[Codo]

Zel is right. This is a 2 ♥ opening, I missed the three passes part too.

[plaur]

I bid 2♦ and pass 2NT (unless its my agreement to open this 2♥ i 4th seat)

[mikeh]

Given that this was a 4th seat hand, 2♥ seems correct to me. Beginners probably don't know that in 4th seat one should beef up the range for the weak two bid. While some players use weak 2 bids as primarily or even purely preemptive calls (as I do at favourable), many players use weak 2 bids as a combination of constructive and preemptive bids. However, in 4th seat, there is no need for much preemption.....if we are afraid this is 'their' hand, we can pass. So a 4th seat weak two can usefully be played with a range of a maximum other seat weak two up to and including a minimum opener.

Assuming, for the moment, that this was not in 4th seat, such that the correct opening is 1♥, the traditional and (I think) still standard meaning of 1♥ 2♦ 3♥, in the given auction, is that 3♥ is forcing.

This has sound logic behind it. Responder has invited game, but doesn't yet know that opener has 6 hearts. Opener will often have a hand that wants to be in game but can't unilaterally commit to either 3N or 4♥. So 3♥ as forcing, with a 6 card suit, allows responder input into the choice of games.


The corollary to this is that opener has to bid differently with a weak 6-4, and the standard sequence is 1♥ 2♥ 3♦. Whether opener would choose this approach on a side suit of xxxx is another issue for another day.

There is a solution, should you feel that not being able to show diamonds at your second bid is an issue. The solution belongs in the A/E area, since it involves opener playing transfers over 2N (and doesn't work if opener's second suit is clubs, because there is no way to transfer to 3♣ over responder's 2N)

[ArtK78]

It is my understanding that bidding the suits in this order - hearts - hearts - diamonds - is weaker than bidding the suits in this order - hearts - diamonds - hearts. Both show 6-4 shape.

Neither is forcing.

However, in this case, you really don't have a four card diamond suit. xxxx is not a real suit. I would ignore it completely and treat this as a one suiter, essentially the same as A AKxxxx xxx Jxx.

*I see that partner is a passed hand. So, even if one played the sequence hearts - diamonds - hearts as forcing opposite an unpassed hand, it would be nonforcing opposite a passed hand. Whether you want to treat this hand as a weak 2 bid opposite a passed hand is an entirely different issue. I would open the hand 2♥ opposite a passed hand.

[HighLow21]

Zelandakh, on 2012-March-16, 03:45, said:

2♥ rebid? or 2♥ opening? This looks like the latter to me...

The more I think about it the more I kind of like this suggestion. The hand is a bare minimum anyway, 5 of the 12 HCP are in short suits, the 4-card side suit is horrendous, and partner passed originally. The hand is not worth the 12HCP it originally contained, and as far as 12 HCP 6/4's go, it's pretty yucky.

Either way, 1♥ followed by a 2♦ rebid is not nearly discouraging enough opposite a passed hand for my taste. Move the black honor cards to diamonds and then it makes much more sense to me to encourage with 1♥/2♦. The point is, absent a big heart fit you know you don't want to be in game opposite a passed hand, and 1♥/2♦ fails to convey that.

[aguahombre]

Agree with 1H, not 2H to start with (a style thing for us).
Agree with 2H rebid, not 2D.
If I rebid 2D with 6 hearts, I either am prepared never to show the 6th heart or have extra strength and intended to show both suits rather than jump rebid the hearts.

If I had rebid 2D, then removed 2NT to 3H ---SAYC, Standard, or 2/1 not withstanding, my partner should assume I was prepared for this to happen and didn't rebid 2H on the second round because of intermediate strength. This makes 3H forcing.

[mikeh]

ArtK78, on 2012-March-16, 09:52, said:

*I see that partner is a passed hand. So, even if one played the sequence hearts - diamonds - hearts as forcing opposite an unpassed hand, it would be nonforcing opposite a passed hand. Whether you want to treat this hand as a weak 2 bid opposite a passed hand is an entirely different issue. I would open the hand 2♥ opposite a passed hand.

Sorry, Art....I don't mean to be rude, but in my view, this makes no sense. Partner's 2N means precisely the same as a passed hand as it does were he unpassed: in both cases it denies an opening hand....in both cases it shows a hand that is invitational to game. So it is the same 10-11.

That means that using 1♥ 2♦ 3♥ as forcing opposite an unpassed hand but nf opposite a passed hand has no logic to it at all.

In addition, since you appear to agree that this sequence shows more strength than 1♥ 2♥ 3♦, how can it not be forcing opposite an invitational hand? I mean, are you trying to parse hands with 11 hcp from those with 12, or are you, as is standard, trying to parse hands with 11-13 from hands with 13-16 (the overlap is intentional and reflects the fact that the 4321 count is only an approximation of playing strength)?

