The_Badger

A 5♣5♦3♥ hand may be shapely, but with 18HCPs you can only open it at the one level. The way to show it is by bidding your higher-ranking 5 card suit, and then jump-shifting/high reversing at the three level. For example:- 1♦ - 1♠ - 3♣, etc. This tells your partner that you have 18+ HCPs, that your diamonds are longer or as long as you club suit, and that you want to be in game. The only downside with this particular auction is that partner has bid your void, so your hand might now need some devaluing, so many players might prefer 1♦ - 1♠ - 2♣ where by agreement 2♣ is forcing. And it does depend on what system you are playing, too. [i am unsure whether this is forcing with the robots as I don't use them] The forum contributors had a long discussion about a similar hand with 4♣6♦3♥ recently. and that can be found at https://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/79445-21-assistance-please/

I don't believe being a cleverclogs here even though we hold the anchor suit, ♠s. Any other bid than 3♠ may let the opponents define their hands. Let them make the last guess. 3♠ it is for me.

It ceased being Acol years ago when strong twos were replaced with weak twos. Modern 5M Acol looks more Kaplan-Sheinwold these days. When you change both the strength of the bids and the length of the suits, it is hardly original. Forget about calling Acol 'Benjaminised', it is seriously 'Bastardised' [change (something) in such a way as to lower its quality or value, typically by adding new elements.] these days. I think many advanced/expert Acol players will agree that whilst Acol will probably never be a 'World Championship Winning System' it was, once upon a time, one of the neatest bidding systems that was ever invented. Personally I believe that the arrival of the original Precision system bought a more neater bidding system to prominence, and with that, plus the emergence of other 5M systems, will eventually consign Acol to the scrap bin. RIP, Acol old boy...

Having read a few replies, I think it is possible if 1♣, possibly 1♦ is played as 'prepared'. Thus hands that are 15-17 balanced (with a four card major) would have to be opened 1♣/1♦. Which sorts of defeats the object somewhat. But with all these bidding variations, there are swings and roundabouts. Without analysing it in great detail, using such a system would mean that many major suit openings would be automatically five cards, and would have either an unbalanced shape, suitable for a two level rebid, or would have extra beans to 'counter' the nebulous 1NT response in 2/1. All 4333/4432/5332 12-14 hands would be opened 1NT, and strong/weak 4441 hands would be handled by opening the minor much in the same way as 2/1. Personally, I would have to analyse this a bit further, but playing a 2/1 Acol system with a weak NT is, in my view, feasible. It sort of pans out as a amalgam of Kaplan-Sheinwold, Acol and 2/1. Any takers?

From Wikipedia: A high level reverse (a term used in the UK and in Acol), when opener's second bid is in a new lower ranked suit at the three level, is forcing to game. I didn't realise that the term 'high reverse' is peculiar to Acol and the UK. You're right in saying it is a jump shift, too. I was always brought up that if you went 1M - 3m as opposed to 1m - 2M you should have a slightly stronger hand as the bidding has gone one level higher.

As Tramticket rightly says, it's an easy weak 1NT opening for us this side of the Atlantic, even with two suits open and without stoppers. So, it's an easy 1♦ opening and a rebid of 1NT if partner bids a major in 2/1.

"The Lightner double is a lead-directing double of a slam contract, developed by the bridge pioneer Mr. Theodore A. Lightner of New York City, New York, United States. He was born in the year 1893 and died in the year 1981. He was one of the leading bridge personalities in the early days of the evolving game of bridge." Far more salient than whether this is a Lightner Double or not, Pete, which patently we have all concluded it isn't, is the bidding. I believe we would have a lot more to discuss here as it is an interesting hand, and I wonder how South finally arrived in 5♠X. There are a lot of decisions to consider on route to 5♠X. Is it possible to repost the hand with it? [i did note that you say you can't remember it, but please ask the other players for Pete's sake - excuse the obvious pun :)]

mikeh's thread https://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/18177-a-primer-on-reverse-bidding/ is an interesting read on reverse bidding. Reverse bidding is not unconditionally forcing to game in all systems. Certainly not when I played bridge regularly. Discounting 2/1 where a two level response by responder automatically establishes a game forcing situation, the general rules of reverse bidding were a one level response by responder followed by a two level reverse rebid by opener were forcing for one round; a two level bid by responder followed by any reverse by opener, or, a one level response by responder followed by a high reverse (three level reverse) by opener were unconditionally forcing to game. I think we all agree there are marginal hands for reversing in the 16-17 range, where the bidding goes 1♦ - 1♥ - 2♠, and stronger hands of 18+ HCPs [plus distributional points.] My take is that any reverse at two level by opener is 16+, but when you make a high reverse at the three level you should have 18+ especially in response to a one level response from responder. Even with a three card fit for ♥s, the hand is worth 18+ That's why 3♣ should be unconditionally forcing in any system.

In 4th seat I'm opening 2♣ here. You need so little for game to be on. The only reason why West was allowed to bid again was due to South's - very dubious in my personal opinion - balance after his robot partner had passed in 1st seat.

West's hand is good enough to open 2♣ and rebid 2NT either through Kokish or directly, I feel, despite those poor ♣s.

Welcome to the forum and well done!

You could come to a compromise. Rule of 2,3 for teams. Rule of 2,3,4 at pairs. You need steadier bidding at teams, and your teammates won't be able to criticise the gung-ho approach of bidding pre-empts on almost anything these days. My favourite bridge partner, David, didn't care for pairs, and we rarely won at matchpoints, but at IMPs you always knew he had his bid. There again, if your teammates are up for 2,3,4 pre-empts too, well at least you are on the same page.

