Basic 2/1 auction

[han]

Playing 2/1 GF, the auction starts 1S-2C-2D-2S. Does responder show 3-card support?

 

The poll is motivated by a comment of mikeh in a different thread, where he suggested Kx Jxx Qxx AKJxx for responder. I wonder how many would bid 2S with that hand, and if they do, whether it would be a gentle lie or a systemic bid.

[Guest Jlall]

100 % shows 3 card support to me. One of the first rules I learned of 2/1 was 2/1 then raise= 3 card support.

 

As for the example hand, I know many play 2H as showing a hand like this, and people like myself would find 2N routine with this hand.

 

Side note about a 2H bid here... I was playing against jacobs/versace. They had the auction 1H p 2C p 2D p 2S(jacobs) p 2N p 3N. They then have the following conversation:

 

Versace: 2S was fourth suit, do I need to alert this George?

Jacobs: 2S shows spades.

Versace: 2S shows spades???? 1H..2C..2D...2S...4th suit

Jacobs: We're already in a game force.

Versace: How can 2S be spades? 1H...2C..2D...2S. May be natural...usually not natural...

Jacobs: Why do we need 4th suit in a game force?

 

Finally the lead was made...lol.

[luis]

3 cards for me too. With Kx 2NT looks simple. Then you bid 3!s and life is good.

[luke warm]

i'd take 2♠ as absolutely guaranteeing 3 spades

[Kalvan14]

3 spades at least, but might be 4 (with a good club suit and a GF hand, bidding must start with 1♠-2♣).

 

 

1♥-2♣-2♦-2♠: 2♠ is 4th suit (2 reasons: opener can still have 4 spades in 4-5-4-0; advancer does not bid 2NT without a spade stopper). Opener raises spades with 4 cards, bids 2N with a stopper, or in any case better describes his hand. Priority is to clarify the spades situation, but with a good red 5-5 he might prefer to rebid 3♦ in any case.

[mikeh]

I guess I opened a real can of worms with my earlier post :ph34r:

 

Okay, let's look at some of the issues here.

 

Let me start by saying that much of my argument falls away if you agree that 2♥ by responder over 2♦ is a noise: saying nothing other than that responder has no better bid available. This may be playable, altho I ask how you cope with 1♠ 2♦ 2♥ when responder holds Kx Qxx AKJxx xxx?

 

If you play that 2♥ shows ♥, then with Kx xxx Qxx AKJxx, it seems that you must bid either 2♠ or 2N.

 

2N is lunacy. Pure and simple lunacy. You are engaged in an uninterrupted power auction and you are inviting 3N on such commonplace hands for partner as AQJxx xx AKxx xx. What on earth is he to do over 2N? Sure, maybe ♥ break 4=4 and you only lose 1 imp. Well done.

 

What about AQJxx Kx Jxxx Qx opposite the same hand. Now you are praying that the ♥ A is onside. Sure, if they lead opener's side suit at trick one, you may need the same luck when opener plays 3N, but I sure as heck know who I want to be declarer.

 

And what do you gain? Is it that big a deal to know that 2♠ promises 3+ support?

 

2/1 seems to function quite adequately in the comparable sequence: 1♠ 2♦ 2♠ where, for the majority of 2/1 players (but not all), the 2♠ bid promises no more than 5 possible weak ♠.

 

My experience, and (I suggest) bidding theory, indicates that after a 2♠ preference, in an uncontested power auction, the partnership has ample opportunity to explore the degree of fit and preserve options as to strain, level, and which player will be declarer.

 

Modern bridge players are so indoctrinated with the idea of the 8 card fit that we seem to shy away from sequences that might allow us to intelligently bid a 5-2 or 4-3 contract. The 'rule' that 2♠ shows 3+ support, if combined with 2N not promising a stopper in the unbid suit, seems to be part of that process.

 

As a side issue: it occurs to me that if opener is supposed to cater to 2N being on xxx in the unbid, by agreement, then maybe (I don't know the answer) 2N ought to be alerted.

