Old Problem, New Hand

[Winstonm]

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=s6hq953dqj9ca10973]133|100|Scoring: IMP

1S-1N

2D-?[/hv]

 

As game is still within reach, we run into the same old 2/1 problem of how to continue. Partner will bid a 3-card suit here with a minimum 5233 as we play 1N as absolute force.

 

What now?

[pbleighton]

2S.

 

Peter

[hrothgar]

2NT seems obvious

[Winstonm]

2S.

 

Peter

Although this does indeed keep the auction alive, it also offers the best chance to play 2S in a 5/1 fit. :)

[Winstonm]

2NT seems obvious

I believe most play 2N as more in the 10-12 range, so this hand, especially with the singleton spade, seems a bit light.

 

Obviously, though, 2N is one alternative solution.

[mike777]

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=s6hq953dqj9ca10973]133|100|Scoring: IMP

1S-1N

2D-?[/hv]

 

As game is still within reach, we run into the same old 2/1 problem of how to continue.  Partner will bid a 3-card suit here with a minimum 5233 as we play 1N as absolute force.

 

What now?

 

I would rebid 2s if partner may have only 3D in your style.

 

 

I would expect partner to rebid 2clubs with any 5233 shape.

This is what BART is for.

 

As for now.

I can live with pass or 2S. I lean towards pass, if we have a 7 card fit and partner did not j/s.

[awm]

I'd pass. This is what Gazilli is for. Without such a convention, I prefer to take the percentage action and hope for the best. If partner is very maximum we could easily miss a game, but bidding 2♠ is going to get us -100 or -200 pretty frequently versus the rare missed game. I suppose if I was more fond of 3NT on 23 hcp misfits I could try 2NT (and I know some people who seem to love those sorts of 3NTs).

 

Partner having a 3-card diamond suit is possible but quite rare, whereas a 5-card (only) spade suit is very common. If partner has 6 spades, at least he will have 4 diamonds also (okay this also depends on style).

[Guest Jlall]

I've always thought it was right to pass with this hand type and none of my experiences have convinced me otherwise. Sure I might miss a game but so far this is a misfit hand and any bid I make is a distortion (2N is a pretty big overbid and 2S could just correct from a decent spot to a silly spot). Any debate will boil down to this:

 

2S: I am keeping the auction open for partner, he may have as much as 18 HCP but I don't want to get him too excited. He will bid again with a 16-18 hand type.

 

2N: Well I'm kind of screwed, I do have some stoppers and nothing else appeals, this aims at a game and doesnt lead to a ridiculous contract or a missed game with 26 HCP. Sure I may get to a 23 or 24 HCP game, but sometimes those make too.

 

2D: In the long run I believe this is the percentage action even though we will sometimes miss a game, we will compensate for that by playing a reasonable partscore and going plus far more often than anyone else.

[Winstonm]

I've always thought it was right to pass with this hand type and none of my experiences have convinced me otherwise. Sure I might miss a game but so far this is a misfit hand and any bid I make is a distortion (2N is a pretty big overbid and 2S could just correct from a decent spot to a silly spot). Any debate will boil down to this:

 

2S: I am keeping the auction open for partner, he may have as much as 18 HCP but I don't want to get him too excited. He will bid again with a 16-18 hand type.

 

2N: Well I'm kind of screwed, I do have some stoppers and nothing else appeals, this aims at a game and doesnt lead to a ridiculous contract or a missed game with 26 HCP. Sure I may get to a 23 or 24 HCP game, but sometimes those make too.

 

2D: In the long run I believe this is the percentage action even though we will sometimes miss a game, we will compensate for that by playing a reasonable partscore and going plus far more often than anyone else.

This is such a difficult area of 2/1 due to the wide range of opener's hand, and it becomes harder still at imps with its premium of games and slams.

 

I happen to agree with your assessment that long range pass probably works best, as it is unlikely to be a 3/3 fit unless partner is 5332 exactly.

