[pork rind]

[

Scoring: IMP

---

its the last hand of a team match. you are trailing by about the diff between game and slam(or the diff between small slam and grand). in first position you open 1h.

bidding
south west north east
1H P 2C p
2N p 3H p
4H p 5D p
?
playing sayc with a first time partner. rate your bids
what do you think your prime responsibility here is to your partner? what is he looking for?

[cherdano]

pork rind, on Feb 18 2005, 03:16 PM, said:

south  west    north    east
  1H      P        2C        p
  2N      p        3H        p
  4H      p        5D        p
  ? 
playing sayc with a first time partner.  rate your bids
what do you think your prime responsibility here is to your partner?  what is he looking for?

I really hate 4♥ opposite a completely unlimited hand. I haven't played SAYC for quite some time, so I don't really know whether I have an alternative. However, since I bid 2NT 1st round, I hope I am playing a version of SAYC where this shows 12-14 points, and can be passed. In that case I really should start cue-bidding after 3♥, since my partner won't misjudge my hand as too strong. So 3♠ over 3♥. I abstain over 5♦. Partner may be looking for spade control and/or ♣A, and it's too late to show both of them.

Quote

what do you think your prime responsibility here is to your partner?

Convince him to switch to 2/1

[TimG]

I don't think partner is looking for grand, but I can cater to the possibility by bidding 5♠ now. If partner is looking for the grand and wants to hear about my ace of clubs, he can bid 5N over 5♠ and I will happily bid 6♣. I don't think I have quite enough to bid the grand over 5N, make my ♦J the ♣J and maybe.

But, I'm certainly accepting the invitation to slam, so I might as well try to cater to a grand slam search along the way.

BTW, is it clear that 3♥ is forcing in SAYC? Isn't this the way you show a three-card limit raise? I'm sure partner intended it as forcing since he bid 5♦ over 4♥, but I would have thought 3♥ was non-forcing.

Tim

PS The state of the match does not matter to me.

[Free]

2NT is an awful bid imo, I think it shows a lot more strength in standard approach. This also means partner is searching for slam with his 3♥ bid and you refuse to show controls. Weird bidding, I'll just settle for 5♥ now, the damage has been done already.

[TimG]

Quote

2NT is an awful bid imo, I think it shows a lot more strength in standard approach.

I think it shows a balanced minimum.

Quote

This also means partner is searching for slam with his 3♥ bid and you refuse to show controls.  Weird bidding, I'll just settle for 5♥ now, the damage has been done already.

Surely you can at least bid 6♥.

[cherdano]

Free, on Feb 18 2005, 03:41 PM, said:

2NT is an awful bid imo, I think it shows a lot more strength in standard approach.  This also means partner is searching for slam with his 3♥ bid and you refuse to show controls.  Weird bidding, I'll just settle for 5♥ now, the damage has been done already.

I think you are right about 2NT for official SAYC, where 2/1 promises a rebid, and thus 2NT shows extra strength. However, many seem to play 2NT shows 12-14.

About 3♥, I think this is an official game force. Limit raises are shown by raising to 3♥ directly.

Btw, if I am forced to bid over 5♦, I agree 5♠ should be right.

Arend

[joker_gib]

Well if I promised 12-14, they are pretty good !

I would have cue bid my ♣A (which is probably a golden card) on 3♥ and now I bid 5♠ the strongest bid I think !

[kgr]

2NT is minimal (12-14) for me. Not sure it really is SAYC, but most will play it like this.
Your partner first bids ♣ and then support you. For me this is GF and some interest in slem.
If I play with my regular partner then this sequence shows: A good 5+ card ♣, ♥ support and slem interest.
I now would have to give my first cue including usage of serious 3NT.
I would have bid 3♠ instead of 4♥

Not sure what 5♦ is here:
- showing first round control in ♦ (and no first round control in ♠ or ♣)
- voidwood?
..I would try 5♠.

[TimG]

cherdano, on Feb 18 2005, 10:48 AM, said:

Limit raises are shown by raising to 3♥ directly.

