TWO4BRIDGE

This same topic was discussed in depth last August : http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/47554-quick-poll-1d-2c-x/

This is a tuff situation when the Neg-DBL does NOT guarantee BOTH ( 4 card ) Majors . And the suggestions here, including Justin's, bypass ( or "waste" ) the rest of the 2-level with a 2NT or 3-level rebid by Opener. One method, not very popular with the mainstream is for the Neg-DBL to "guarantee Spades but say nada about Hearts". That would mean for Responder: 1D - ( 2C ) - ?? ...............2H free bid = 4+h ( denies 4s ) ...............2S free bid = 5+s ..............DBL = guarantees 4s, but does not deny 4h [ Opener has confidence to rebid Sp with 4s ] So, after: 1D - ( 2C ) - DBL - ( p ) 2H - ( p ) - 2S/2NT where: 2S = 4s, no 4h, some question about Cl-stop for NT .... or 2NT = 4s, no 4h, but have Cl-stop(s) The 2-level has not been "wasted".

Regarding concerns for Responder holding Clubs and a Major ( Frances ), when playing Wolff, the "NT" rebids will show Clubs as the side suit . The 3C! rebid indicates one of 3 hands for Responder: 5/4 in the majors OR the bid Major and Clubs OR a sign-off in the Major [And a rebid of the Major ( over 2NT ) shows 5+ cards, GF and no side suit ]. For example: 1C - 1S 2NT - 3C! ( always asks for 4 cards Hts ) 3D! ( denies 4h) - ?? ....................3H = 5s/4h, GF ....................3S = to play ( sign-off ) ....................3NT = 4s/4+c ( 10-12 hcp ); only 4s since with 5s, Responder would have rebid 3S directly over 2NT ....................4NT = 4s/4+c ( 13-15 hcp ); ditto

This just in. Russell Brand and Katy Perry split after approximately 6 Kardash Units ( short for Kardashian ). ( You can do the math.... ) .

@ Frances : One plays NMF to distinguish between various Sp/Ht holdings as well as just showing 5 cards of the bid Major: 1m - 1S 2NT( 18,19) - 3om! ( 5 cards Sp; may have 4 cards Hts ) whereas: 1m - 1S 2NT - 3H = 5/5 - - - - - - - - - 1m - 1H 2NT - 3om! = 5 cards Hts; may have 4 cards Sp whereas: 1m - 1H 2NT - 3S = 4/4 - - - - - - - - - - And with OP's "forcing" criteria, this allows the rebid of the Major to show extra length : 1m - 1M 2NT - 3M = 6+ cards - - - - - - - - - - Personally, I rather play the Wolff Relay ( which incorporates the Wolff sign-off ) rather than NMF. 3C! is ALWAYS the "ask" , which allows the 3D rebid by Responder to be natural, forcing. But that is a subject for another time.

Playing your methods ( NMF and only NF bid/2NT is "pass" ) : #1 ... 3S = extra length ( 6+ ) #2 ... 3H = 4 cards; does not deny 3 cards Sp ........... 3S next by Responder = cue for Hts as trump whereas ........... 3NT instead by Responder would deny 4 cards Hts, but still have 5 cards Sp since 3C ( NMF ) was bid initially. #3 ... 4S = to play ( fast arrival ) #4 ... 4C = advance cue for Hts as trump ( have 5+s and 4h ) #5 ... 4C = advance cue for Sp as trump

I think the only thing that would make sense for a bid now by Opener would be a Super-Accept ( Max w/4 cards Hts ).... since Responder's strength is unknown. In other words: Super-Accepts ( SA ) ON over delayed interference ( as long as it would not take you past 3-trump ). Thus, 2NT!/3C!/3D!/3H! would mean whatever you use that SA for w/o delayed interference... otherwise PASS.

If Opener is 4 3 4 2 ( your 1st example ): 1D - 2C! 2S ( 4 cards, and denies 5 cards Diam ) - 4S If Opener is 2 3 5 3 ( your 2nd example ): 1D - 2C! 2D ( 5+ cards Diam; does not deny 4 card Major ) - 2H 2NT ( no 4 card Major ) - 3NT ( no "issue" )

OK, I misread your comment. You are saying that his style for the 1♦ - 2♣! auction is probably OK with folks here ( since it is one of the methods also advocated by Lawrence too ), but that Max Hardy's style in general for 2/1 is often criticized by folks here.... being outdated... or some such.

Wrong again. And Mike Lawrence devoted almost a 3rd of his TWO OVER ONE book to the 1♦ - 2♣! auction ( Methods 1 and 2 ).

Again, I'll show Hardy style ( often poo-pooed by the posters here ): The first obligation for opener is to rebid 2♦ if he has 5+ cards and does not deny a 4 card Major. 2NT immediately would deny a 4 card Major as well as deny 5+ Diam. 2M instead by opener would show that 4 card Major and deny 5+ cards Diam. After 2♦, you still have the entire 2-level to find a 4-4 Major fit: 1♦ - 2♣ ( GF ) 2♦ - 2♥( does not deny 4 cards Sp ) 2NT ( no 4 card Major ) - ........again, the situation is clear .