 

However, there is another bid available although not the popular choice, I'm sure, and that is 3D. I don't think this is as silly as it first appears as the chances of it being horribly wrong is fairly small while it keeps open game possibilities.

 

I am not familiar with Gazilli, so it may be an improvement - but like everything, there are ripples from Gazilli that would effect other sequences and I don't know if that trade off is worth it.

[Fluffy]

Isn't 3♦ as strong as 2NT?, I don't see it has any advantage, high level ♦ contrracts don't rate to play very well.

[hrothgar]

2NT seems obvious

I believe most play 2N as more in the 10-12 range, so this hand, especially with the singleton spade, seems a bit light.

 

Unlike many people, I don't open on crap when I play 2/1 game force. You severely overload the forcing NT and the frequency of hands like this one increase to an unacceptable level.

 

Accordingly, for me most 12 counts are a Game Force opposite an opening bid. The only exceptions would be "quacky" balanced hands. I agree that this hand is a bit on the light side, but I certainly prefer 2NT to either 2♠ or 3♦. Pass could work well, especially if 2♦ promises 4+ pieces. However, I prefer 2N.

[jdonn]

2♠ and 3♦ are pretty ridiculous, since if you are going to keep the auction alive the slight overbid of 2NT seems clear rather than totally misrepresenting your hand, or going for a 5-1 or 3-3 fit.

 

I guess I'll bid 2NT, it's just a guess between that and pass and either is right on different days. I think it's only a mild overbid so no big deal.

[whereagles]

I'll be ridiculous and bid 2♠ anyway.

[pbleighton]

Although this does indeed keep the auction alive, it also offers the best chance to play 2S in a 5/1 fit.

 

As passing offers the best chance to play in a 4-3 or (occasionally) 3-3 fit.

 

If you're not going to bid 2NT (and I won't, a 9 count with a stiff in pd's primary suit doesn't do it for me), it's very close between 2S and pass. Playing in 2S, the 5th spade will score 62% of the time. Playing in 2D, it will almost never score. I therefore have a slight preference for 2S.

 

If 2D promised 4 I would pass.

 

Peter

[Winstonm]

2NT seems obvious

I believe most play 2N as more in the 10-12 range, so this hand, especially with the singleton spade, seems a bit light.

 

Unlike many people, I don't open on crap when I play 2/1 game force. You severely overload the forcing NT and the frequency of hands like this one increase to an unacceptable level.

 

Accordingly, for me most 12 counts are a Game Force opposite an opening bid. The only exceptions would be "quacky" balanced hands. I agree that this hand is a bit on the light side, but I certainly prefer 2NT to either 2♠ or 3♦. Pass could work well, especially if 2♦ promises 4+ pieces. However, I prefer 2N.

I agree completely with your assessment that when playing 2/1 one must up the opening standards to compromise for the increased ineffectiveness of the 1N apparatus. I, too, would count virtually all 12's as worth a GF.

 

I do not critisize pass, 2N, or 3D, as each has merits and faults. In this hand valuation plays a role.

[Winstonm]

Although this does indeed keep the auction alive, it also offers the best chance to play 2S in a 5/1 fit.

 

As passing offers the best chance to play in a 4-3 or (occasionally) 3-3 fit.

 

If you're not going to bid 2NT (and I won't, a 9 count with a stiff in pd's primary suit doesn't do it for me), it's very close between 2S and pass. Playing in 2S, the 5th spade will score 62% of the time. Playing in 2D, it will almost never score. I therefore have a slight preference for 2S.

 

If 2D promised 4 I would pass.

 

Peter

Good point. However, remember that unless partner is precisely 5332, a 3/3 diamond fit is impossible, and without a trump lead a 3/3 at the 2-level can score a lot of tricks on cross-ruff (although I wouldn't build my bidding system around finding 3/3's. :P )

[Winstonm]

2♠ and 3♦ are pretty ridiculous, since if you are going to keep the auction alive the slight overbid of 2NT seems clear rather than totally misrepresenting your hand, or going for a 5-1 or 3-3 fit.

