rmnka447

I'd like to add a little historical perspective to the discussion herein. Back in the 1960 book "How to Play Winning Bridge", Edgar Kaplan and Alfred Sheinwold provided one of the earliest expositions of 2/1 as part of their Kaplan-Sheinwold bidding system. One of the basic concepts they espoused was that opener's simple rebid of his suit said nothing about suit length, but simply indicated that opener's was a minimum. Any other bid by opener, then would show "extras". The only exception was a 2 H rebid over a 1 S opener which didn't necessarily show extras to avert suppressing a major. Back then "extras" was treated as 16+ points. But as experience was gained, openers learned they could shade the point count if they had the right distributional hands. So, a hand like S x H AKJxx D xx C AQ10xx is worth a 3 C rebid over 1 H - 2 D while S Ax H AKJxx D x C Q10xxx is only worth a 2H rebid. This "stone age" treatment incorporates a solid principle of good bidding that with a minimum hand a player should limit his hand as quickly as possible. Responder then has a pretty good idea where the hand is going. Mike Lawrence in his last 2 columns for newer players in the ACBL bulletin (April 2013, May 2013) has discussed how important it is in 2/1 for opener to be able to rebid his 5 card suit. He refers to it as a de facto default when you are not happy with other bids. He points out that when opener doesn't simply rebid his suit that he has "a classical hand for those choices". (Interestingly one of the hands used for an example from an international competition was the following: S K974 H AK742 D 75 C J2. After 1 H - 2 D, he pointed that three players chose to rebid 2 H with this hand. They were Alfredo Versace of Italy, Tom Townsend of England, and Ming Sun of China.)[Note similarity in value to opener's actual hand here.] Based on the above (since I still play stone age 2/1 with most of my 2/1 partners), our auction on this hand would be: 1 H - 2 D 2 H* - 4 H * - minimum Now I understand that, as a choice, some players may want to bid out there hand pattern. If that's your choice, fine. But it's still important to figure out and agree how to limits one's hand when holding a minimum. Someone has to do so at some point in the auction. Otherwise, you'll be overbidding on too many hands. Some comments on the actual auction -- I'd ask this question about the auction -- is it really necessary for opener to show 4 spades in this auction? Since it's a game forcing auction, responder could with 5+ D and 4 S rebid 2 S to show that hand: 1 H - 2 D 2 H - 2 S So chances that a 4-4 spade fit will be missed seem rather slim. I think what happened to the actual responder here was he took the 2 S rebid as showing a much better hand. A 15-16 hand opposite a 14 point hand may produce slam if the right cards are held. So the responder temporized with a 3 H rebid. After opener bid 4 H, responder probably pictured opener with a big 4 S 6+ H hand. (Think about how opener should bid something like S AKxx H AQJxxx D xx C x. How does opener bid that hand versus the hand actually held?) Just a thought for opener -- a 2/1 response usually connotes a pretty good suit. So with a void opposite partner's 2/1 response, your hand's aren't fitting well and you should normally devalue it.

Pass. Yeah, I've got length in the majors, but I'm void in partner's suit. By my light, the hand's a misfit. So I'll try to get out of the auction as quickly and as low as possible. If pard reopens with 2 ♦, it's likely a 6 card suit and may have some play. If pard doubles, I can bid a major and not have pard expect too much.

2 NT for me. ♦ could be wide open. In any case, Partner will have a good handle on the hand's overall strength and have a way to find 4 ♥ if that's right.

Pass. It could be as suggested that the opposition has bid on a 5-2 fit. However, jumping to 4 ♦ with 2 card support is really taking a shot even white versus red. So something seriously out of kilter seems to be going on in this auction. The only reason to move over 4 ♠ is if you think slam is a reasonable gamble. With the hand you hold, that isn't apparent. So just stay "fixed" in 4 ♠. Partner may have pushed to take a call with a ♦ void. The last thing you want to do is take a call and find you have gone past the last makeable contract of 4 ♠.

Double and no.

