[microcap]

A two part question: I will post the second after seeing the first bunch of answers.
Playing 2/1 ...

You hold:

Scoring: none

---

[sorry this is IMP's and both sides are not vul.]

Partner opens 1♥, LHO passes. You bid 1♠, now 2♥ from partner [opps all pass].

What is your next bid?

[foo]

1H-1S;2H-4S

With only 6 ♠'s, with such a bad ♠ suit I might bid 3N instead. But with 7 ♠'s, 4S feels like the better game.

(...and no, I am not going slamming in a misfit auction with such a bad long suit. If We belong in a slam, Opener has enough extras to take another bid over game.)

[benlessard]

3D is my bid now the problem come next turn. My spades arent good enough for a 3S bid and its too premature for a 3Nt/4S bid since partner can still have a good for the 2H bid.

I have no problem with 3C also.

[rogerclee]

The first bid is not the problem; I think 3D is pretty clear. It is better than 3C, since 3D helps evaluate his minor holding better. It is impossible that partner will raise me to 4m, so we don't have any problems there.

I'm willing to bet that 3NT, based on brute strength, is going to be the best contract here if partner shows nothing in spades, but I'm not going to give up on a spade slam if partner shows any interest in spades.

[1eyedjack]

3D seems normal. Partner may have some help in Spades. You have only promised 4 of them after all. If partner comes up with help in Spades you are close to slam, and I fear he will pass an immediate 4S on a lot of hands making slam.

[foo]

To all the 3D bidders:

You really believe ATxxxxx is such a bad suit and AJx is such a good suit that you want to bid your hand as if you were 54 in S+D rather than 73?

[rogerclee]

foo, on Dec 22 2007, 09:49 AM, said:

To all the 3D bidders:

You really believe ATxxxxx is such a bad suit and AJx is such a good suit that you want to bid your hand as if you were 54 in S+D rather than 73?

I'm bidding 3C before I bid 4S. 4S is an out-of-the-park ridiculous bid. What are you going to do when partner puts down Kxx Axxxxx Kx xx? A 10-count, and slam is a wild favorite, with the grand just on a hook.

It costs nothing to force another bid out of partner before making a signoff.

[ArtK78]

I agree with 3♦ now, intending on bidding 4♠ unless partner bids 3♠.

[foo]

rogerclee, on Dec 22 2007, 09:54 AM, said:

foo, on Dec 22 2007, 09:49 AM, said:

To all the 3D bidders:

You really believe ATxxxxx is such a bad suit and AJx is such a good suit that you want to bid your hand as if you were 54 in S+D rather than 73?

I'm bidding 3C before I bid 4S. 4S is an out-of-the-park ridiculous bid. What are you going to do when partner puts down Kxx Axxxxx Kx xx? A 10-count, and slam is a wild favorite, with the grand just on a hook.

It costs nothing to force another bid out of partner before making a signoff.

That "10 count" is all controls and has 3 card support for our 7 card suit; giving Us a 10 card ♠ fit and 10 controls between Us. And no wastage in any suit either.

Doesn't that seem just a tad like "playing partner for the perfect hand"?

Opener is far more likely to have a mundane =1633 12-15 count for this auction.

OTOH, if opener has 2 card ♠ support, giving Us the all important 9 card fit, and a decent 6 loser hand, far more likely than your example, then 4S should get a slam probe out of partner.

Bidding our hand as if we have only 5 S's is not going to excite an opener holding 2 card ♠ support.

[bid_em_up]

foo, on Dec 22 2007, 09:04 AM, said:

1H-1S;2H-4S

With only 6 ♠'s, with such a bad ♠ suit I might bid 3N instead.  But with 7 ♠'s, 4S feels like the better game.

(...and no, I am not going slamming in a misfit auction with such a bad long suit.  If We belong in a slam, Opener has enough extras to take another bid over game.)

Quote

Doesn't that seem just a tad like "playing partner for the perfect hand"?

4S is about the worst bid you can make here. Sorry.

This hand as huge potential for slam, and yet you are signing off.

By bidding 3D, you are not describing a 5-4 hand, partner asked you to further describe your hand (via 2♥) and all 3D does is show a non-minimum with some diamond cards. It does not promise a 4 card suit.

And btw, it cannot be a misfit auction. Its impossible for partner not to have a spade fit and still be able to bid 2♥.

Quote

Doesn't that seem just a tad like "playing partner for the perfect hand"?

No. Partner doesnt need much more than Kxxx xxx KQxxx x, or Kxxx xx xx KJxxx for 6S to be cold, now does he? And both of these hands would be almost subminimum for the 2H call.

You apparently fail to appreciate that all 2H does is ask you to further describe your hand. 4S does nothing of the sort, it gives partner no clue as to your control rich hand.

And...if you think partner is acting over 4S on either of the above hands, I will share a secret with you. He wont.

I will bid 3D as well, followed by 4C (over 3S) or 5C over 4S.

[foo]

bid_em_up, on Dec 22 2007, 10:09 AM, said:

foo, on Dec 22 2007, 09:04 AM, said:

1H-1S;2H-4S

With only 6 ♠'s, with such a bad ♠ suit I might bid 3N instead.  But with 7 ♠'s, 4S feels like the better game.

