Possible auction after 2 club opening

[Wackojack]

[hv=d=n&n=sakqj932hqdakjc97&s=s865hk53d876caj43]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

Playing 2/1 but no specific agreement on responses to 2♣.

2♣ 2♦

2♠ 3♣

3♠ 4♠

I have played Benji for the majority of my bridge playing life, but now trying to come to terms with 2/1 and sayc. I was sitting south. The old fashioned response would be 2NT, but I have seen that 2♦ as a waiting bid is now favoured so that is what I bid. Partner now bids 2♠. I was aware that some partnerships play 3♣ as 2nd negative, (comments please on this as I cannot see any advantage). Whereas I have been brought up with 2NT as 2nd neg. So I bid 3♣ to show a club feature. Partner bid 3♠ probably thinking this could be a 2nd negative and I bid 4S. I think I would have rebid 3♦ on North's hand to which I would have responded 3♥ to show another feature.

 

How should this be bid? How do you arrive in 4♠ knowing for certain that there is no slam?

[helene_t]

Your bidding is fine.

 

After 2♠, I would bid 2NT (not sure if it's descriptive or just a waiting bid doesn't really matter) since 3♣ should show a real suit - would you go for a club slam if partner raised clubs? Even if 2NT is second negative I suppose you could bid that, if partner bids 4♠ you can raise to 6. An advantage of using the 2nd negative here is that you get to know that opener is limited (as it happened in your auction) so you don't end up in slam.

 

I've read somewhere that the reason for using 3♣ as a second negative is to avoid letting the weak hand declare in 3NT. I'm not sure if you need more or less bidding space after a second negative than after a positive second relay. FWIW, I prefer 2♥ as an imediate second negative.

[inquiry]

I agree with helene.. I prefer 2♣-2♥ as instant second negative. All other auctions auctions game force (well 2♣-2♦-2NT doesn't have to be, depending on how strong your 2NT rebid is).

 

If you play 2♣-2♥ as instant double negative, that leaves you with an auction that started

 

2♣ - 2♦

2♠     where 2♦ promised some values....

 

Now if it is game forcing values, you can raise immediately to 3♠, and explore if you like. Or you can jump to 4♠ being weaker than bidding 3♠. I like Chris Ryall's solution to this problem here. This is what he does... over 2♠ responder rebids 2NT to show his 2♦ bid had one trick.. say your hand without the heart king). over such a 2NT bid, if openere rebids 3♠ it is not forcing.. here opener opposite one trick will bid game (and hope the one trick isn't the heart king).

 

Since 2NT shows one trick (and might include support), then a raise to 3♠ or 4♠ must be more than one trick. I like the jump raise being fit and 1.5 to 2 tricks, and the simple raise being 2.5 tricks or more. So here, I would jump to 4♠ over 2♠. Opener knows at best slam is on a finesse (partner could have AK of clubs, but then no heart ace and no diamond queen).

 

On your auction, playing 3♣ as forcing, I would have rebid 3♦ with north as 3NT might be easier than 4♠, especially at matchpoints (yes i see it is imps). Not sure if that helps or hurts on the actual hand.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

for what's it worth, I prefer 3S

instead of 3C.

 

Whatever the meaning of 3C is,

life gets easier, if you tell partner

about your support.

 

Over 3S, partner can bid 3NT as

serious or if you think opener has a

min. club opener 4D.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Codo]

edit silly statement ;)

[awm]

Wait a sec....

 

Surely 3♠ is game forcing regardless of whether 2♦ establishes a force to game. There are many reasons for this: (1) You didn't make a second negative call. (2) With a reasonable fit, even if you don't have any points game could easily make opposite a 2♣ open. (3) It's just too hard to explore intelligently for slam if agreeing opener's suit doesn't establish a force.

 

Obviously we can argue all day about the merits of various "negative" responses, and which hands should open 2♣, but is that really the issue here? I think the auction should be 2♣-2♦-2♠-3♠ playing standard methods, and then a few cuebids. The likely result is 5♠, which will usually make.

 

I can't really imagine opener introducing a three card diamond suit over 3♣ when it's obvious that the hand should play in spades. Why create confusion (what if partner raises diamonds) when there's no reason to? The 3♣ bid seems bad to me, because it suggests actual clubs and might be misinterpreted as a second negative. The rule of "support with support" is all the more critical when a strong 2♣ opening has already consumed most of the space, and I think responder could bid this way with a hand like xx xxx xxx KTxxx.

[bid_em_up]

How do you arrive in 4♠ knowing for certain that there is no slam?

