[Kalvan14]

Scoring: IMP

P - (P) - 1S - (X) - ?

---

Your bid, please

[Blofeld]

At these colours I'm going to bid 3♠. I don't know what the correct level is, but neither do our opponents, and 3♠ is unlikely to be very dear.

[mike777]

Kalvan14, on Mar 12 2006, 05:59 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

P - (P) - 1S - (X) - ?

---

Your bid, please

3S


I play Bergen 3c, 4 trumps 7-10 less than a limit raise, still on over x as well as BROMAD for 3 card raises so easy 3S bid here. All are still on as a passed hand as well.

[P_Marlowe]

3S, in case it is wrong and partner complains,
tell him, that he should write a e-mail to cohen.

Sry, but you are green vs. red, you have a 9 card
fit, and you hold the spades, kill the space.

Marlowe

[pclayton]

If vul were reversed I'd bid 3♠, but this hand just has too much.

AJTx over the doubler is a very strong holding.

[Kalvan14]

I'm quite happy to see another position in this thread. I'd the fear that everyone would back 3♠

Still, it is a 3rd-hand opening, NV vs vul: who guarantees that it is a true opening bid, and that there are 5 spades?

[mike777]

The problem is 2S does not describe this hand, it shows 3 spades and less than constructive. If you like this hand that much at least bid 3clubs bergen or 2H BROMAD showing 3 pieces and constructive. I will stick with 3S, 4 spades and 0-7 points or so. I do not think Txx of hearts is a plus.

[mike777]

ok, but as we have discussed before it just seems making a free bid of 2s over x here is undefined in standard but perhaps not. I can see playing 2s as a constructive free bid but that would be more than 5hcp. A constructive raise to 2s makes a lot of sense if that would be standard today? On the other hand if 2s is just a wide range bid less than limit....

[mike777]

hmm ok, I will think about this issue, thanks.

edit ok here is my int. level logic for 3S. I hope to learn something on this excellent post problem.
1) The simple book bid of 3s shows around 0-7 hcp and 4 spades...ok but any reason to upgrade or downgrade?
2) We got 0-7 hcp and 4 spades.
3) Would like to have side shortness but none here.
4) Jxxx of trumps is a negative
5) Txx of hearts is a negative
6) AJTx of clubs is a plus.

[Kalvan14]

If pard had opened in 1st or 2nd seat, I'd have no doubt in choosing a simple raise. The problem is that he opened in 3rd seat, and we are at fav V. IMHO, I ould again give a simple raise over E pass; when E doubles, I believe that the priority is pre-empting W. 2♠ is just not enough.

[joker_gib]

Too strong in HCP at these colours and no shape enough.

Without agreements I go with 2♠.

LHO has already passed and maybe 2♠ is enough to buy the contract.

In my method I bid 2♥ showing a constructive raise.

Alain

[whereagles]

2♠ is more than enough. Besides, pard opened 3rd seat. Don't bury him.

[FrancesHinden]

Kalvan14, on Mar 13 2006, 02:45 AM, said:

I'm quite happy to see another position in this thread. I'd the fear that everyone would back 3♠

Still, it is a 3rd-hand opening, NV vs vul: who guarantees that it is a true opening bid, and that there are 5 spades?

If you don't bid 3S because you are catering for partner not having an opening bid, perhaps you should alert partner's 1S bid.

I would bid 3S. Seems to about down the middle for the call.

[whereagles]

FrancesHinden, on Mar 13 2006, 02:16 PM, said:

I would bid 3S. Seems to about down the middle for the call.

Well, if you're going to bid to the 3-level, you might as well bid 3♣. This at least will give pard a better pic of what you have.

[FrancesHinden]

Not if you play that fit bids show 9 cards in the two suits.

[whereagles]

The 3♣ bid has a number of advantages that offset the lack of distribution.

[han]

I'm bidding 3S. I like to use Fred's rule here: I must have at least one nice feature for a raise, an ace, a king or shortness (I assume that Fred didn't invent this rule, but he wrote it somewhere on this forum a while ago). This hand would be a minimum for 3S at unfavorable, and is about a maximum at favorable.

I don't dislike 2S, but I expect that the bidding would come back to me at 3D or 3H, and I would hate to bid 3S then (and passing is not attractive either).

I thank wereagles for pointing out the possibility of bidding 3C with hands like this, it wouldn't have occured to me. For me it shows a more distributional hand, as well as more strength. Kxxx xx xx AJ10xx would be close to a minimum.