[mike777]

club suit not good enough for 3c over 2c opener, hand not strong enough.

2 reasons why a direct suit bid over 2c is a pretty rare bid.

[Free]

mgoetze, on 2011-January-06, 17:06, said:

Huh... and what did North think his 4♣ bid shows?

Probably ♥ fit and cue for some reason...

[gwnn]

gszeszycki, on 2011-January-06, 20:59, said:

this looks like a self created problem to me why did you not bid 3c right away??

please dont tell me you dont consider this a positive response hand--- after u bid 3c
it is easy to bid 4c and leaves p little doubt about the nature of your hand. The way you
are bidding it leaves partner completely clueless at best and worse misled (what would
you do if p suddenly bid say 6h). Bidding 4c now only helps p a tiny little bit.

because 2♠ shows a 16+ hand with spades (read the opening post!), 2♣ shows a weak 2 in diamonds or a strong opening.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

3H was fine, in the previous round you could have bid 3C instead of 2D,
but due to the semi bal. nature and the control poor hand 2D is fine.

4C from p denies a spade control (at least in form of values), it should
show a club control - shortage or values, that is not clear.

I would bid 5D.

Since 3D was NF, 3H showed some live, but you dont have more.

With kind regards

Marlowe

PS: After having read the other posts, some comments

#1 without lots of gadgets, you dont have enough room over 3D to keep 3H
as natural, if opener is 6-4, he should open 1D.
If responder has a 5 card suit, he can bid 2H naturally, so the only 5 card
suit left would be Qxxxx or what ever.
This assumes, that you just play 2D as waiting the rest as naturally.

Obviously if you happen to play a more complicate structure, with 2H real
weak, than this will be different, but than you are mostlikely already in gf
mode after 2D.

#2 3D showes a 6 carder, so 2 card support is enough, again without lots of artifical
stuff open strong 2-suited hands with only a 5 card minor with 1D.

[Fluffy]

very interesting bidding where both players bid controls before having a fit and surprisingly they end up playing with 6 trumps

[gwnn]

Does anybody ever read the opening post??? 3♣ was not an option the round before!

[tolvyrj]

I dont understand the bidding; is 2C somesort of a strong bid or one of those 2 way.ie. strong any or weak 2 in D. Whatever if 2C is the first one so just strong, i would have bid 3C in first round KQxxxx is alone strong enough for some positive answer. If 2C was the latter case i would have bid 4C to the 3D what else. 3H will be taken as a natural 5- card suit not as something looking for Nt.

[mike777]

tolvyrj, on 2011-January-07, 12:52, said:

I dont understand the bidding; .... Whatever if 2C is the first one so just strong, i would have bid 3C in first round KQxxxx is alone strong enough for some positive answer.

A positive response takes up a lot of room. You need a heck more than KQxxxx for a pos. response.

At least 1.5QT plus more. You need a good long suit and more.

Positive response in a suit means more, much more, than just some dead minimum gf response.

[MrAce]

mike777, on 2011-January-07, 13:13, said:

A positive response takes up a lot of room. You need a heck more than KQxxxx for a pos. response.

At least 1.5QT plus more.

Positive response means more, much more, than just some dead minimum gf response.

Since when 7 hcp and KQxxxx suit considered as just dead minimum gf vs a 23+ ?

gwnn, on 2011-January-07, 07:33, said:

Does anybody ever read the opening post??? 3♣ was not an option the round before!

I am reading the opening post, 1 more time, and still cant see where it says 3♣ was not an option previous round. (perhaps i shd change my glasses ) I would think opener post should mention it, if only comments after 2♦ and on are welcome.

[mike777]

MrAce, on 2011-January-07, 13:18, said:

Since when 7 hcp and KQxxxx suit considered as just dead minimum gf vs a 23+ ?

forever your example is more than KQxxxx and is still far too little, and btw 2c does not promise 23 hcp.

---

btw the 2d bid was alerted and in tiny print we see that 2c can be a weak two bid in d.

[MrAce]

mike777, on 2011-January-07, 13:19, said:

forever your example is more than KQxxxx and is still far too little, and btw 2c does not promise 23 hcp.

---

btw the 2d bid was alerted and in tiny print we see that 2c can be a weak two bid in d.

Ahhh, i didnt know that we can click on the bidding alerts as if we are in BBO and see the alerts, totally my bad. If 2♣ doesnt mean 23+ i have to take all my comments back.

I was wondering, and checked the opener's post many times to see a note at the bottom or something , now i know why. Thanks and sorry

[OleBerg]

Valardent, on 2011-January-06, 16:51, said:

This was the bidding :

---

It drifted 2 off for a well deserved loss of 15 imps as 5♦= was played in the other room.

First things first: Don't open 2♣ on that.

[Fluffy]

MrAce, on 2011-January-07, 13:18, said:

I am reading the opening post, 1 more time, and still cant see where it says 3♣ was not an option previous round. (perhaps i shd change my glasses ) I would think opener post should mention it, if only comments after 2♦ and on are welcome.

Change your glasses or hover the mouse over 2♣ and click

[tolvyrj]

Ok sry, i didnt know how to use that "click" system. I agree first round 3C was not possoble bid, but prd 3D confirms a strong hand yes? Now IMO u dont have a choice, u must bid 4C; suit is too good to hide when u know prd is strong. 3H is stab in the dark; its natural by nature 4+ cards, there is no way prd would understand it as bid which seeks 3Nt.
What if 3Nt is u last good spot? Then u got u self a raw deal, but u cant know that and have no way to guess that after 3D bid; u system didnt work out this time, but hey there is no perfect sys in this world.

[whereagles]

OleBerg, on 2011-January-07, 13:54, said:

First things first: Don't open 2♣ on that.

That wasn't the main reason for the disaster. Add the spade queen or so and you'd have a fine 2♣ opener and the same auction problems anyway.

[y66]

gnasher, on 2011-January-06, 11:50, said:

Regarding your primary question, one reasonable method is to play 3♥ over 3♦ as artificial, somewhere between a second negative and a waiting bid. 3NT over 3♦ shows 5+ hearts. If you combine that with using 2♣-2♦;3M as four of the major and five diamonds, you have a half-playable system.

Still, the best way to make this sequence work is not to have it very often. It's seems particularly foolish to stretch to open 2♣ on a hand where you're going to have to rebid 3♦.

OleBerg, on 2011-January-07, 13:54, said:

First things first: Don't open 2♣ on that.

Yeah, don't open 2♣ there.

gnasher's half-playable system works as advertised when it comes up which for me, so far, has only been twice as frequently as a lunar eclipse on the winter solstice. Next one is 2094 I think.

Also, I think 3D should exclude hands that have any interest in 3N.

[nigel_k]

I don't mind the 2♣ opening but it is certainly a minimum when the suit is diamonds.

IMO you need to be able to make a positive response on this hand type - where you have a pretty good suit and a smattering of values but not enough to be sure of going past 3NT if there is not fit. Then you can just bid 2♣-3♣-3♦-3NT-Pass. Otherwise this hand is much too hard. As it happens 5♦ or 4NT are not much worse than 3NT but that need not always be the case.