Good bad 2N

[1eyedjack]

[hv=v=n&s=sa2hj6daq754caj64]133|100|Scoring: IMP

1♦ (1♥) P (2♥)

?[/hv]

You are playing Good/Bad 2N

Does this hand rank as good? or bad? or Pass? (God forbid, "other"?) Is it close?

BTW you are playing 12-14 1N opener, so no remarks about the choice of opener pls.

[Guest Jlall]

I would just pass, partner wasn't good enough to bid the first time and will have a chance if LHO is passing. If LHO is about to bid I'd prefer to have passed and not gone for a number.

 

I will assume I played weak NTs since I opened 1D.

[1eyedjack]

Sorry yes I edited first post about the NT range as you were posting

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

if I did intend to show the clubs, than this would

be definitly be "bad", you dont have shape and

you dont have a lot of compensation in form of

HCP, and it is not close ... if I bid.

 

I probably pass.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[skjaeran]

With partner unable to give a sign of life over 1♥, I can see no reason to bid now, even if my hand is far better than minimum.

 

In my mehtods partner could have bid 1♠ to show a balanced 7-10 w/o a ♥ stopper or ♣'s and the same range (and deny 4c♠).

 

So all signs indicate that this is not our hand.

[pclayton]

If pard made a negative double, then this would be a good use of g/b 2N. With partner passing, I don't think I want to get involved.

[kenrexford]

I suppose the consensus seems to be to choose bad more than good. LOL

[fred]

I don't think you should use good/bad 2NT in this auction.

 

Good/bad 2NT only works if you some way of dealing with hands that are suitable for a natural 2NT call. If your partner had taken some call you could DBL with an 18-19 HCP hand (and thus use good/bad 2NT without giving up much), but when partner Passes you need DBL as "takeout of hearts". I don't think it will work if you try to lump natural 2NT bids into the DBL as well.

 

Note that playing both good/bad 2NT and support doubles doesn't work very well (because now you are totally screwed when you have 18-19 balanced and lack as much as 3-card support for partner).

 

It should be noted that a natural 2NT in this auction is not typically an "average 18-19 balanced hand". A free 2NT should suggest a "player" - something like:

 

xx

Kxx

AKQxx

AQx

 

With most normal 18-19 balanced hands you would either DBL or Pass.

 

So I suggest you forget about playing good/bad 2NT by opener when responder has Passed at his first opportunity.

 

I also suggest you make a serious attempt to categorize situations in which good/bad 2NT applies in your partnership. Many inexperienced players fail to do this and the result is (not surprisingly) a lot of bidding costly misunderstandings that seem to follow this convention around.

 

If your hand is good enough to bid 3C then bid 3C. If you afraid your hand is too good for that then bid 4C.

 

I agree that opening 1NT with the hand in question is a good idea (only if it falls into range of course). Having opened 1D I think you should Pass regardless of whether you play good/bad 2NT or not.

 

This hand is neither a good 3C bid (not enough playing strength) nor a bad 3C bid (not enough playing strength and too much high card strength). It is not a 3C bid at all.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[whereagles]

3♣ should be fine here. Pard rates to be 4333 or something like that, so we should have a play for 3m.

[1eyedjack]

Thanks for all of the replies.

 

My thoughts ran along the lines that if they are in an 8 card fit then we should have an 8 card fit and we should not let them buy it at the 2 level, especially if we are non-vul. As I am the hand (of our partnership) likely to be shorter in the opponents' trumps, it is incumbent upon me to take action if action is to be taken, as partner will probably be fixed in the pass-out seat. Sure, bad things can happen (not least that they may be lying about the fit), but also it might push them into 3H one off, and they may be less inclined to double us into game at IMP than might have been the case in another form of scoring.

 

So my instinct was not to let them have this in 2H. The only question then remaining is whether there is any point in distinguishing between a good hand that wants to compete and a bad hand. The distinction may be of some value to partner in his decision what to do if and when they push on to 3H, but it may also help the opponents in deciding whether or not to push on (and how to play the hand if they do). And of course as Fred points out you would lose the natural 2N if used for the distinction (you always lose the natural 2N when playing good/bad, even when it does apply, and that has not stopped players from being willing to sacrifice the natural use, so I am not entirely convinced on this point yet).

 

I suppose that if I have a "bad" hand that wants to compete, there is a real risk of pushing them into a making game (and a low likelihood of our winning the partscore battle or defeating them in 3H) so perhaps 3C by me should show a good-ish hand anyway, and just pass on the bad hands however distributional.

 

By the way, secondary question: Change the scoring to MP and do the passers bid 3C now?

[whereagles]

Opps cannot play at the 2 level in an 8-card fit, period. Unless you have compelling evidence that they'll go down (eg KQJT of trumps and side AAK), you must bid something. This is regardless of how strong you are, scoring and match state.

 

As for whether 2NT should be good-bad or not, there's not so high a motivation for playing it as good-bad opposite a pard that passed. There's no use in telling you're strong because pard is gonna sign-off regardless. Might as well play it natural because you show the suits right away.

 

But of course, you CAN play it as good-bad, where "good" refers to offensive hands (not necessarily strong ones) which encourage pard to bid on, whereas "bad" refers to defensive hands that are not willing to go beyond the 3 level (like this one).

[Finch]

Opps cannot play at the 2 level in an 8-card fit, period. Unless you have compelling evidence that they'll go down (eg KQJT of trumps and side AAK), you must bid something. This is regardless of how strong you are, scoring and match state.

That's totally untrue.

 

It has some mild truth to it non-vul at pairs, but otherwise is silly. I assume that if you pass over 2H partner alerts and says "it's forcing because we can't pass you out in 2H if we think you have an 8-card fit"?

[Apollo81]

Opps cannot play at the 2 level in an 8-card fit, period. Unless you have compelling evidence that they'll go down (eg KQJT of trumps and side AAK), you must bid something. This is regardless of how strong you are, scoring and match state.

rofl

[whereagles]

That's totally untrue.

huh.. maybe you should see my statement in context? As in, if your hand is distributional...

 

Obviously, you're not going to bid with a balanced 12, right? B)

[cherdano]

That's totally untrue.

huh.. maybe you should see my statement in context? As in, if your hand is distributional...

1. Your statement was made explicitly without context, period.

2. Where is the distributional hand you are talking about?

[whereagles]

That's totally untrue.

huh.. maybe you should see my statement in context? As in, if your hand is distributional...

1. Your statement was made explicitly without context, period.

2. Where is the distributional hand you are talking about?

1. If you wanna get picky on this, it's your problem.

 

2. A 54 minors with extras has enough strength and distribution to act.

[the hog]

They are right Whereagles, you made no comment on hand type, and this is not getting picky. This hand is NOT good enough to bid on opposite a passed partner.

Ron

[whereagles]

I disagree. I think this hand IS pretty good for bidding on. I would do it 100% of the time.