I also agree that the North hand is not an opener. After a forcing NT, the only sure way to get to 4 ♥ or 4 ♠, is for South to reverse to 2 ♠. Then North holding 11 working points will make sure to drive to game. The question, then, is whether the South hand is good enough for a reverse. Virtually all the values are concentrated in ♥ and ♠ -- two AKs with minor honors supporting -- so reversing doesn't look too hard a decision to make. It works this time, but might lead to overbidding in a partial if North had held a bust response and was planning to simply rebid 2 ♥ over 2 of a minor. The South hand (4 ♠, 5 ♥) is the BIG problem hand after a forcing NT response. If you don't feel the hand is worth a reverse after opening 1 ♥, then you have to decide which is the least onerous way to misdescribe the hand. The choice is either to bid a 2 card minor or simply rebid 2 ♥. How to handle this situation is something for partnership discussion if you don't want to play Flannery. Here a simple 2 ♥ rebid probably gets you to 4 ♥ also. North has to then decide between a raise to 3 ♥ or simply bidding 4 ♥ after the 2 ♥ rebid "promises" 6 ♥ in opener's hand. I suspect more than a few players would choose to treat the doubleton ♥ honors like they were 3 hearts and simply bid 4 ♥. Flannery players should get to 4 ♥ if they decide to open 2 ♦ with the South hand. North would bid 2 NT asking for a further desciption of the South hand. South would rebid 3 ♠ showing a maximum and 2-2 in the minors and North would bid game.

I pretty much agree with PhilKing's comments. Responder may be somewhat stuck in finding a forcing bid, so 3 ♣, which should be forcing, may be made on not a lot of ♣ length (♣ Jxxx). It's also quite possible for responder to hold both minors as well as ♥s -- something like ♠ x ♥ KQxx ♦ Axxx ♣ Jxxx.

Comment deleted

5 ♥ Partner can't have many ♠s and I've got short ♣s. Who knows what makes? I'm bidding one more.

Pass/nay, not even close.

Pass, as partner would expect 10+ value for a 2 level negative double. 2 ♦ loses the ♥ suit. There's not enough values for 2 ♥. The hand looks like a partscore at most unless pard has a moose.

A Dbl followed by cue bidding the openner's suit shows about the equivalent of what you would bid with a strong and artificial 2 ♣ opener if the opponents had passed. In years very long gone, a direct cue bid was used for that purpose. But since Michaels has become the preferred use for a direct cue, doubling and then cue bidding has become the standard way to show that hand. In this hand, a 2 ♣ rebid forces partner to bid again and gives partner a further chance to describe his/her hand. This may be crucial to finding a good spot to play the hand. Even though partner partner is limited to about 0-7 points, it doesn't that partner is necessarily bereft of any values. Say partner has something like ♠ Qxxx ♥ Kx ♦ xxx ♣ J10xx. Partner would normally respond 1 ♠ to a takeout double so not to lose a 4-4 spade fit if one existed. After being forced to bid again and knowing you had a big hand, partner would bid 1 NT to show the ♣ stopper and maximum values. Now it becomes easy for you to bid the NT game. Likewise, with a relatively poor hand, partner might choose to bid the higher ranking of two 4 card suits. This will allow both suits to be shown without potentially forcing doubler to preference back to the first suit 1 level higher. So with ♠ Jxxx ♥ Kxxx ♦ xx ♣ xxx, partner would bid 1 ♠ and then if forced to bid again could show the ♥ suit. Opener can then choice between the majors without being forced to bid 1 level higher.

I would bid 2 ♥ with the hand. I'll offer the caveat that Mike Lawrence is pretty adamant in his book on overcalls about overcalling at the 2 level with good suit holdings. ♥ KJ9xx would probably not be a very attractive holding to overcall on for him. However, South has the equivalent of a really good more than minimum range opening bid. So I believe the extra strength offsets the lack of suit quality in the overcall suit. (No, I would never overcall at the 2 level with a really terrible suit holding such as Qxxxx no matter how strong I was.) In competitive bidding, it also pays to think ahead about the possible next round of bidding. Consider, for instance, if the bidding would have gone 1 ♠ - DBL - 2 ♠ - P - P - ? South has an unenviable choice to make. Does South now risk bidding ♥s at the 3 level? Or, does South DBL again and risk losing a highly playable ♥ contract with a 5-3 fit? Now consider if the bidding had gone 1 ♠ - 2 ♥ - 2 ♠ - P - P - ? South has an easy DBL which shows extras, and a willingness to compete. North will have a pretty good picture of what South's hand is (which happens to be just about the exact hand held here) and can help the partnership find the best spot to play. The bonus comes when West has strained to raise ♠s and North has the right values to sit for the double. This kind of thinking about a potential second bid is what probably led the majority to overcall rather than double. Also, after an initial Takeout Double, it will be very difficult for North to ever envision that South holds 5 ♥s. That may be very important in certain competitive bidding situations.

I'm transferring to ♠ via Texas and then cue bidding 5 ♦. That should focus pard on his rounded suit holdings which is really what you want to know about for slam.

I'm a passer, too. There's just no way to know if partner has the right cards for slam. So, I'll just stay "fixed" by the opponents preempt and settle for game. In any case, it'll be easier in the post mortem to explain missing a tough slam to bid than bidding an unmakeable one.