[david_c]

c.f. 1S:2D,2H:2S

[kenrexford]

I would add that fewer people now-a-days are requiring real diamonds in this auction either. Meaning, 1S-P-2C-P-2D-P-2S is an auction where the only known facts are that a spade fit exists and that game will be reached, with the limitations that Responder probably does not have five hearts and Opener probably does not have four hearts.

 

I could imagine this auction with 5323 opposite 3523, easily.

 

However, I could not imagine any auction where Responder has two spades.

[Kalvan14]

One of the best features in 2/1 was the ease in finding fits at 2-level after an immediate GF. If opener starts to relay rather than bidding suits, this advantage goes away.

 

If bidding goes 1♠-2♣-2♦, advancer (holding Kx xxx Qxx AKJxx) cannot bid either 2♠ or 2NT. 3♣ is a matter of partnership agreement (for me, 3♣ shows a semi-autonomous suit)). 3♦ would be a stronger hand and almost certainly slam try. 2♥ (4th SF) is the only reasonable bid (I'd bid 2♥ even with Kx xx Qxxx AKJxx: 3NT might be the best contract, and an immediate 3♦ would require a better hand).

 

 

Note: with a 5-3-3-2 or similar distribution, opener rebids 2♠, which does not promise anything (it just denies any 4 cards below spades, and denies also a non-minimum hand with club fit).

[Stephen Tu]

I think the biggest problem is with a hand like Kx QJx xxx AKxxx after

1♠-2♣;2♥-?

 

I definitely prefer playing mikeh's style where 2♠ is sometimes doubleton & non-committal to strain, rather than being forced into a 4th suit 3♦ which makes the auction awkward and takes up too much space.

 

But I think the default assumption if your only agreement is with partner is "2/1 GF" is that 2♠ shows 3.

 

People who think you don't need 4th suit artificial just because you are in a 2/1GF auction clearly haven't thought through all the possible combinations of problem hands.

[joshs]

In standard 2/1, bidding the 2/1 suit, then supporting partner shows 3 card support.

 

There are 3 problem auctions:

1S-2m-2H (thats 2 of them)

1S-2H-3D

In these auctions, the 4'th suit is only available at the next level so there is a case to be made for 2S in auctions 1 and 2 and 3S in auction 3 to be occasionally made on Hx. If you had real support you would need to rebid them.

 

Example:

AQJxx Kxxx Kx xx

Kx QJx xxx AKxxx

 

In traditional 2/1 the auction goes:

1S-2C-2H-3D(A Semi-natural punt, denies the ability/orientation to bid 2N)-3N-P

 

3N depends on diamonds breaking.

 

While it sounds ugly, a better auction is:

1S-2C-2H-2S(possibly only Hx)-2N(diamond stopper)-3C(good clubs, often only 2 spades)-3S (good spades)-4S

 

With 3 spades and decent suit oriented cards (such as the AK of clubs rather than KQJ) responder has to bid 3S over 2N to show a real fit.

 

Now this is very non-traditional, so you better have an agreement on these auctions to bid this way...

 

Also note there is no reason to pervert the 2S bid when a punt is available below 2N:

e.g.

AQJxx Kx Kxxx xx

Kx xxx QJx AKxxx

 

Here it goes comfortably: 1S-2C-2D-2H-2N-3C-3S-4S

So in these auctions, 2S should definitely show 3.

 

Josh

[joshs]

I think the biggest problem is with a hand like Kx QJx xxx AKxxx after

1♠-2♣;2♥-?

 

I definitely prefer playing mikeh's style where 2♠ is sometimes doubleton & non-committal to strain, rather than being forced into a 4th suit 3♦ which makes the auction awkward and takes up too much space.

 

But I think the default assumption if your only agreement is with partner is "2/1 GF" is that 2♠ shows 3.

 

People who think you don't need 4th suit artificial just because you are in a 2/1GF auction clearly haven't thought through all the possible combinations of problem hands.

Wow, someone cited the exact same hand as I did. ! ;)