[AL78]

♠J
♥T5
♦AK963
♣AK786

Club game MPs, red against green.

After two passes, RHO opens a weak 2♥. What do you do?

[mw64ahw]

I bid 3♦ taking it to 4♣ over any other bid. This hand should play ok somewhere between 3 & 4 if partner has little.

Or you could swap 3♥ asking for a stopper to both minors as I guess the frequency of the bid would be higher.

[Huibertus]

You can't afford to pass missing a vulnerable minor suit game if partner has fit and 1 ace.

A dummy good enough for 5♣ for instance

---

So bid whatever shows minors, whatever shows a two suiter with one of your suits or in case neither option is available 3♦.

Yes it is risky, and it could lead to disaster but you just can't sell out too cheaply.

[AL78]

I bid 3♦, I didn't like it but we had no way of showing a minor two suiter other than maybe 4NT and I didn't think the hand was strong enough for that.

---

What do you think partner has and what do you do now?

[mw64ahw]

AL78, on 2026-January-16, 05:01, said:

I bid 3♦, I didn't like it but we had no way of showing a minor two suiter other than maybe 4NT and I didn't think the hand was strong enough for that.

---

What do you think partner has and what do you do now?

I guess he has a limited 6-suiter inviting 4♠. Stick to plan and bid 4♣. This shows the strength bound 55 shape. 4♥ would have been unlimitted.

[AL78]

I was struggling to think of a hand which can bid 3♠ but couldn't open 1♠ or 2♠ and I assumed it was a weak two hand that partner decided was unsuitable for opening second at red, in which case it is a misfit hand and we aren't really going anywhere so I decided to pass. By either luck or judgement I wasn't far off:

---

This was +140 and a joint top. Several people bid game in spades or NT going down. Someone went two off in 3♠ and one South was allowed to play in 2♥ two down.

Partner said he didn't want to open 3♠ with a four card major on the side.

[barmar]

AL78, on 2026-January-16, 08:47, said:

Partner said he didn't want to open 3♠ with a four card major on the side.

I also wouldn't open 3♠ with that crappy suit in 2nd seat unfavorable.

[pescetom]

barmar, on 2026-January-16, 15:43, said:

I also wouldn't open 3♠ with that crappy suit in 2nd seat unfavorable.

On the contrary I think that an agreement not to open this hand is looking for trouble, even 2nd seat unfavourable and (all the more reason) with a 4 card major side suit.

[mw64ahw]

I would open East's hand, but it's close between 2&3♠ at these colours. Opening 2♠ I would find the ♥s on this hand.

[AL78]

pescetom, on 2026-January-16, 16:45, said:

On the contrary I think that an agreement not to open this hand is looking for trouble, even 2nd seat unfavourable and (all the more reason) with a 4 card major side suit.

This is one area of bidding I feel left behind, I'm not used to ultra-aggressive pre-empting. I did open 2♠ in 2nd seat at red on these cards which is something I wouldn't normally do, but maybe the frustration of picking up poor hands was starting to get to me:

♠T98754
♥62
♦KT53
♣8

Partner raised to 4♠ and we played there, partner put down:

♠KJ32
♥Q4
♦AJ
♣KQJ92

Although the ♠AQ were over the KJ, a defensive error allowed me to hold it to one down for an 80% board

[pescetom]

AL78, on 2026-January-17, 15:26, said:

This is one area of bidding I feel left behind, I'm not used to ultra-aggressive pre-empting. I did open 2♠ in 2nd seat at red on these cards which is something I wouldn't normally do, but maybe the frustration of picking up poor hands was starting to get to me:

♠T98754
♥62
♦KT53
♣8

That is closer to a psyche than aggression
There is an ocean of difference compared to the hand of East above, which I think is an automatic opening of some kind unless you are hampered by agreements promising a perfecto concentration of strength in the trump suit or forbidding a major on the side.