[kenrexford]

P-(1♥)-2♦-(2♥)-?

♠xxx ♥Qxx ♦Ax ♣KJ10xx

This sequence occurred this weekend.

First, would you consider a 3♣ call here to show:

1. Clubs
2. Clubs with diamond tolerance (snapdragon-like)
3. Club Fit Bid (clubs plus a true diamond fit)
4. Something else

For your choice, what strength?

Given this, with the actual problem, P, 3♣, or 3♦? (Or, something weird like X or 2NT?)

[inquiry]

I know fit non-jumps by passed hand is not a popular choice among many people, but I still bid that way. So 3♣ would show true diamond fit and clubs.

So here my choices are between two tame bids, pass and 3♦. Before being critical of 3♦, note: 2♦ overcall is usually a six card suit, and 3♦ will get the best lead, and the defenders might misguess their partners ♦ length thinking we have more than we do. Also, this moves them from a comfortable 2♥ contract, you will never get rich defending that.

Pass has a lot going for it too. First, partner is still in the auction, and pass is the only way to get into clubs. Second, we have Qxx of hearts which suggest going slower. Third, our heart legnth suggest partner is likely to balance back in if the auction dies here.

I would bid 3♦ but do not find fault with a careful pass.

[kenrexford]

Jlall, on Jun 7 2008, 10:39 PM, said:

I would bid 2N natural. I think this shows my hand well, not sure why it was mentioned as a weird bid. What is a 2N bid supposed to show? If partner is weak he probably has 6+ diamonds and can retreat to 3D.

To me 3C doesn't show a fit.

By "weird," I meant that it would be strange if is somehow promised a snapdragon shape. Natural makes sense as an option, as well.

[the hog]

3C would be a fit non jump. So I agree with Ben here, I would bid 3D. A X is also a possibility. Dislike 2NT as Qxx is hardly a stopper in this auction.

[EricK]

Why does the FNJ necessarily show genuine support but the direct raise not?

[gnasher]

For me, 3♣ shows a raise to 3♦ with good clubs. The degree of diamond support promised by 3♣ and 3♦ is the same.

I'd bid an imperfect 3♣. I'm not worried about having to play 3♦ in a 5-2 fit - partner's diamonds are unlikely to be worse than KQJxx. The main problem is that partner will picture a less balanced hand.

I think 2NT overstates both the heart stop and the quick tricks. If RHO has a top heart or a black-suit entry, 3NT will be down on top; otherwise a spade lead may knock out partner's only stop and leave us without enough winners (eg Axx xx KQJxxx Qx). I'd bid 2NT with the same hand and ♣A10xxx, because that reduces both risks.

If we're going to play 3NT, I'd rather partner suggested it by bidding 3♥.

[skjaeran]

Move the ♥Q to spades (Qxxx xx Ax KJTxx) and it's a perfect double.

I agree that playing FNJ, 3♣ and 3♦ should show the same degree of fit....

There's two possible bids, 2NT natural and 3♣, not playing FNJ. I'd settle for 2NT.

[mike777]

I may have asked this before but I really wonder how many USA players play FNJ and if almost zero out of 200,000 or so why?

I concede that at least ten forum usa players play this.

[gwnn]

mike777, on Jun 8 2008, 11:17 AM, said:

I may have asked this before but I really wonder how many USA players play FNJ and if almost zero out of 200,000 or so why?

I concede that at least ten forum usa players play this.

-because only a British book from 93 advocate it (or maybe one or two more) and only a handful of its novelties ever got into high level expert practice.
-a higher percentage of the forum plays it as FNJ because Ben is like the father of this big happy family and an example.

[gnasher]

mike777, on Jun 8 2008, 10:17 AM, said:

I may have asked this before but I really wonder how many USA players play FNJ and if almost zero out of 200,000 or so why?

Might it be that most Americans open less aggressively than the rest of us, so they're more likely to want to make a non-fit non-jump as a passed hand?

[inquiry]

Jlall, on Jun 8 2008, 03:38 AM, said:

EricK, on Jun 8 2008, 03:25 AM, said:

Why does the FNJ necessarily show genuine support but the direct raise not?