 

I guess I must be too old fashioned. Dont the auctions

 

2♣-2♦-2♠-3♠ promising at a mininum an outside Ace or King with ♠ support, and its corrollary auction, 2♣-2♦-2♠-4♠ showing spade support, scattered values without an outside Ace or King, still apply?

 

Seems to me the auction should go exactly as the first, since thats what you have.

 

How do you arrive in 4♠ knowing for certain that there is no slam?

 

Heckuva lot easier to do if this hand doesnt get opened 2♣. You really have nothing to fear about it going 1♠ all pass, and the opps will not be able to outbid the spade suit (at least not until they reach the 5 level). Yes, you have 20 hcp (if you count the heart Q as part of your opener), yes you only have 4 losers, but somebody is still holding the other half of the deck and they are going to be short in spades as well (in most cases) and will reopen (if it goes 1S-p-p). Reserving the 2♣ opener for stronger hands, as opposed to hands with lots of playing tricks in them, will make staying out of slam on these hands much easier to do.

[keylime]

I don't agree with 2♣ here. Single suited hands like this are best bid with 1M and then jump bidding to 4.

 

♠ AKQJ932

♥ Q

♦ AKJ

♣ 97

 

♠ 865

♥ K53

♦ 876

♣ AJ43

 

With that said, par is likely 4♠. I can't see any rationale to attempting six when you need a lot of help.

 

I'd bid it this way:

 

1♠ - 2♠

4♥* (discuss this - some play it as splinter, some play this as strong 5-5) - 4♠

[awm]

I don't agree with 2♣ here. Single suited hands like this are best bid with 1M and then jump bidding to 4.

I very much disagree with this statement. There are several issues:

 

(1) Jumping to 4♠ eliminates all space for investigation. Note that you have slam opposite xx xxx Qxxx AKxx or even xx xxx QTxx Axxx. I doubt partner will know to bid on with these hands. The problem is even worse if you play 2/1 since the 1NT response could be quite a bit better than the hands above.

 

(2) You'd like to jump to 4♠ on certain hands with eight spades and substantially fewer values. For example KQJxxxxx Axx Kx - seems a bit strong for a 4♠ opening, so you want to open 1♠ but don't want to wind up playing at the three-level. Of course playing namyats might change this a bit.

 

(3) With 20 hcp, there is a fair chance of being passed out in 1♠. Note that you don't really need a spade fit to make 4♠ good; partner could have the diamond queen and a stiff spade and your chances are excellent, or any ace, or even just the club king. In fact you have some chance at 4♠ opposite x xxx xxxxx xxxx simply because of partner's diamond length (or the chance of a diamond lead). Note that even though the ♥Q contributes virtually nothing to the playing strength of the hand, replacing it with a small card makes it more likely that partner can muster the strength to respond, or that one of the opponents can manage a call, and reduces the risk of a passout.

 

Compared with most others, I'm in the conservative camp with regard to opening 2♣. Many of my other posts reflect this. But with a one-suited hand including a primary major and nine top tricks, I think a 2♣ opening is called for. It's not like this is a "hard hand to describe" after opening 2♣ since basically you're just going to bid spades until the end of the auction.

[neilkaz]

The opening 2C bid here is a perfect for this hand which is too good to open 1S and jump to 4S risking a pass out and underbidding this nice 9.5 trick hand.

 

4S is cold opposite void,xxxxxx,Q,xxxxxx unless trumps split 5-1 as an extreme example of something that may be passed out at the 1 level.

 

Now take away the Q of H and J of D and a passout is less likely and you need some real help from PD for your 10th trick, so I'll open 1S and jump to 4S, although I may be a bit strong for that, and won't quarrel if PD opens 2C.

 

From what I've read and been told a 2NT response by PD shows 8 balanced HCP and that is just what he has(many play 8+ balanced). But, I wouldn't dream of playing that unless discussed. So 2D waiting (a simply terrible system (2H bust or controls is considerably better)) it is. I even prefer Jacoby HCP step to 2D waiting since opener often can tell quickly if he should be investigating slam. For those who don't play controls, I strongly think 2H bust is best and then 2D is GF period.

 

Opener can jump rebid 3S or even 4S to show long solid spades, but how many tricks should each bid guarantee and how much outside of spades ? Based on what is written here http://www.prairienet.org/bridge/b_2c.htm this hand is maybe shown by a direct jump to 4S, but if the bidding then goes 5C, 5D and responder Q's his K of H, opener will most likely bid a bad slam. It seems that after a 4S picture-type jump, it is risky to Q 2nd round controls with a minimum responding hand. Maybe it is best to jump 3S with hands like this that can use some outside help other than aces to make a slam. (others use jumps to 3 to show 3 suited monsters)

 

Many experts play controls and if the response to this 2C opener shows and ace and a king, then it maybe easier to stop below slam.

