[jeffford76]

---

1C was potentially short if exactly 4432, and could be a strong NT hand. 1NT is fairly wide ranging. 2S is to play - now what?

[CSGibson]

I would assume either the 1N balancing hand is showing a superaccept of spades with whatever conventional meaning 3♦ would normally have for a superaccept, or, if that is unlikely, that opener does not know that 2♠ is to play, and is treating it as minor suit stayman, assuming that's what 2♠ would mean in our strong NT auctions.

My actions for a superaccept would just be to play 3 spades opposite some 10-15ish range of balancing NT.

[jeffford76]

CSGibson, on 2012-October-31, 12:11, said:

I would assume either the 1N balancing hand is showing a superaccept of spades with whatever conventional meaning 3♦ would normally have for a superaccept, or, if that is unlikely, that opener does not know that 2♠ is to play, and is treating it as minor suit stayman, assuming that's what 2♠ would mean in our strong NT auctions.

My actions for a superaccept would just be to play 3 spades opposite some 10-15ish range of balancing NT.

You have no specific agreements about what the uncontested auction 1N - 2H (xfr) - 3D would be, and you have the agreement that the uncontested auction 1N - 2S is Minor Suit Stayman.

[CSGibson]

jeffford76, on 2012-October-31, 12:20, said:

You have no specific agreements about what the uncontested auction 1N - 2H (xfr) - 3D would be, and you have the agreement that the uncontested auction 1N - 2S is Minor Suit Stayman.

If I don't have any UI constraining my actions, I would make a judgement about whether partner may have played 2♠ as minor suit stayman - I would probably assume that's the case behind screens, for example, if I know that partner and I haven't discussed this sequence in detail. If I have UI, though, I am going to go with superaccept as the LA not suggested by the UI.

[aguahombre]

CSGibson, on 2012-October-31, 12:34, said:

If I don't have any UI constraining my actions, I would make a judgement about whether partner may have played 2♠ as minor suit stayman - I would probably assume that's the case behind screens, for example, if I know that partner and I haven't discussed this sequence in detail. If I have UI, though, I am going to go with superaccept as the LA not suggested by the UI.

That. When this morphs into an alert by the balancing NT bidder, we will still be screwed however...because the alert indicates partner does not take 2S as natural and we cannot do anything about it, except suffer.

[JLOGIC]

I am Usually in a minoRity of zero but it is natural and I pass. To super accept bid 3s your partner couldn't overall one spade so to super accept you need a massive hand anyways. Can't you balance with 1n on k xxx kqjxxx kqt trying o preempt spades and grab nt at mp, safe from partners non spade over call? Anywyays everyone thinks I'm nuts so try winning the committee but how many people don't pass if theirpartner answers that its spades and still bids 3d

[jeffford76]

Everyone has guessed what has happened - 2S was alerted. I was actually the partner of the 1C opener, and felt a bit aggrieved when this hand passed 3D, but I've become convinced it's the normal action (although like Chris I would have bid 3S thinking I had to in possession of the UI).

[barsikb]

Will as here not to make a new topic

♠ A K 5
♥ J 10 7 5
♦ A Q 9
♣ Q J 2

Bidding goes 1H-P-P-? Too strong for 1NT in a balancing seat, right?
If after Double partner bids 2C what to do next?

[SteveMoe]

barsikb, on 2013-January-13, 07:00, said:

Will as here not to make a new topic

♠ A K 5
♥ J 10 7 5
♦ A Q 9
♣ Q J 2

Bidding goes 1H-P-P-? Too strong for 1NT in a balancing seat, right?
If after Double partner bids 2C what to do next?

This hand starts with "Double!"

[aguahombre]

If the man is going to necro an old thread, you might as well see what his question was. Yes, IMO it is too strong for a balancing 1NT.

After doubling and getting a 2C advance by partner, 2NT seems right, on the add-a-king theory.

[the hog]

Well, I would have overcalled 1S to start with. This takes up a lot of room over the 1C opening and, after all, you are nv.
I would take 3D as a superaccept here.

[gordontd]

barsikb, on 2013-January-13, 07:00, said:

Will as here not to make a new topic

It's better to make a new topic, since you are asking a new question.

[WellSpyder]

gordontd, on 2013-January-14, 01:34, said:

It's better to make a new topic, since you are asking a new question.

+1. It is not as if minimising the number of topics is of any benefit to anyone.

[barsikb]

"It is not as if minimising the number of topics is of any benefit to anyone."

Sorry, was not aware of this. Will start new topic.