I bid 4 ♠. I agree with gszes. I don't see the need to unilaterally push past game when the percentages are against it. That's especially true if your partner and teammates are excellent players. 4 ♠ really describes your hand to partner. If partner has the right hand, he may make a move. One thing I've learned is that in team games, even down a bundle, you never know what will happen at the other table. So it's best to just play good bridge and let the chips fall where they may.

Double. I don't see much other choice.

Double looks pretty clear at MPs unless pard is a VERY conservative preempter with white pockets. Most people aren't, so prospects for 3 NT making aren't good -- no guarantee of an entry to run ♦s. In the meantime, it looks like you'll need help from pard to have more than 1 spade stopper.

Pass. Your hand has lost some value with a ♥ bid behind it. Even though pard rates to have 6 pretty decent ♠, he'll have to be play them out of his hand to set them up. Unless they're solid or semisolid, prospects aren't too good for setting them up with 1 loser.

5 ♦ - Pard ought to have at least ♦ AK seventh for an unfavorable preempt or possibly ♦ A eight times. RHO opponent has bid 4 ♣ holding a suit no better than headed by AQJ, so it seems almost certain that the ♣ are accompanied by either the ♥ A or ♠ K or even pretty likely - BOTH. So 5 ♦ should have a play. Bidding 5 ♦ now makes the opponents have the tough decision to make.

Since in my partnerships we play CRASH over strong 1 ♣ bids, we also play it over strong 2 ♣ openers, too. Systemically then, my bid is 2 NT which shows the pointed suits (♦, ♠) or rounded suits (♣, ♥). If there is no agreement about 2 suited bids, I'd simply bid 3 ♦ if partner will take it as ♦. Otherwise, I'd bid 4 ♦ with the hand.

2 ♠ to show the strength of the hand. Your hand doesn't have 13+ HCP, but the hand is worth 9 tricks all by itself in a ♠ contract. How you continue depends a lot on your agreements over the 2 ♠ bid. You don't plan on stopping below 4 ♠, but the key is to get partner to identify his values so you can evaluate slam prospects.

7 ♦ across the board. Of course, if partner likes to push the down 2/3/4 approach a lot, I might be tempted to bid one less. If 7 ♦ doesn't do well at MPs, that's life. 7 ♦ at IMPS seems no worst than a -2 IMPs and seems a bit safer to me than 7 NT.

Rebid 3 ♠. Your hand has 16 HCP, a reasonably good 6 card ♠ suit, and really no other suit to show. A jump rebid shows exactly that hand. Partner will know to pass with the 5 to bad 8 hand and bid on with a better hand. Partner has a decision to make -- pass 3 ♠, bid 4 ♠, or bid 3 NT. Partner's problem is that there in no way to obtain more information about your hand. Holding a good 8, I think the choice for partner is between 3 NT or 4 ♠. With bad ♥ spots, I think 4 ♠ is better. The opponents have helped you by leading ♣ Q. They didn't find a lead and cash 3 ♥ tricks. Win in your hand with ♣ A. Cash ♠ A. If neither ♠ Q or ♠ 10 show, cash ♠ K. If spades are 3-2 and the Q is doubleton, you can draw the last trump and pitch a losing ♥ on the ♦ Q making at least 5. If spades are 3-2 and the Q has not fallen, you still make 4 so long as the hand holding the ♠ Q also has a doubleton ♦. You next cash 3 rounds of ♦ and pitch a ♥ loser on the third ♦ winner. If the hand with the ♠ Q has exactly three diamonds, diamonds will break and you have a chance to make 5 by playing a 4th ♦ trick and pitching a 2nd ♥ loser. If the ♠ Q falls when you cash the ♠ A, you can cash two more ♠s [K,J] and hope the player with the ♠ 10 fourth has at least 2 ♦, continue playing as above. If ♠ are 4-1 and the ♠ 10 falls when you cash the ♠ A or spades are 4-1 and all low cards show when you cash the ♠ K, you may still have some possibilities via a trump coup. Had the opponents cashed 3 ♥ tricks against 4 ♠, you would have been down to bringing in the ♠ suit without the loss of a trick at best. A 4th ♥ led from in front of your hand might well effect a trump promotion. In that case, your best hope would be to ruff with the ♠ 9 and hope ♠ Q10x were in front of your hand. Without a 4th ♥ return, your best hope is to cross to dummy and finesse the ♠ J hoping for 3-3 ♠s with the Q onside.

4 ♠ as you have absolutely no defense against 4 ♣. For 4 ♣ doubled to be right, partner likely has to 4+ tricks in his own hand. Unfortunately, the 3 ♣ cue makes partner think you have some values. If you're weren't going to show ♥ on this hand, did you consider bidding 4 ♠ initially?