[Winstonm]

---

As usual, the imposed system is a basic 2/1 with 100% forcing NT. You are playing imps in the Bermuda Bowl. What is your bid? (If it matters to you, North is Zia Mahmood.)

[DavidKok]

Partner probably would have raised spades with 3 (or maybe intends to on the next round with 3=1=5=4?), so 2♦.

[mikeh]

Winstonm, on 2021-July-08, 12:34, said:

---

As usual, the imposed system is a basic 2/1 with 100% forcing NT. You are playing imps in the Bermuda Bowl. What is your bid? (If it matters to you, North is Zia Mahmood.)

I’d bid 2D.

Partner won’t usually have 3 spades unless he has extras since he’d raise 1S to 2S with most 3=1=5=4 hands, tho he could be 3=0=5=5, but that’s improbable because such hands are rare and, also, the opps aren’t bidding.

If he has 4=5 in the minors, I’m probably not going to enjoy the result, but my hand is good enough that it needn’t be horrible.

Meanwhile, and the reason I’m bidding, is that he could have up to 18 hcp.

x AQx AKxxx Axxx isn’t close to a jumpshift and I’d want to be in game at imps, especially if he has some decent spots.

Also, Qxx x AKxxx AQxx is 2C rather than 2S and over 2D he has any easy, descriptive 2S call, which I’ll raise to game.

Passing with a 9 count seems pusillanimous to me. The spades are not even close to rebiddable. So the only other call that has even slight appeal is 3C, but that overstates the clubs.

[LBengtsson]

the only reason why I do not bid 2♦ - my bid - is if partner has 1444 shape and prefer to bid 1♦ - 1♠ - 2♣ to 1♦ - 1♠ - 1NT. other than that I see no reason not to bid 2♦ as other posters have said

[mw64ahw]

Partner is 5(4)-4 either way in the minors with a limited hand (open ♣ and reverse if stronger) so I pass with a hand not good enough for the 3-level and I then find out that combined we have enough for 3NT

[smerriman]

mw64ahw, on 2021-July-08, 17:45, said:

Partner is 5(4)-4 either way in the minors with a limited hand (open ♣ and reverse if stronger) so I pass with a hand not good enough for the 3-level

If you're suggesting partner should open 1♣ and reverse into 2♦ with 4 clubs and 5 diamonds.. that's horrible. As mikeh mentioned above, partner could have up to around an 18 count with this shape, so I see no reason not to give the standard false preference into diamonds.

[Winstonm]

Here is how Justin responded:

Quote

Justin Lall: 2D. Automatic. I won't pass when partner can have up to a bad 18, and I won't bid 3C with only three clubs and 9 points. This gives partner a chance to act again with extras, or stay low with a minimum.

---

Rodwell and Meckstroth reached 3NT with these cards while Zia's partner passed 2C.

[mw64ahw]

smerriman, on 2021-July-08, 17:56, said:

If you're suggesting partner should open 1♣ and reverse into 2♦ with 4 clubs and 5 diamonds.. that's horrible. As mikeh mentioned above, partner could have up to around an 18 count with this shape, so I see no reason not to give the standard false preference into diamonds.

No that's not what I'm suggesting for a hand up to 18 points and I think it's far from standard to give a false preference. My comment reflects Zia's partners choice knowing that a 3NT contract is not out of the question as occurred at the other table.

With the actual hand 55 in the minors and 19ish total points this hand in the old style I originally learnt would have been suitable for a reverse. Not what I play now, but my current approach would end up in 3NT/5♣

[nullve]

Winstonm, on 2021-July-08, 12:34, said:

What is your bid?

2♦. The only systemic call, like opening 1♠ with

AKxxx
x
AQxx
Kxx.

[Cyberyeti]

Yup, a quack more and this would be the poster child for non GF 4SF but it's not quite good enough, so 1♦-1♠-2♣-2♦-3♣- and now S is not stopping below game. 3N is very lucky you want to play 5♣, not sure which one I get to.

[Gilithin]

Winstonm, on 2021-July-08, 21:30, said:

Rodwell and Meckstroth reached 3NT with these cards while Zia's partner passed 2C. [/size]

This pass feels like someone with a total misunderstanding of basic bidding principles. If it were not the BB I would assume it was a beginner. I suspect there is more to this board than we have been presented with here. The Nickell team is well-known for hardball tactics and Zia+partner (Rosenberg?) were renowned for stepping outside of system based on small psychological cues so perhaps some subtle but false AI was provided to prompt the pass of 2♣.

[nige1]

Winstonm 'As usual, the imposed system is a basic 2/1 with 100% forcing NT. You are playing imps in the Bermuda Bowl. What is your bid? (If it matters to you, North is Zia Mahmood.)'
+++++++++++++++++++
I rank
1. 2♦ = NAT "False" preference (Faute de mieux).
2. 2♠ = NAT. Space consuming, exaggerates your ♠.

---

[Winstonm]

Gilithin, on 2021-July-16, 09:13, said:

This pass feels like someone with a total misunderstanding of basic bidding principles. If it were not the BB I would assume it was a beginner. I suspect there is more to this board than we have been presented with here. The Nickell team is well-known for hardball tactics and Zia+partner (Rosenberg?) were renowned for stepping outside of system based on small psychological cues so perhaps some subtle but false AI was provided to prompt the pass of 2♣.

Zia was playing with Masood at the time. Masood passed 2C. No other information was given.