[pescetom]

MP

---

I'll get linched if I suggest this semi- balanced 18HCP looks like a 2NT opening, let alone that it looks almost too strong

So let's say you opened 1♣ and got a spades response. Your rebid now, playing preferred methods?

[DavidKok]

That's 20 HCP.

I rebid 2♦, art GF. Partner may have not responded 1♠ in my favourite methods.

[pescetom]

 DavidKok, on 2026-April-15, 09:26, said:

That's 20 HCP.

I rebid 2♦, art GF. Partner may have not responded 1♠ in my favourite methods.

I entered the hand from memory and had the diamonds honours slightly wrong, sorry: 18 HCP it now is.

Partner would have transferred spades over 2NT in a standard system (but Stayman in my methods) if that helps you decide what she would do here over 1♣.

[DavidKok]

My 1♠ nominally shows 8+ (though with some shape you may freely upgrade into it).
My favourite way to play 2♦ is GF three-way: 17-19 bal; ♣+♦ reverse (GF opposite 8) or GF 6(+)♣. Over this partner shows degree of slam interest (2♥: yes. 2♠: no.) while asking us to clarify, or zooms past that with specific very shapely hands (2NT+).

[mikeh]

I’d have no problem with 2N at mps in 3rd or 4th, or teams against a significantly better team but otherwise I prefer to stay within my methods.

Which use transfers. So let me assume 1C 1H. Now I bid 1N, showing 2-3 spades and 17-19 hcp. This hand values to the extreme high end of the range. We gave methods over this so how the auction progresses is dependent on what he does next. If he tetransfers to spades, I accept.

[pescetom]

mikeh, on 2026-April-15, 10:48, said:

I’d have no problem with 2N at mps in 3rd or 4th, or teams against a significantly better team but otherwise I prefer to stay within my methods.

Which use transfers. So let me assume 1C 1H. Now I bid 1N, showing 2-3 spades and 17-19 hcp. This hand values to the extreme high end of the range. We gave methods over this so how the auction progresses is dependent on what he does next. If he tetransfers to spades, I accept.

I can see why you are happy playing transfers here, wish I had a partner who would accept to play similar methods.
My first thought was indeed that our T-Walsh pair (absent that evening) would be off to a great start with 1C-1H; 1N.
It's an underbid IMO, but they still exchanged a wealth of information and are only at 1NT.

[pescetom]

 DavidKok, on 2026-April-15, 09:39, said:

My 1♠ nominally shows 8+ (though with some shape you may freely upgrade into it).
My favourite way to play 2♦ is GF three-way: 17-19 bal; ♣+♦ reverse (GF opposite 8) or GF 6(+)♣. Over this partner shows degree of slam interest (2♥: yes. 2♠: no.) while asking us to clarify, or zooms past that with specific very shapely hands (2NT+).

Our 1♠ could be much less, at worst an Ace and four spades.
I too would bid 2♦ (IMO this is too strong for a 2NT rebid even if you are prepared to bid it as balanced) which for me is not GF and is five-way:
- ♣+♦ reverse
- 6(+)♣
- 5+ ♣ 3= ♠
- 5+ ♣ 4= ♠
- 2+ ♣ bal 18-19 4= ♠.
So here I have to show 6+ clubs by bidding 3♣.
Now 2♥ by partner is artificial GF with 8+ points (and that is what she bids).

[Cyberyeti]

I probably open 2N (good 19-21).

My alternatives - show it as 17-bad 19 bal
Show it as a GF with 6+♣ and less than 3 spades once partner responds

[jillybean]

pescetom, on 2026-April-15, 09:24, said:

MP

---

I'll get linched if I suggest this semi- balanced 18HCP looks like a 2NT opening, let alone that it looks almost too strong

So let's say you opened 1♣ and got a spades response. Your rebid now, playing preferred methods?

I have thick skin but this is not quite a 2nt opener but why on earth wouldn't you rebid 2nt?

[pescetom]

 jillybean, on 2026-April-16, 10:02, said:

I have thick skin but this is not quite a 2nt opener but why on earth wouldn't you rebid 2nt?

No need for thick skin, the majority of our players rebid 2NT. I dislike it because I think it's an underbid and because I want a dialogue with partner about shape and fit, a suit slam is still in the picture.
Even playing pure natural (without my convention to show 6+ clubs 2- spades) I would prefer to rebid the diamonds reverse on 3 cards here. Our system has good methods over that and we're still in time to bid NT if that looks best.

[jillybean]

pescetom, on 2026-April-16, 11:27, said:

No need for thick skin, the majority of our players rebid 2NT. I dislike it because I think it's an underbid and because I want a dialogue with partner about shape and fit, a suit slam is still in the picture.
Even playing pure natural (without my convention to show 6+ clubs 2- spades) I would prefer to rebid the diamonds reverse on 3 cards here. Our system has good methods over that and we're still in time to bid NT if that looks best.

I have thick skin for the eye rolls I receive after opening this 2nt.

Are you playing Walsh? I agree this hand is strong but we also have methods over 2nt.
I like 3♦ if your partner will handle it, if there is any doubt I think 2nt is best. KISS