 

Seeing how at the table I opted for 3D, I should feel pretty ridiculous - but I don't. :P

 

The likelihood of precisely a 3/3 diamond fit is extremely remote and probably not all that different than the chances of having a 5/3 fit. The hand has a ruffing value and the secondary diamonds cards of QJ9 would rate to go up in value (although this is not a secure as a freely bid 2D) and a quick-catching card in the club ace.

Surely the hand is more suitable to suit play than NT play; however, because of the good spots in clubs and hearts it would also be suitable for NT if partner moves again over 3D.

 

All in all, if I had it to do over again, I'd pass. :P

[mikeh]

This problem is an excellent advertisement for the common approach that 2♦ promises 4cards: that 2♣ could be a doubleton. Whether you play Gazilli (which I don't, and which I wasn't aware applied here) or Bart, which I do play, or just seat-of-your-pants bridge, compressing 2♣ offers a net gain compared to making both minors 3+. It makes a bad situation re 2♣ slightly worse, while making a bad situation re 2♦ far better.

 

On the given hand, I'd probably make the misbid of 2N at least some of the time, but I am certain that pass is the best call.....

[helene_t]

This is very difficult and is the reason why Danny Kleinman in his "The notrump zone" argues that playing 1N forcing is a case for playing a weak 1NT opening.

 

I think I'd pass.

[jdonn]

I still haven't heard any great objections to 2NT. If we can figure the excellent spots somewhat cancel out having a singleton spade and thus go strictly on a pointcount basis, it's an overbid by a point. What is so terrible about this, as compared to missing games any time partner is maximum or trying to play in ridiculous non-fits? Passing is ok, it's just a gamble that 1-partner is minimum, and 2-partner doesn't have 3 diamonds. But at least under those condititions it would clearly work well. 3♦ seems to be depending on partner to be 5-5 (they WILL lead a trump by the way), and I can't even imagine how 2♠ could work well.

 

And how often people whine about forcing notrumps too, I don't mind it at all. For every time this situation happens (and if we guess to do the right thing it's not a loss anyway), there is a time responder is 1345 and gets to pass the 2♣ rebid, or 2632 and gets to rebid 2♥ over 2♣, which are both cases 'standard' would have you playing in 1NT. It works worse probably a little more often than it works better, maybe 60-40, but not nearly to the extent its detractors would have people believe.

[Winstonm]

I still haven't heard any great objections to 2NT.

 

The reason IMO opinion you haven't heard great objection to 2N is because there is no great objection - it is a slight overbid - not a horrible crime.

 

I'm truly not fond of 2S, as I think a high percentage of the time you have decreased your chances for a positive result. About the only time it would seem to be right would be if partner is 5332 and even then 2N would have better play.

 

3D is.....well.....a strange choice....but on reflection, not quite so off-the-wall weird and wacky as might first appear. Maybe not choice #1 or #2, but clearly at least tied for last with everything else. :P

[Winstonm]

I guess it is time to post the result of this fiasco in bidding acumen.

 

Partner held: AJ98x, A108, A87x, 8.

 

With opponents silent:

1S-1N

2D-3D*

3H**-3N***

 

*Pretend this is 2N and keep the real bid a secret, will you?

** Smelling a rat, no doubt.

***Endplayed.

 

Making 3 on misdefense (clubs led and continued after winning the diamond K offside) and a double squeeze.

 

Can someone tell me again the color of the pass card?

[P_Marlowe]

Pass, no 2nd choice.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Fluffy]

I prefer to play a stupid 3NT than a stupid 2♠, at least if they missdefend the price on 3NT is greater (and they don't see my ridicoulous hand while they do in 2♠ hehe). Anyway I prefer to stay in 2♦, so pass quickly (sometimes they reopen this)

[Winstonm]

(sometimes they reopen this)

 

Ah...now there's something I never factored...juicy. :P