 6+ hearts and 14-bad 17 hcp. Indeed, while we have found the 2M to have value in and of itself, the rebid after a 1M opening has proven quite valuable.

[DavidKok]

mike777, on 2025-November-29, 09:26, said:

Which raises the important question in bidding theory. Should we ignore, or at least downgrade the potential impact of suit quality?

Bergen told us points schmoints! And
Vulnerability is for children..

Next throw suit quality out...

Yes! You're starting to get it.

• You should take suit quality into consideration when evaluating the playing strength of your hand.
  
• Showing your shape is extremely important, and vital to let partner assess their hand strength. Sometimes we have to pick a smallest lie, but I'd rather lie about points than about shape most of the time.
  
• To me putting a suit quality requirement on a bid is often a huge warning sign. Now we need two different ways to show a hand with the same distribution and total strength but different quality suits. I don't have that kind of space (with some very rare exceptions)!

Now this of course does not mean to disregard suit quality, but rather that statements like 'partner will expect a better suit' are, to me, doing more harm than good. Are you really sure you have a systemic way to show the hand with a worse suit? Or are you finding out in this thread that your demand for a suit quality has created a system gap? I don't claim to know this system, but I know I don't have room for such luxuries in my own system (and I find misdescribing my shape to be an unwelcome alternative).

P_Marlowe, on 2025-November-28, 10:51, said:

But 1NT? Why not?

A weak suit takes tricks if it can become trumps, but is a liability in NT as it's slow to establish. We might miss a 6-2 fit (at the partscore, game or even slam level), but with this hand I think even a 6-1 misfit might play better in hearts.


Lastly I think people might play 1♥-1♠; 3♥ differently. For me it shows approximately 15-17, 6(+)♥, and is not forcing (stronger hands rebid 3NT, though gadgets exist to save bidding space with these strong hands). I think this hand is an above average 15 with all the aces and kings, the ♥T, and the fact that our only unguarded king is in partner's long suit. I think this hand is worth closer to 16.5, maybe 16, and falls comfortably within my 3♥ rebid range.
And, sorry for the confrontational remark, but it continues to surprise me how many problems people create with their balanced hand bidding.