Looking back to my original comments, it’s not clear whether I thought it was easy to narrow the choices to 2H and 2D, or 2S and 2D (since I wrote 2H & 2D, but immediately thereafter said 2S looks right.)
VVV’s xx AKQ10x AKJ xxx is indeed a tough hand for me to say what he should rebid, and one where passing 2D would indeed be awful. (He doesn’t have that, since I have the diamond J, but his diamonds AKQ are possible and problems about the same.) While partner’s xx AKJxx AQx xxx would also play very badly in 2D, I would expect partner to pass the double with that.
Or maybe partner should bid 1NT with that. I’ve started a bridgewinners poll. I’ll predict 1NT will win, but expect that both 1NT and pass will outscore 2D. Slightly wondering if anyone will suggest it should have been opened a 15-17 NT. I wouldn’t. Bidding Problem
My prediction is only part right. So far pass is the runaway winner in the bridge winners poll. I was thinking 1NT might win. 13 for pass (including John Diamond, a world champion), 3 for 1NT, 1 for 2H (yuck) and 0 for 2D.
Polling my two most regular IRL partners about their rebid after opening 1H, both think 2D promises at least 4. With xx AKJxx AQx both would pass. With xx AKQ10x AKJ xxx one would pass; one would bid 1NT (but that one would have opened 1NT, to avoid the awful rebid problem had opener’s RHO passed 1S instead of doubling).
7 of 11 panelists voted for 2S, which got 100 points. 2H (3) and 2N (1) each got 90. While 2S (16) had the plurality among 35 solvers, 2NT was selected by 10 solvers. 3C (2 solvers) got 80; 3D and 3S (1 solver each) got 70. No discussion about the vote for 3D.
Had anyone voted for pass, I’m sure it would have gotten at least 70. Fair chance any legal call at the 3 level or below would get at least 70. Slams might get only 60. D4 MSC is extremely generous on its scoring of also-rans.
One 2S bidder did comment that he would have passed at imps, and one 2H said "I probably should pass and take the likely eight-card diamond fit over the seven-card heart fit, but matchpoints makes me do silly things sometimes. " I think those were both solvers, not panelists. One person I know is a solver commented "It’s a close decision between Pass in our ‘known’ eight-card
diamond fit or bidding 2D, but (1) my spades will produce four or five tricks as
trump but maybe only one as dummy; (2) partner will have to play his suits from
his hand; (3) spades making 110 or 140 ties or beats diamonds making 90 or 110;
(4) partner may, for his own reasons, try 2NT next, at which point 3D will complete
describing our hand. "
A challenge at either scoring. Val at imps, pass is out of the question, as I think is 3C. If either Q were in diamonds, I think an immediate 3NT, which is maybe best here. Or maybe just 2C. Leaning toward 3NT.
At watchpoints, much tougher. Pass could be considered. Not 3D for me; too likely 1NT would score more. Not going to shoot 3NT, surely unlikely to make if partner would decline an invite. Leaning toward just passing 1NT.
One consideration in favor of 2C or 2NT: if I pass, I’ll be hoping they let us play 1NT. If they don’t pass, I’ll wish I had bid.
PassUnlikely there’s a game, especially if we have given them some lead info by starting 2C.
1B
Three notrumpThere might be a vul game. More likely there’s a game if we bid it than if we start 2C, plus some danger of not making 2NT if we invite and partner is minimum.
Some surprising votes and possible scoring in the June results.
As expected, at imps 3NT was the clear leader among the panel (better qualifications than the solvers), who voted 8-4 for 3NT vs 2C, with 1 vote for 3C (transfer to diamonds). It was very close among solvers: 14-12-7 among those bids, with 5 votes for other things.
But matchpoints? 50 points (top score) went to 3C; 40 points to pass. Those were NOT then panels’ favorites.
I don’t see much merit to 4NT, even if it were some variation of Blackwood. I’ll have to ask my regular partner, with whom I play Kickback, if Kickback should apply to a 4D call here. (Kickback: 4 of the denomination above trumps is RK). I’m guessing not kickback.
As to what to bid here? My first thought was to raise clubs, but now I’m thinking anything except pass is awful. Partner will often have three spades. We should give him a chance to show them, in a situation when a spade bid could not be interpreted as a cue bid.
I agree pass is very clear. 4H is tempting, but partner might be 2=4=3=4; also, if partner has a stopper, we probably belong in NT. If LHO raises and his 4H comes back to me, I can bid 5C then and have gotten this hand across more clearly. (And on that auction I can finally be confident partner has 5+ clubs.)
Hard to imagine anything except 4S or 3H, and between those 4S seems much better. Sure, hearts could be better, but way too much risk of ending up in 4H when 4S is better. Maybe at matchpoints you could consider only 3S or 2H, but those are too tame for me.
It doesn’t say whether it’s matchpoints of IMPs. I think at matchpoints or white at IMPs, 2H is quite reasonable. You can then bid 4S over 2S and 3S over 3H.
Vulnerable at IMPs, I think I would go for 4S, though it does feel a tad like an overbid.
Definitely not forcing, though it may well get some votes (and I won’t be surprised if it gets some panelist votes, but will be amazed if any panelist comments that he thinks it’s forcing.)
Four spadesWorth taking a shot at game, even at matchpoints, and telling opps less about your hand is a plus. Chances hearts are better offset by concealing info, plus risk of ending up in hearts when spades is better.
1B
Four spadesEven more so at imps, when you certainly must be insisting on game
I am having some second thoughts about these, but sticking with original