 

After 2C-2D(wait)-2S-3S seems normal by responder with 8 HCP and trump support, inspite of such poor distribution since 4S would imply little more than enough to make 4S opposite a typical min. So it may still be difficult to stop the Q bidding below 5S. Perhaps by bidding 2NT on his 2nd turn, responder can show his somewhat scattered values, force to game, and warn opener of his flattish distribution and caution opener not to get too excited. (If opener doesn't rebid spades, not to worry since responder will always pull 3NT and can end any auction in spades.

 

Maybe an auction like 2C-2D(wait)-2S-2N (7-9 scattered(and no more than 1 ace!!) seems good)-3S (great spades)-4C(Q) slows opener down enough since he can see there may not be enough for slam opposite 1 ace and 7-9 HCP.

 

Just my opinions and looking forward to learning more here in this interesting thread. .. neilkaz ..

[microcap]

BTW, this is hardly the worst slam I have ever seen if you do get to 6♠. I don't think you will get a club lead, then you must find the Q♦ or squeeze someone for your 12th trick.

 

I think the real world odds are 50/50.

[HeartA]

I think it's a good slam. Yes, with C lead, slam fails. On the other hand, with D lead, you are home (unless it were ruffed). With a major lead, you have more than 50% chance, finesse or squeeze.

 

That being said, I agree with the following sequence between regular partnership:

2C - 2D (promised something)

2S - 3S (slam interest)

3N - 4C (3N: serious 3NT)

4N ...

[rbforster]

I found that it's reasonably common to treat a jump to 3M by the 2C bidder as setting trumps (showing a solid and/or very long single suiter) and requesting cuebids from responder. More refined methods cue bid only A's, bidding 3NT to deny aces and show 1+ K's (4♣ relay asks for cheapest K).

 

Here the auction might start

2♣-2♦* (positive)

3♠-4♣

...

[Winstonm]

I prefer the idea of using 2D as wait and/or neg to improve subsequent bidding - I use 2N after 2C-2D-2H/2S as a balanced to semi-balanced positive, which allows a subsequent 3C as a control ask: 0-2, 3, 4, 5+ while 3C is a second negative and 3D, 3H, 3S, 4C all show AK in suit bid plus one other outside contol card. (3N shows specifically 3 kings)

 

The bidding would have been:

2C-2D

2S-2N

3C-3H*

4S**

 

* One ace and one king but not in the same suit

** Slam is at best 50/50 if partner has the heart A, club K, and diamond Q.

 

Standard 2C is the albatross of bidding because there is no real good standard treatment and it requires tight understandings to maximize results.

[Wackojack]

I like Chris Ryall's solution to this problem here. This is what he does... over 2♠ responder rebids 2NT to show his 2♦ bid had one trick.. say your hand without the heart king). over such a 2NT bid, if openere rebids 3♠ it is not forcing.. here opener opposite one trick will bid game (and  hope the one trick isn't the heart king).

 

Since 2NT shows one trick (and might include support), then a raise to 3♠ or 4♠ must be more than one trick. I like the jump raise being fit and 1.5 to 2 tricks, and the simple raise being 2.5 tricks or more. So here, I would jump to 4♠ over 2♠. Opener knows at best slam is on a finesse (partner could have AK of clubs, but then no heart ace and no diamond queen).

 

On your auction, playing 3♣ as forcing, I would have rebid 3♦ with north as 3NT might be easier than 4♠, especially at matchpoints (yes i see it is imps).  Not sure if that helps or hurts on the actual  hand.

In fact I do try and play paradox responses with a f2f partner. Chris Ryle on his web site suggests the 2♦ response to indicate a trick for either major. My interpretation of this is that ♠865 in a 3334 hand is not a trick in spades so the bidding would go:

2♣ 2♠ a trick in hearts but not spades

3♠-?

 

If you interpret this hand as worth a 2♦ response, and the bidding then goes:

2♣ 2♦

2♠ ?

Chris Ryle on his web site suggests 3♠ = A+ or KK+ and 4♠= K+.

He does not go into what 3♣ 3♦ or 3♥ would mean. Since spade support is implicit in the 2♦ response, then presumably 3♣ would show a club feature/control. Ditto 3♦ but denying a club feature, and ditto 3♥ but denying a feature in either minor.

Accordingly, the auction would go:

2♣ 2♦

2♠ 3♣

3♦ 3♥

3♠ 4♠ no more to say

pass

 

Is there more information on paradox responses elsewhere?

 

 

I quite like Winstonm's idea to use 2NT as a semi-balanced postive after the 2♣ 2♦ 2♥♠ sequence and then use 3♣ to ask for controls. This is a fairly popular treatment isn't it?