Welcome to the forum. I think you have to accept that 2/1 bidding, especially after a nebulous 1NT response, isn't a perfect science. Here you could have a poor six count, or a useful eleven count. Bidding your six carder seems to be the most natural thing to do, but you'd be bidding your six carder with ♠x ♥xxx ♦KQJTxx ♣xxx. As Uwe (P_Marlowe) says, if you treat 3♣ as game forcing, the opener bidder should have nearer a 18-19+ count than a 16-17 for a high reverse. There's also the other consideration that with 5-5 black-suited many players will open 1♠ these days as opposed to 1♣. Bidding 3NT without a ♥ stopper on a wing and a prayer is a definite no-no in my opinion. 3♦ keeps the bidding low and allows partner to describe his hand further.

I won't post a solution but it's a case of recognising that finesses can be manipulated by throwing a card or cards that block a suit, and by doing so provides discards for losing cards. That hasn't given it away, has it?

I'm not totally keen personally on the Rule of 20 though obviously these things have been thoroughly analysed by players far, far better than me. As Cyberyeti rightly says, a few intermediates cards in the hand can make all the difference, especially in the long suit(s). ♥65432 is a definite downgrade. I think you also have to take account what system you are playing too, whether it be Acol, SAYC, 2/1, etc. If you are playing a 5M system, the extra card has, as I see it, been already take into consideration. What I look for using the Rule of 20 is an easy rebid whatever partner responds. That makes all the difference I feel. If you feel compromised in that situation, then maybe it's better to pass than open.

I was thinking on those lines too. I looked up a few 2/1 reference sources that I use but couldn't see one that said in this sequence 3♣ is unconditionally forcing to game. Though give responder the barest minimum hand for a 1♥ response, something like ♠QJxx ♥Kxxxx ♦x ♣xxx, and there is some play for a thin game depending on the lead or breaks.

I think the adverse vulnerability comes into the equation here too. I used to know a number of players who would open the multi on a five card suit with 5431 even at red/white, so West's XX could be - although it isn't - more like a support redouble given the red/white status. With points, but not enough strength to bid a forcing 2NT on the first round in response to the multi, but with some spade support. I think South needs to proceed with caution here. I like Mike's (miamijd) splinter of 4♠ but if partner says 5♣ in response, I don't think you have enough to bid one more.

I've been looking at this 15 minutes and can't decide what is the best way to proceed. Given that there are many players more experienced in 2/1 than me, I'll let them give you a definitive answer.

Players who play 21HCP major suit games shouldn't be allowed to find the lady. Full stop :)

Agree. With the North hand now corrected to 3064, I'd just see the auction going 1♦ - 1♥ - 2♦ - 4♥. When both hands see their partner bidding their voids, their are no frills here.

The Hideous Hog would be in a Moysian 7♠ contract on this and would succeed given a few good breaks in the side suits and a ♣ finesse, even on a trump lead :)

From your profile I see you play SAYC so can't bid 2♦ as it would show a stronger hand. When playing Acol (4 card majors including ♠s) I would only raise to 2♥ with a 5431 shape hand as there is a ruffing value. So here I would bid 1NT assuming it is not forcing but showing a balanced 7-10. If partner says it should guarantee a stop in ♠s then that's not a pre-requisite as far as I am concerned especially at the one level. 5332 is a balanced shape and you should make the most descriptive bid possible. If partner has a second suit he will bid it and then you can (given his bid) give preference to ♥s. If he doesn't have a second suit then he's likely to be balanced too, except when he has 4441 with ♣s as the singleton. In the unfortunate case that neither of you has a stop in ♠s and the opponents take the first five tricks in the suit in a 3NT contract, well we've all been there.

Having found a fit in ♠s total points come into consideration. It is in this day and age acceptable to think of a 25 point major suit game. Maybe when you were playing previously, that number was 26, even for some 27. As partner has shown 10-12 total points, add that to 14 high card points that you already have, and its better than evens that you should bid game. If partner has only 10 total points then you might fail, but with 11 or 12 you have a total of 25-26. Even with 25-26 you may go down, but in the long run you will gain more by bidding games as opposed to safely settling for a part score.

I'm sure you would have got some 'feedback' from partners at an Acol-based bridge club opening this hand in 1st or 2nd seat, and the same applies to 2/1. It is always better to be consistent and disciplined than aggressive. The hand does come out at a tad over 11 total points - my calculation - but total points shouldn't be a consideration where an opening bid is made with a standard 5422 or 5431 shape. It's difficult to put the brakes on when partner has made a game forcing response in 2/1, so as Helene rightly says, many 10 or even 11 point hands are not suitable for an opening bid in 2/1 so opening with a 9 count is a definite no-no except if a find a partner who is tolerant of your aggression. At least GIB doesn't leave 'feedback' :)

The hand you gave Ax KJxxx Qxxx AQ looks like poor 1NT opening hand, let alone an overcalling 1NT hand. No intermediates, and its a standard 1♥-2♦ rebid opener for me. It's unsuitable for 2♥ overcall in my opinion as the suit is so anaemic. The only option is to make an off-shaped takeout double. What you lack in shape you slightly compensate with strength. It keeps the bidding low. It is not ideal. The only other option available is to pass, and hope partner can reopen given that the opponents have bid the anchor suit, ♠s, and in many cases will outbid you anyway. That is also not ideal. A difficult hand generally, and the robot just made it ten times worse by doubling the final contract.