Ah yes, in SAYC a direct limit raise does not promise four-card support.

[flytoox]

Just bid 6C. This should imply both C and S 1st round control. Pd should have a very good hand to try 5D.

[pork rind]

---

i actually held the north hand and would have liked to hear 3c after 2c.
in the old days we had a box on the convention card that you checked that said 2/1 response forcing to game unless suit rebid(something some still play). we did not play forcing 1nt. but 90 % of bridge is judgment and hand evaluation. so it was a workable system(and it still works). i actually took 2n to show extras but as i said first time to play with this part. i consider 3h absolutely forcing in this seq. partner bid the 5s, i bid 5n, and he bid 6h. makes 7 of course but he could not see that from his hand.

[TimG]

pork rind, on Feb 18 2005, 11:40 AM, said:

partner bid the 5s, i bid 5n, and he bid 6h. makes 7 of course but he could not see that from his hand.

Partner was lazy not to bid 6♣ over 5N.

[luke warm]

Free, on Feb 18 2005, 09:41 AM, said:

2NT is an awful bid imo, I think it shows a lot more strength in standard approach. This also means partner is searching for slam with his 3♥ bid and you refuse to show controls. Weird bidding, I'll just settle for 5♥ now, the damage has been done already.

been much easier if 1nt had been opened, eh buddy?

[junyi_zhu]

pork rind, on Feb 18 2005, 04:40 PM, said:

---

i actually held the north hand and would have liked to hear 3c after 2c.
in the old days we had a box on the convention card that you checked that said 2/1 response forcing to game unless suit rebid(something some still play). we did not play forcing 1nt. but 90 % of bridge is judgment and hand evaluation. so it was a workable system(and it still works). i actually took 2n to show extras but as i said first time to play with this part. i consider 3h absolutely forcing in this seq. partner bid the 5s, i bid 5n, and he bid 6h. makes 7 of course but he could not see that from his hand.

You can probably bid 3C over 1H as a strong jumpshift if you play sayc and later raise your partner in hearts. Still, over partner's 2NT rebid, you can splinter 4D to show strong hearts and short D. Anyway, it's a simple hand for any reasonable system I believe.

[luis]

Maybe I'm evil but I think that 2NT, 4H and 5d are really horrible bids.
Even playing 2NT as 12-14 natural I'd rebid 2h or 3c and not 2NT then 4H over 3H is like saying "I don't have a real opening bid" message that is in serious contradiction with 2NT. Finally about 5d I think I'm out of words.

[mike777]

Good Grief!

Jacoby 2nt is as standard in expert SAYC as it is in 2/1. Note 99% of 2/1 conventions come from standard american bidding. In fact one could argue there is no such thing as "standard" 2/1 despite what most of BBO players think.

There are Lawrence and Hardy books but even they do not agree.

[TimG]

luis, on Feb 18 2005, 04:14 PM, said:

Maybe I'm evil but I think that 2NT, 4H and 5d are really horrible bids.
Even playing 2NT as 12-14 natural I'd rebid 2h or 3c and not 2NT then 4H over 3H is like saying "I don't have a real opening bid" message that is in serious contradiction with 2NT. Finally about 5d I think I'm out of words.

And, after all that they were just one call (6♣ over 5NT) away from getting to the grand.

[cherdano]

TimG, on Feb 18 2005, 10:34 PM, said:

luis, on Feb 18 2005, 04:14 PM, said:

Maybe I'm evil but I think that 2NT, 4H and 5d are really horrible bids.
Even playing 2NT as 12-14 natural I'd rebid 2h or 3c and not 2NT then 4H over 3H is like saying "I don't have a real opening bid" message that is in serious contradiction with 2NT.  Finally about 5d I think I'm out of words.

And, after all that they were just one call (6♣ over 5NT) away from getting to the grand.

That's because 2NT and 4♥ were underbids, whereas 5♦ was an overbid.

Arend

[dogsbreath]

whatever my p is looking for .. i havent got it .. PASS
Rgds Dog