[Free]

---

2♦ = weak with 5+M and 5+ in another suit (may be both Majors).

What do you do?

Responses:
Pass = long ♦ or suspicion that opener has ♦
2♥ = 2+♥ P/C (if you rebid 3♥ next, you show your own suit)
2♠ = 3+♠ P/C (if you rebid 3♠ next, you show your own suit)
2NT = GF relay
3♣ = nat NF
3♦ = INV, either tolerance for both Majors or 3-suited with a short M
3♥ = both Majors or 3-suited short ♠, PRE
3♠ = 3-suited short ♥, PRE
3NT = to play
4♣ = transfer your best M
4♦ = bid your best M
4M = to play

[hrothgar]

Looks like a hideous misfit
I am passing.

(I tried to figure out if there was any convincing case to be made for 2♠, but couldn't find one)

[nige1]

Free, on 2014-August-03, 06:35, said:

2♦ = weak with 5+M and 5+ in another suit (may be both Majors). What do you do? Responses:
Pass = long ♦ or suspicion that opener has ♦
2♥ = 2+♥ P/C (if you rebid 3♥ next, you show your own suit)
2♠ = 3+♠ P/C (if you rebid 3♠ next, you show your own suit)
2NT = GF relay
3♣ = nat NF
3♦ = INV, either tolerance for both Majors or 3-suited with a short M
3♥ = both Majors or 3-suited short ♠, PRE
3♠ = 3-suited short ♥, PRE
3NT = to play
4♣ = transfer your best M
4♦ = bid your best M
4M = to play

---

IMO Pass = 10, 2♥ = 9, 2N = 5.

[PhilKing]

You probably know my answer from last year's multi thread which featured a remarkably similar hand.

2♥ then 3♦ can be used to show this hand (an invitational red two-suiter). I just need one card in diamonds to make game good, but I can't really blast it.

Assuming partner bids 2♠, you don't need 2NT as a relay. You can play it as a puppet to 3♣, so I think all hand types can be sorted. 3♣ is still available as p/c.

All strategies that do not give partner a chance to value their hand are worth of the dreaded Nigel 5 out of 10 imo.

[gwnn]

4♥. Who knows?

[whereagles]

4♥ for me as well. The good news is no one can dbl this

[rbforster]

Why help out the opponents? How about 4♣ and passing partner's expected 4♥ transfer? He's more likely in a better position to declare (our holdings don't care), and they may think we've screwed up our system and have a harder time leading.

[Cyberyeti]

I'm bidding 4♥, 4♣ could also work. While our holdings don't care, it could be to our advantage not to reveal the 6 card diamond suit immediately, maybe they'll play me for more hearts than I have and not punch me out (eg dummy decks with x(x)/Q in the reds and they play trumps to stop me ruffing diamonds).

[foobar]

+1 for 4♥.

[the hog]

As 4H is W is pass/correct, this may not be a great bid! If you want to play in 4H, bid 2H followed by 4H or go via 2NT.

[whereagles]

Ron, it's not P/C. It's "to play".

[the hog]

whereagles, on 2014-August-04, 19:32, said:

Ron, it's not P/C. It's "to play".

This is Matula's scheme.

Responses: Pass = a) found me diamonds, pd! b) hope you got diamonds, pd! c) tactical (if 4th seat doubles, opener: Pass = D, XX = S-H, 2M = M-C) 2H = p/c, 2+H
2S = p/c, usu. 3+S unless 1H-2S
2N = strong relay
3C = nat NF
3D = invite+, support for both majors
3H = preempt, p/c
3S = preempt, support for spades and both minors, short hearts
3N = to play
4D = asks pd to bid major
4C/4H/4S = natural

Yes, you are right.

[Free]

the hog, on 2014-August-04, 23:34, said:

This is Matula's scheme.

The response scheme we play is indeed based on Matula, but it's not entirely the same. Why do I even bother to write down our response scheme if you're going to respond using another scheme?

[the hog]

Free, on 2014-August-05, 01:00, said:

The response scheme we play is indeed based on Matula, but it's not entirely the same. Why do I even bother to write down our response scheme if you're going to respond using another scheme?

Because you are so loveable.

[Fluffy]

I am going to play at least 4♥ but I See no harm on trying 2NT first.

[the_clown]

Fluffy, on 2014-August-05, 02:32, said:

I am going to play at least 4♥ but I See no harm on trying 2NT first.

+1 provided I can still sign off in 4♥ after starting with 2NT

[wank]

i pass and expect to write down a large number in the plus column at the end of the hand.

[Free]

It seems like you're either an optimist (= realist?) or a pessimist. I was pessimistic and passed expecting a plus. Partner had ♥T8 and ♦Q (5-5 blacks no Ace) and 4♥ made easily.

[the hog]

Free, on 2014-August-06, 08:56, said:

It seems like you're either an optimist (= realist?) or a pessimist. I was pessimistic and passed expecting a plus. Partner had ♥T8 and ♦Q (5-5 blacks no Ace) and 4♥ made easily.

Ok. Because I now know that pd had those 3 great cards I will also bid 4H. Before I would have taken the same route as you and passed.
Next time pd will have everything in the blacks; you will be forced at trick 1 and will go a couple off. That's life.

[nige1]

IMO Pass = 10, 2♥ = 9, 4♣ = 8, 4♥ = 7, 2N = 6.
Amended I accept the optimist's good argument -- and, in practice, game made