[Hanoi5]

They're red, we're white, MP's:

♠Kx
♥Ax
♦KQxxx
♣7xxx

1♣-(X)-???

[Free]

♦

[helene_t]

A fourth option is to blast 3NT. But 3NT probably plays better in partner's hand.

If we have a forcing club raise that isn't 2NT, then it could work - on a good day partner gets a diamond lead against 3NT if we don't show them. But if we raise clubs I would be worried that partner, expecting better club support, may bypass 3NT or bid 5♣ over their 4M.

The normal bid is 1♦. It describes the hand best and helps partner if we belong in 5m or if we get the chance of defending 4M.

[MrAce]

How about 1♦ ?

[gszes]

One size does not fit all:)

xx
At THESE COLORS I see no reason to give up on a possibly
lucrative penalty x from p or playing 1c xx. The problem with
starting with 1d is from that point forward we are going to be
playing catch up instead of sitting and waiting to pounce at
the slightest misstep by the opps.

I would bid 1d since a low level penalty x is not so enticing
at any other vulnerability.

[rmnka447]

At MPs, I'm a basher bidding 3 NT. If partner doesn't have any help in the majors, then we've probably got scads of minor tricks. If I bid 1 ♦, I give advancer a chance to provide major suit info to the Dbler which can only help the defense.

[madongjun]

redouble.

[inquiry]

The opponents have AT LEAST, one seven card major fit, and are odds on to have an eight card one, given your two doubletons in the majors. I am not that sure I want to defend one of major. So I will not make the normal (ok, I admit it is more or less normal) redouble with this hand.

If I have a fit jump to 2 ♦ available I would bid that, now they bid again at their own risk. If partner hits something after this fit jump, I would be delighted to defend. If I don't have fit jump in my bag of tricks, I would bid a simple forcing 1♦. A jump to 3NT will not convince my LHO to lead his best major, let's be sure about the strain, and besides, it might be much better if partner declared (and not just because, no average, my partners are WAY better than me).

[aguahombre]

Familiar theme: Do we let a call by the opponent which takes up none of our bidding space make us waste a round of bidding or blast to something we wouldn't normally have blasted to?

I was going to respond 1♦. I respond 1♦. Let's use their double to our benefit. We reserve the RDBL of 1CX for a specific hand which is otherwise awkward. Exactly four clubs, no longer Diamond suit, and a balanced hand of invitational strength. The Jordan 2NT shows 5+ clubs.

Similarly, the double of 1D takes up no room from our side and increases the number of things we can do...using it in our favor.

--We couldn't have an inverted raise structure, yet still be able to simply raise to 2D with 4-card support and a minimum responding hand. Now we can.

--We couldn't handle the 5-card club suit with invitational strength in 2/1 other than by bidding 2NT N.F. (An ugly solution) Now, we can use the Redouble to show invite + with club length.

--We couldn't show a weak response with long clubs. Now we can just bid 2C or 3C, depending on length/weakness.

[the hog]

gszes, on 2013-July-18, 11:00, said:

One size does not fit all:)

xx
At THESE COLORS I see no reason to give up on a possibly
lucrative penalty x from p or playing 1c xx. The problem with
starting with 1d is from that point forward we are going to be
playing catch up instead of sitting and waiting to pounce at
the slightest misstep by the opps.

I would bid 1d since a low level penalty x is not so enticing
at any other vulnerability.

xx is foolish. You do not hae the abilty to penalise 1M, and if you think you will play 1Cxx then you are playing bridge in Cloud Cukoo Land. 1D is an obvious bid for me.