(...and no, I am not going slamming in a misfit auction with such a bad long suit.  If We belong in a slam, Opener has enough extras to take another bid over game.)

4S is about the worst bid you can make here. Sorry.

This hand as huge potential for slam, and yet you are signing off.

By bidding 3D, you are not describing a 5-4 hand, partner asked you to further describe your hand (via 2♥) and all 3D does is show a non-minimum with some diamond cards. It does not promise a 4 card suit.

And btw, it cannot be a misfit auction. Its impossible for partner not to have a spade fit and still be able to bid 2♥.

Opener can not have a void in ♠'s and 6+H?

Hmmm. 06(34), 07(24), 07(33). Looks possible to me.

But let's give opener =1633 or 17??.
Is x opposite ATxxxxx such a great trump suit that you really want to consider slamming with it?
Even K opposite ATxxxxx rates to have a trump loser.
(Our stiff ♥ x is not that great a trump holding opposite most 7 card ♥ suits either.)

...and of course, We still have the problem that a 3m rebid will not tell an opener with 2 card ♠ support that We have a 9 card ♠ fit.

If Responder had a 5 loser hand, I be much more worried about 4S costing Us a slam. ATxxxxx_x_AJx_AQ is good, but it isn't =that= good.

[rogerclee]

I don't even understand what the logic is here.

Partner opened the bidding.
I have a control-rich 15 count with a 7-card suit.
Let's preempt the bidding to give partner an impossible problem!

If you were going to do that, you might as well have just responded 4S to 1H as a signoff.

[foo]

bid_em_up, on Dec 22 2007, 10:09 AM, said:

Quote

Doesn't that seem just a tad like "playing partner for the perfect hand"?

No. Partner doesnt need much more than
Kxxx xxx KQxxx x, or
Kxxx xx xx KJxxx
for 6S to be cold, now does he? And both of these hands would be almost subminimum for the 2H call.

You apparently fail to appreciate that all 2H does is ask you to further describe your hand. 4S does nothing of the sort, it gives partner no clue as to your control rich hand.

And...if you think partner is acting over 4S on either of the above hands, I will share a secret with you. He wont.

I will bid 3D as well, followed by 4C (over 3S) or 5C over 4S.

Now We are supposing =11= card ♠ fits between the two hands to justify our fear of missing slam?

Also, where are the 6+H suits to justify opener's 2H rebid in your examples?

[foo]

rogerclee, on Dec 22 2007, 10:26 AM, said:

I don't even understand what the logic is here.

Partner opened the bidding.
I have a control-rich 15 count with a 7-card suit.
Let's preempt the bidding to give partner an impossible problem!

If you were going to do that, you might as well have just responded 4S to 1H as a signoff.

Ah, but we =didn't= just bid 1H-4S. Therefore we have a hand that is better than that.

What we do have is a 6 loser hand with a stiff in opener's single suited hand (not a good thing), and an indifferent suit of ATxxxxx.

If opener has 2+S and 6- losers, far more likely than the examples I've been rebutting so far, they know we rate to have 5 level safety opposite our guaranteed to be 7- loser hand and can make a slam move after 1H-1S;2H-4S.

If Opener does not know that his 2+S are valuable, I submit We are even more likely to miss a slam.

[1eyedjack]

foo, on Dec 22 2007, 03:49 PM, said:

To all the 3D bidders:

You really believe ATxxxxx is such a bad suit and AJx is such a good suit that you want to bid your hand as if you were 54 in S+D rather than 73?

On the contrary, I believe that ATxxxxx is such a GOOD suit that I only need a little bit of encouragement from partner in that suit, where bidding an immediate 4S is at risk of not getting it.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

3D.

You may convince me that 3C is better,
due to the addition space it leaves for
partner, but I doubt that it matters.

Of course the hand would fit perfect
if you play contructive WJS, because now
3S would be forcing.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

foo, on Dec 22 2007, 09:04 AM, said:

1H-1S;2H-4S

With only 6 ♠'s, with such a bad ♠ suit I might bid 3N instead. But with 7 ♠'s, 4S feels like the better game.

(...and no, I am not going slamming in a misfit auction with such a bad long suit. If We belong in a slam, Opener has enough extras to take another bid over game.)

Hi,

how do you know, that we are in
a misfit?
Did opener deny 3 spades? No.

I can always bid 4S later, and I
will, but I give opener the chance
to show spade support at the 3 level,
may not help much, but does not hurt
as well.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[nick_s]

bid_em_up, on Dec 22 2007, 10:09 AM, said:

And btw, it cannot be a misfit auction.  Its impossible for partner not to have a spade fit and still be able to bid 2♥.

Hi.
FWIW, I too bid 3D. (wtp?)

Could you elaborate on the statement above please. I agree with everything else you said, but didn't understand this part.

An aside: being old-fashioned, I still use strong jump shifts. This hand does not qualify for that either. The suit is not good enough.

[neilkaz]

Add another vote for 3♦ here to get opener to further describe his hand.