Lol, this post is so spot on it's awesome. Well done.

"Since 3C would show real diamond support to go with my clubs, I'll just raise to 3D." hahahaha.

3♣ is more positive going than 3♦, and encourages partner to bid more in competition if double fit is found. A 3♦ raise can be (and fairly often actually) made on doubleton honor and is more likely "competitive".

Thus, a FNJ promises MORE cards in the two suits than I have, the direct raise does not promise anything more than Hx in the minor, although three card support is more common. The true advantage of 3♦ is it will more often than not get partner off to the right lead against ♥ contract (or even 3NT). A non-fit 3♣ may get you into a 5-1 ♣ fit when a 6-2 ♦ fit exist.

[kenrexford]

A lot more people play FNJ than is argued here, at least in my circles.

I polled a few people and found an interesting trend, at least interesting to me. The idea was that a FNJ in support of a major shows a true fit and is game-going, as is a minor-suppporting one that changes the level. However, this specific one (under 3♦) was viewed as a SNJ ("Snapdragon Non-Jump," if you will).

I liked that view.

[EricK]

inquiry, on Jun 8 2008, 01:08 PM, said:

Jlall, on Jun 8 2008, 03:38 AM, said:

EricK, on Jun 8 2008, 03:25 AM, said:

Why does the FNJ necessarily show genuine support but the direct raise not?

Lol, this post is so spot on it's awesome. Well done.

"Since 3C would show real diamond support to go with my clubs, I'll just raise to 3D." hahahaha.

3♣ is more positive going than 3♦, and encourages partner to bid more in competition if double fit is found. A 3♦ raise can be (and fairly often actually) made on doubleton honor and is more likely "competitive".

Thus, a FNJ promises MORE cards in the two suits than I have, the direct raise does not promise anything more than Hx in the minor, although three card support is more common. The true advantage of 3♦ is it will more often than not get partner off to the right lead against ♥ contract (or even 3NT). A non-fit 3♣ may get you into a 5-1 ♣ fit when a 6-2 ♦ fit exist.

OK I see what you are saying. But is that the best way to play the bid? Partner will sometimes compete further even if you raise to 3♦. Surely he will make a better decision if he knows about your ♣. Also, you don't know what the best lead is, but partner might be in a better position to decide if a ♣ or ♦ is better if he knows about your ♣ suit. I understand the reasoning as to why you think a FNJ is better than a NFNJ, but I don't follow why it is better to have agreement that the fit bid shows better support than direct support shows.

[OleBerg]

kenrexford, on Jun 8 2008, 04:59 AM, said:

P-(1♥)-2♦-(2♥)-?

♠xxx ♥Qxx ♦Ax ♣KJ10xx

This sequence occurred this weekend.

First, would you consider a 3♣ call here to show:

1. Clubs
2. Clubs with diamond tolerance (snapdragon-like)
3. Club Fit Bid (clubs plus a true diamond fit)
4. Something else

For your choice, what strength?

Given this, with the actual problem, P, 3♣, or 3♦?  (Or, something weird like X  or 2NT?)

I'd prefer 3♣ to be a FNJ.

If I am not satisfied with my doubleton as support (depends on overcall-style), I can double.

After a double, I convert any any spade-bid by partner to clubs, and have shown my shape. Of course they get me, everytime they bid and support on 7 hearts.

Edit: I will convert 3♠ to 3nt. That shows my shape as well.

[kenrexford]

Overcaller, BTW, held ♠Ax ♥A ♦Q109xxx ♣Qxxx.

3♦ was hit, down one when the diamonds split 5-0 (behind the Q109xxx).

The board was a big win because the other pair ended up in a wild 5♣X (clubs also split 4-0). But, I was curious about the technique.

[gnasher]

3♦x-1 should have been a good result anyway - the opponents seem to have been making game in either major. I bet I wouldn't agree with responder's bidding at your table.

[dake50]

Clubs in a max-pass 'useful hand'. So at least D-Hx if C-HHxxx. D-xx iff CAKQxx.
Max-pass not D-tolerant doubles.

But 2S?? could be just 6xS.