[Fluffy]

♠5
♥AJ10653
♦Q
♣A10862


all vul, you open in second position to hear

1♥-1♠
2♣-2♦
2♥-2♠
3♣-3♥

what now?

[straube]

I don't regard 3H as setting trump; it's just showing tolerance. I've pretty much shown my pattern and 4H will confirm that I really do like hearts. I must have some high cards to go along with opening my 6/5 so even with 2 aces I don't think I have extra.

[gordontd]

Fluffy, on 2011-March-12, 08:33, said:

♠5
♥AJ10653
♦Q
♣A10862


all vul, you open in second position to hear

1♥-1♠
2♣-2♦
2♥-2♠
3♣-3♥

what now?

Why did I rebid 2♥ and not 3♣?

[ahydra]

2H seems sensible over a 4SF enquiry since showing 6 card major is more important than 5 card minor IMO. I agree with 4H now.

[Fluffy]

gordontd, on 2011-March-12, 08:44, said:

Why did I rebid 2♥ and not 3♣?

To save space mainly, not a matter of wich is more important, bua a matter of wich thing is cheaper to show, show the extra shape "up-the-line" more or less.

[pooltuna]

gordontd, on 2011-March-12, 08:44, said:

Why did I rebid 2♥ and not 3♣?

which is better show 5-5 or 6-4?

[gordontd]

Fluffy, on 2011-March-12, 10:02, said:

To save space mainly, not a matter of wich is more important, bua a matter of wich thing is cheaper to show, show the extra shape "up-the-line" more or less.

Except that you're not showing any extra shape - wouldn't you have to rebid 2♥ with some 5-4s?

[FrancesHinden]

Personally, no. (Unless I was prepared to call the heart suit 6 cards).

[gordontd]

FrancesHinden, on 2011-March-12, 11:51, said:

Personally, no. (Unless I was prepared to call the heart suit 6 cards).

What do you bid with 1534 with ♦xxx?
Or 2524 with ♠xx?

[FrancesHinden]

2S

[whereagles]

I don't know what's going on, so just a simples 4♥.

[MrAce]

FrancesHinden, on 2011-March-12, 11:56, said:

2S

L O L

[gnasher]

In the circles where I play, 1♥-1♠;2♣-2♦;2♠ is nearly always a 2524 shape, and doesn't promise a spade honour. With a 3514 minimum opener would have raised 1♠ to 2♠. With a 3514 and extras, opener would bid 3♠ after 2♦.

With a 1534 shape with no diamond stop (a fairly rare hand), there are a number of reasonable approaches:
(1) Always bid 2♥
(2) Always bid 2♠
(3) Always bid 2NT
(4) Always bid 3♦
(5) Do whatever looks like the smallest distortion
(6) Do something conventional

It isn't clear to me that any of these is better than the rest. Personally I prefer (5) or (6).

Frances (who made it clear that she was speaking only about what happens in her own partnerships) apparently prefers (2), or somewhere between (2) and (5). The idea that this deserves a "LOL" is laughable.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2011-March-13, 06:18

[gnasher]

Going back to Gordon's original question

gordontd, on 2011-March-12, 11:28, said:

Except that you're not showing any extra shape - wouldn't you have to rebid 2♥ with some 5-4s?

Even if your style is that 2♥ might be a 5-4, if you bid 2♥ and follow it with 3♣, you are now showing 6-5, and you have saved quite a lot of space by doing so.

[Fluffy]

My style is also that 2♥ might be 5 cards, but as gnasher said, my paln was to follow up with clubs to show 6-5

[cherdano]

MrAce, on 2011-March-13, 04:16, said:

L O L

Good for you that there are no downvotes possible yet

[MickyB]

gnasher, on 2011-March-13, 06:13, said:

In the circles where I play, 1♥-1♠;2♣-2♦;2♠ is nearly always a 2524 shape, and doesn't promise a spade honour.

Can 2524 bid 2NT instead of 2S in your circles? If so, what would you tend to bid with Qx in diamonds? Would the spade holding make a difference?

[FrancesHinden]

gnasher, on 2011-March-13, 06:13, said:

In the circles where I play, 1♥-1♠;2♣-2♦;2♠ is nearly always a 2524 shape, and doesn't promise a spade honour. With a 3514 minimum opener would have raised 1♠ to 2♠. With a 3514 and extras, opener would bid 3♠ after 2♦.

With a 1534 shape with no diamond stop (a fairly rare hand), there are a number of reasonable approaches:
(1) Always bid 2♥
(2) Always bid 2♠
(3) Always bid 2NT
(4) Always bid 3♦
(5) Do whatever looks like the smallest distortion
(6) Do something conventional

It isn't clear to me that any of these is better than the rest. Personally I prefer (5) or (6).

Frances (who made it clear that she was speaking only about what happens in her own partnerships) apparently prefers (2), or somewhere between (2) and (5). The idea that this deserves a "LOL" is laughable.

Yes, somewhere between (2) (Jallerton's preference) and (5). With extra values (say a good 16+) I raise 2D to 3D, showing almost exactly this hand.

[FrancesHinden]

MickyB, on 2011-March-13, 08:38, said:

Can 2524 bid 2NT instead of 2S in your circles? If so, what would you tend to bid with Qx in diamonds? Would the spade holding make a difference?

My circles are not quite the same as gnasher's. In one partnership, we don't play 2D as game forcing, so will tend to give preference to 2S on most horrible 2524 hands because if it ends the auction it's likely to be the best spot. 2NT is slightly more constructive because it's a harder contract to make if I've only got a single diamond stop.

When I play 2D as game forcing, I will still give spade preference on virtually all 2524 hands. Partner can re-fourth-suit with 3D over this and we can bid 3NT, and we've shown pretty much exactly this hand. The relative suit holdings can make a difference, obviously xx Axxxx AQ KJxx is a 2NT bid.

[gnasher]

MickyB, on 2011-March-13, 08:38, said:

Can 2524 bid 2NT instead of 2S in your circles? If so, what would you tend to bid with Qx in diamonds? Would the spade holding make a difference?

Yes, it can bid 2NT, but it needs a real diamond stop, not Qx.

It feels as though the spade holding ought to affect close decisions. Maybe Kx KQxxx A10 J10xx is a 2♠ bid, but xx KQxxx A10 KJ10x is a 2NT bid?