[gwnn]

x
AKJxxx
x
AK9xx

opp

A97xxx

Axx
JTxx

1H-1S-p-p
2C-p-2S-p
4H-p-5C

+440. all white imps. while it would be hard to characterize both NS as experts, assume they play expert std.

[suokko]

I blame both

Neither showed enough respect for the minor fit.

[jdonn]

1♥ fine
P fine
2♣ underbid, I would bid 3♣
2♠ fine
4♥ crazy, if you want to jump to show the nature of your hand then why not 4♣?
5♣ what more do you want him to do, his trumps are bad and partner said HEARTS in a big voice and clubs in a little voice
P well partner did cuebid before going to clubs, north really is probably worth a flier at slam here

I find fault with north the whole way, and though south's decisions were a little questionable they were much more reasonable.

[ONEferBRID]

Most, if not all, of the blame to Opener.

When Responder failed to make a Neg-DBL, Opener should protect partner
with a re-opening DBL.

That said, after Opener rebids 2C, partner had to come up with a forcing bid.
2S! by Responder did not necessarily show support for Hts. He could bid 3H
because of the 6 card suit, but 3C might be better-- showing at least a 5-5 shape--
.... or Josh's 4C-jump perhaps even better.

1H ( 1S) p p
2C - 2S!
3C - 4C
4D! ( Redwood) - 5C ( 2 - cQ )
6C

[gnasher]

Are we all sure that 2♠ shows this sort of hand, rather than something like KQJ10xx x xxx xx?

Well, obviously I'm not sure, because I'm asking the question. But is everyone else sure?

[gnasher]

I don't agree with the 4♥ bid, but I think South should bid 6♣ over it. Opener is obviously 6-5 or longer, so there are no side-suit losers. 4♥ sounds like a one-loser suit or better, so 6♣ is unlikely to be worse than a ruffing finesse through the overcaller.

[helene_t]

gnasher, on Dec 2 2009, 11:26 AM, said:

Are we all sure that 2♠ shows this sort of hand, rather than something like KQJ10xx x xxx xx?

Well, obviously I'm not sure, because I'm asking the question.  But is everyone else sure?

Your example hand would be more typical I think. Or maybe such a weak hand should just pass or take preference to hearts. Even so I think the OP hand is too strong for 2♠.

This hand should raise clubs I think. Obviously too strong for 3♣ so I bid 4♣.

[andy_h]

I don't think 2♠ is suggestion of contract with KQJ10xx, or else you might be stuck with 12+counts with 5 spades say KJ109x that wanted to penalty pass but now has a good fit for opener's 2nd suit. Given that opener only bid 2♣ and along with LHO and RHO's silence, I don't think a hand with KQJ10xx and out is likely.

Having said that, I blame North much much more on this hand. Really can't stand 2♣ with 6-5 AKAK with a followup of 4♥ misdescribes his hand by miles.

[Jlall]

2C is god awful, you need nothing for game and are you really scared of going down at the 3 level or that partner will bid too much if you bid 3C?

I am sure 2S is a cue, there are times where I'd like it to be nat NF but that is true of a lot of auctions, I'm sure that I would like a cuebid to be available or else it will be really hard to bid with a majority of my trap passes that have good hands.

[ArtK78]

At the risk of sounding like a "me too," I agree with Josh and Justin that North underbid his hand significantly at his second turn to call. This infected the rest of the auction making it very difficult to get to the right spot.

I also agree that the 2♠ bid by South was a cue bid, not showing a suit. The fact that South has a good (possibly very good) hand after passing the overcall already implies that he has spades, but there is no reason to suggest that the partnership should play in spades.

I don't see how South could bid any stronger than he did. So I give the blame to North.

[gwnn]

how many ♣ can S have when he bid 2♠ (can it be AKJxxx xx xx QJx)? also, where is it forcing to?

[billw55]

Agree 2♣ is underbid. Having done so, north has a chance to redeem himself somewhat by recognizing 2♠ as a good club raise, and returning a 3♦ cue. Next perhaps 3♥ from south, 3♠ from north, and we're off to the races with room left for keycard. Cuebids up the line - what a concept!

[jdonn]

gnasher, on Dec 2 2009, 05:32 AM, said:

I don't agree with the 4♥ bid, but I think South should bid 6♣ over it.  Opener is obviously 6-5 or longer, so there are no side-suit losers.

I disagree so so so much. Opener bid clubs once and hearts twice including once as a jump. Nothing on earth would convince me opener must have more than 4 clubs. In fact, on the hands where north does have 5 clubs and bids that way I'd be quite sure his clubs were bad, probably Axxxx or worse.

[gnasher]

So what sort of hand with only four clubs would bid 2♣ rather than double or 2♥, and would then bid 4♥ opposite what is likely to be shortage?

[jdonn]

gnasher, on Dec 2 2009, 11:51 AM, said:

So what sort of hand with only four clubs would bid 2♣ rather than double or 2♥, and would then bid 4♥ opposite what is likely to be shortage?

I doubt I could come up with any example that you wouldn't disagree with. I'm quite sure I could come up with plenty of examples on which some would bid that way, along the lines of xxx KQJTxx - AKxx.

I should ask the obvious counter question. On what hand with 5 good clubs would opener bid this way? (or maybe you agree with me that if he has 5 clubs they must be bad?)

[gnasher]

jdonn, on Dec 2 2009, 06:16 PM, said:

I doubt I could come up with any example that you wouldn't disagree with. I'm quite sure I could come up with plenty of examples on which some would bid that way, along the lines of xxx KQJTxx - AKxx.

I should ask the obvious counter question. On what hand with 5 good clubs would opener bid this way? (or maybe you agree with me that if he has 5 clubs they must be bad?)

I don't think opener can have completely self-sufficient hearts, because he bid 2♣ rather that some number of hearts. Hence 4♥ must allow for the possibility of conversion to 5♣.

How about x KQ109xx x AKxxx ?

[OleBerg]

gnasher, on Dec 2 2009, 12:26 PM, said:

Are we all sure that 2♠ shows this sort of hand, rather than something like KQJ10xx x xxx xx?

Well, obviously I'm not sure, because I'm asking the question. But is everyone else sure?

I think you've put your hand on the heart of the problem:

North thought that 2♠ was natural and non-forcing, in which case it is not unreasonable to stay in a game. Of course North' initial 2♣ is nonsense. 4♣ seems right to me, as four hearts is a fine contract, facing a doubleton and a soft queen.

South thought he had made a cuebid in support of clubs. Even under these circumstances, 5♣ is to conservative for me, but I guess it is not completely wacko?

[helene_t]

Learned something from the forums once again. I used to think that 2♠ should be natural and non-forcing. I guess I was confused with situations in which South may have no-where else to go with a weak hand with lots of space, like
1♥-(1♠)-p-(p)
x-(p)-p-(2♦)
p*-(p)-

*agreed as forcing