 

Otherwise I can see some sense in giving immediate support for spades by responding 3♠ after the rebid of 2♠. Not easy now, though, to find slams that depend on responder having a key queen.

[whereagles]

2C 2D

4S

 

this shows 9 tricks in spades.. resp has an easy pass. Opener, with 10 or more tricks in spades, bids

 

2C 2D

3S

 

requesting for cues.

[pclayton]

I'm OK with all calls except 3♣. Why introduce a mangy 4 card suit instead of raising pard?

 

By the way, theres a sensible inversion some California players are using after 2♣ - 2♦ - 2♠:

 

2N becomes a spade raise. Opener has a whole extra level to start cue bidding. 3♠ is a hand that wanted to bid 2N. This also has the advantage of right siding 3N.

[mikeh]

I have played the inversion described by Phil... it is called (I believe) JAWS, altho why, I don't know. Anyway, after playing it for a couple of years, in a partnership that did not play very often, we dumped it. It works fine when you have the fit, but NOT when you don't, and opener has a two suiter.

 

2♣ 2♦ 2♠ 3♠ and opener with a two suiter has to bid his second suit at the 4-level, which is very destructive of bidding space. We did not feel that the modest gain from using 2N as the ♠ raise was worth this cost.

 

On the actual hand, I fully agree with some of the more popular comments:

 

I dislike the 3♣ call. Responder is not showing features (at least, not as I understand standard bidding).. he is showing a 5+ suit and denying support for ♠. Thus he ought to bid 3♠.

 

I fully support the 2♣ opening: I am with Adam in that I am probably one of the most conservative 2♣ openers around, yet this hand is perfect for the bid.

 

I reject the notion of opening 1♠ and rebidding 4. I adopt all of Adam's points. BTW, I play that 1♠ 1N 3♣ is either both blacks, or specifically 4♥ or a power jump to 4♠, with 1♠ 1N 4♠ being a weaker hcp hand... but this hand is too good for 1♠.

 

I would not jump as opener, after bidding 2♣. A jump to 3♠ is warranted by the trump suit, but not by the hand. In my view, this jump should be based on a hand that needs only one or (usually) two specific cards opposite in order to place the contract.... responder no longer shows suits but cues. The opening hand is not suited for that approach. I would not jump to 4♠ either: because the auction belongs to us, and we should be very reluctant to destroy our own bidding space.

 

Opposite xxx xxx Qxxxx Ax we want to be in slam. Opposite xx AKx Qxxx xxxx we are off the first two ♣ tricks. If we bid 4♠, partner will be hard placed to evaluate accurately.

[whereagles]

Opposite xxx xxx Qxxxx Ax we want to be in slam. Opposite xx AKx Qxxx xxxx we are off the first two ♣ tricks.

How would you bid these two responder hands then?

[mikeh]

Opposite xxx xxx Qxxxx Ax we want to be in slam. Opposite xx AKx Qxxx xxxx we are off the first two ♣ tricks.

How would you bid these two responder hands then?

I admit that the first hand, in particular, is not easy.

 

For me, I do not use serious 3N as it is usually described. I use 3N , in a forcing major suit auction that has reached the 3 level, as inviting a cue of a ♣ control. Typically the 3N bidder has red suit control (or the red suit controls have been shown already) and a good hand but is worried that the partnership may be off the ♣ suit, and that there may be no 5-level safety should that be the case.

 

That style works well on the first hand:

 

2♣ 2♦ 2♠ 3♠ 3N 4♣... 3♠ shows some interest.... with a truly poor hand in context, I'd bid 4♠. Now opener is assured (more or less) of 5-level safety and can cue ♦.

 

I think (but may be guilty of wishful thinking) that the sequence thereafter of 4♦ 4♠ 5♦ focusses on the ♦ issue. 5♠ over 4♠ should be about ♥, while if the only worry is trump, 4N addresses that issue. This may be either too subtle or plain misguided... me thinking that it should be this way because I want it to be this way on this hand.

 

Alternatively, and I am not comfortable with this, responder could choose 3♦ over 2♠.... this should show (most often) a poorish 5+ suit.. altho whether this poor is debatable. This would get opener excited, but I am unsure of the best way forward, trying not to use knowldege of the actual hand.

 

On the second hand, responder has an easy 2N over 2♠, opener bids 3♠ and responder bids 4♥... an clear cue in support. Opener can bid either 4♠ (my choice) or an aggressive 5♦, identifying the ♣ issue. Either way avoids slam.

[whereagles]

hand 1: yeah, I think that identifying the diamond double fit is too hard. With relays, maybe, but otherwise it requires some luck.