[WGF_Flame]

They should add likes to the forums so I (and i suspect many more) could like/agree with mikeh.

[ArtK78]

mikeh, on 2012-March-16, 10:34, said:

Sorry, Art....I don't mean to be rude, but in my view, this makes no sense. Partner's 2N means precisely the same as a passed hand as it does were he unpassed: in both cases it denies an opening hand....in both cases it shows a hand that is invitational to game. So it is the same 10-11.

That means that using 1♥ 2♦ 3♥ as forcing opposite an unpassed hand but nf opposite a passed hand has no logic to it at all.

In addition, since you appear to agree that this sequence shows more strength than 1♥ 2♥ 3♦, how can it not be forcing opposite an invitational hand? I mean, are you trying to parse hands with 11 hcp from those with 12, or are you, as is standard, trying to parse hands with 11-13 from hands with 13-16 (the overlap is intentional and reflects the fact that the 4321 count is only an approximation of playing strength)?

Because the hands need not fit. Partner can have a balanced invitational hand and still pass the 3♥ rebid because you didn't jump to game. Unless you have a specific agreement to the contrary, no natural non-jump bid is forcing on a passed hand. Quite frankly, I would play 1♥ - 1NT - 2♦ - 2NT - 3♥ as nonforcing opposite an unpassed hand. Responder's hand could easily have a lot of cards that are essentially useless opposite a 6-4 red suit hand, such as:

KQJ xx xxx KJxxx

It depends on how much "extra values" you are showing with your 3♥ rebid. Given what passes for an opening bid today, I can see playing 3♥ as nonforcing.

[Antrax]

WGF_Flame, on 2012-March-16, 11:11, said:

They should add likes to the forums so I (and i suspect many more) could like/agree with mikeh.

Click the green plus button on the bottom right of his post.

[gordontd]

mike777, on 2012-March-16, 00:43, said:

for me pard rebid 2nt too much....... Iwould just pass 2d.....

He has an 11-count. How much do you think 2NT shows?

[MrAce]

WGF_Flame, on 2012-March-16, 11:11, said:

They should add likes to the forums so I (and i suspect many more) could like/agree with mikeh.

[the hog]

Codo, on 2012-March-16, 05:26, said:

Zel is right. This is a 2 ♥ opening, I missed the three passes part too.

rofl. Perhaps in your mind Roland, but not in mine.It is about a King light for me.

[neilkaz]

squealydan, on 2012-March-15, 23:59, said:

2♥ for me every time.

I'd need something like ♥Kxxxxx ♦AQxx to suppress the fact that I have a 6-long major in order to show a 4-card minor.

Yes..I agree and honestly the suit quality difference might have to be even more extreme for me to not rebid 2♥ which also limits the hand nicely.

[han]

I would generally rebid 2D with a 6-4 hand, but with this hand I would definitely rebid 2H. It's not close.

Partner being a passed hand argues for rebidding 2H but the main reason is the suit disparity.

[jillybean]

This discussion has grown from the initial, basic question into an interesting thead, I love these forums.

mikeh, on 2012-March-16, 09:31, said:

There is a solution, should you feel that not being able to show diamonds at your second bid is an issue. The solution belongs in the A/E area, since it involves opener playing transfers over 2N (and doesn't work if opener's second suit is clubs, because there is no way to transfer to 3♣ over responder's 2N)

Since this question is now in the I/A forum perhaps you can elaborate, if there is any need.

[WGF_Flame]

thanks for the like explanation.
Like you all

[TWO4BRIDGE]

mike777, on 2012-March-16, 01:26, said:

If you think your 6-4 is minimum in your style rebid 2 major...if not rebid 2 minor...

general principle.

ditto

I know it has been pointed out before about 6-4 hands:

Bidding 6 - 4 - 6 is stronger than bidding 6 - 6 - 4 .

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Codo, on 2012-March-16, 05:26, said:

Zel is right. This is a 2 ♥ opening, I missed the three passes part too.

Agree . ( Opener is greater than a 12 count w/ 6h ) .

[aguahombre]

I might point out that SAYC is the framework for this thread.

Weak two's are 5-11, and there is no redefinition of a 2-bid opener in 4th chair. You might judge to open this hand 2H, but it does not show partner that you have more strength than you would have in another seat.

This treatment of a 4th-chair 2bid might be widely practiced, but it is not part of the Yellow Card, and not one of the areas of the Yellow Card predesignated system which is flexible. If this is an opening 2-bid in your agreed style, you are not playing SAYC.