More on the Impossible Spade. I have in my notes a tidbit from Fred G.... where you can improve on Responder's rebids when Opener has rebid 2D : His suggestion ( I can't find the original thread ): 1H - 1NT 2D - 2S! ( either a good Club hand or strong Diam raise ) 2NT! ( asks ) - ?? ......................3C = good Club hand ( direct 3C over 2D would be a lesser hand ) ......................3D = strong Diam raise Just thinking out loud, let's say the 2S! always shows the strong Diam raise: 1H - 1NT 2D - 2S! ( strong Diam raise + something else ) 2NT! ( what else? ) - ?? ..............................3C = Club-stop(s), no Sp-stop ..............................3D = 5+ Diam or questionable stops ..............................3H = honor-x doubleton Ht ..............................3S = Sp-stop(s), no Cl-stop .............................3NT = Cl & Sp-stop

Let's see what I do know ( to eliminate from the choices ): (4H) - ?? ........... DBL = 3 suited T/O ............4NT! = minor 2-suiter ( at least 5/5 ) ............4S/5C/5D = to play So, I need bids for the following: i ) strong Sp w/ Ht Ctrl .......I think I'd choose: 5H ii) strong Sp w/o Ht Ctrl.......I think I'd choose: 5S iii) strong 2-suiter: Sp/minor...I think I'd roll this one into the T/O DBL After the DBL: ... this allows partner to bid 4S if that is best for him; ...or if partner bids 5m, then 5S by you would show Sp/other-minor 2-suiter.

jdeegan.....I think we are ready for North's hand .

1H - 1NT! 2D - 2S! ( Impossible Spade... showing top end of 1NT! w/Diam fit ) 3NT

I have this one in my files... from a friend in the Netherlands .... 1NT - 2S! ( GF, Distribution-Ask ) where 1NT does NOT contain a 5 card Major. ?? .. 3C! = 4 cards + another 4 card higher; 3D! asks for 2nd suit .. 3D! = 4 cards + 4 card Major; 3H! asks for 2nd suit .. 3H! = 4/4 Majors .. 3S! = 5 cards Clubs .. 3NT! = 5 cards Diam So, after: 1NT - 2S! 3S! - 4C! ( Minorwood ) 4NT ( 4th step = 2 + ♣Q ) - 6C/6NT

Because of the VUL, I think I'd pass. Too bad, though, because you have good play in 4♠ if partner has as little as ♠K-4th, and cold if he has an Ace as well. EDIT: Heck, with the latter ( ♠K-4th and an Ace ), you are in the slam zone .

What about a "Competitive DBL" ( Richard Pavlicek ) instead of the ambiguous 4NT by Opener ? 1D - ( 1H ) - X - ( 3H ) X = Certain doubles, while penalty in standard bidding, are best played as competitive meaning, “I want to compete further but I am not sure what to bid.” The bidding would stay lower and Opener would get an opportunity to key card-ask after partner supports. The competitive DBL by Opener certainly fits the criteria set forth by Pavlicek for such an action after partner's Neg-DBL and opps' preemptive raise of their suit [ http://www.rpbridge.net/7g19.htm ] .

The basic problem with "NMF" over Opener's minor rebid is when the minor is ♦. 3♣! as the artificial force takes up too much valuable space -- it's just not an efficient force. 1♦ - 1♠ 2♦ - 2♥! ( cheapest new suit forcing ) ?? ..Opener now has 2♠/2NT/or 3♣ available that he would not have if 3♣! were the artificial force. Likewise: 1♦ - 1♥ 2♦ - 2♠! ?? ..2NT and 3♣ are still available as rebids. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - EDIT ( Addition ). I'm interested too in cyberyeti's post # 12 where he suggests to use 2♥! as the artificial force for the last sequence: 1♦ - 1♥ 2♦ - 2♥! ?? .. Now 2♠/2NT/and 3♣ are available

Bourke uses 2♠ : After 1♦ -1♥ 2♦ - ?? Opener will not hold 4 spades, so Responder's relay is 2♠. http://www.freewebs.com/bobbybridge/conventions/BourkeRelay.htm

You want to use something like the Bourke Relay ( I call it "cheapest new suit forcing after Opener's rebid of the minor " ) to distinguish between invitational and game force 3minor bids. This is analogous to NMF ( if opener were to have rebid 1NT instead of 2m ) and keeps the bidding at a reasonable levels w/o all that jumping which usually takes you past 3NT -- something that you most likely do not want to do. 1m - 1M 1NT - 2om 2M/2NT - 3m which now is GF. shows m support, and cancels interest in M as trumps whereas 1m - 1M 1NT - 3m = invitational ( the 2nd way to bid 3m ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Analogously: 1C - 1H 2C - 2D! 2H/2NT - 3C = GF whereas: 1C - 1H 2C - 3C = invitational

Playing it Forcing gives you an extra try at the best game contract when Responder has a good hand. Example: 2D - 2S ( forcing, RONF ) ?? ...2NT! = x x x tripleton♠ or A x, K x, Q x honor-doubleton♠ ...3S = honor-tripleton♠ ...3C = none of above , but ♣ "feature" ( A or K; if agreed, may also be Q ) ...3H = " " " " ♥ feature ...3D = none of above ...3NT = " " " but A K Q x x x of ♦ Note: the 3C and 3H replies are the same as if 2NT! ( feature-ask) were used by Responder, but has at most x x in Responder's Major.

I'm ready for the spoilers ...

Here is a "resulting senario". Stiff Q would be a horrible lead. If West had the Q-J doubleton (or the stiff J), leading the J would be better ( IMO edit: since there is a much lower probability of partner holding the Ace because of his preemptive opening ) . Thus, since the Q was actually led, I would deduce it was from Q J x .

[hv=pc=n&s=saqjt6hakq6dkj72c&n=sh742dqt8643caj82&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=2d]266|200[/hv]