Very basic bidding theory

[cherdano]

A while ago we added the agreement that a jump to 3N (whether by responder or opener) in a GF auction opposite an unlimited partner shows extras, roughly 15-17. This simplifies a lot of auctions where you can trade off describing your shape exactly against showing your extras below 3N, while still showing your rough hand type; it avoids the problem of playing in 3N with 16 opposite 17 or 4N with 17 opposite 12. (e.g. 1S 2D 2S 3N, 1D 1H 1S 2C* 2H 3N)

 

A couple of weeks later I read some old Master-Solver-Clubs and found that everybody was assuming this agreement, i.e. it seems to have been a very classical rule.

 

So why didn't I learn about this earlier? Isn't this something everybody should know? My experience on BBO playing with or kibitzing adv+ players seems to be that hardly anyone is assuming this rule. Has it become obsolete? (I don't see how.) No longer standard?

Are we too busy discussing gadgets that only ACOL players still know straightforward value bidding?

 

End of rant :)

[the hog]

A lot of players believe in fast arrival, hence the jump shows a min - about 13-14. I believe this is more sensible as it gives the stronger hand more room.

[cnszsun]

I learned the same idea from Mike Lawrence's CD 'The Two Over One System'.

Also, i'm curious to know how many experts did play it.

[Guest Jlall]

It is a very standard agreement amongst expert players. If I was to sit down with say, mikeh, I would assume this agreement with no discussion.

[barmar]

Fast arrival is generally only used for suit contracts once you've found a fit. With NT you bid quantitatively. With a minimum opening hand, you want to give responder a chance to bid his shape below game, so you don't jump around.

[keylime]

I tend to discuss this with any comparable player with regards to fast/slow arrival - I'm a slow arrival person by preference.

 

However around here in D.C., pretty common.

[cherdano]

Fast arrival is generally only used for suit contracts once you've found a fit. With NT you bid quantitatively. With a minimum opening hand, you want to give responder a chance to bid his shape below game, so you don't jump around.

I agree with that, adding that fast arrival seems to have become unpopular anyway.

 

So if this is expert standard (and of course everybody here knows it :) ), why don't more advanced players know that.

 

Just yesterday on BBO I saw 3 auctions by good (but not expert) players who apparently didn't know this (either jumping to 3N on a flat 12, or bidding 2N then raising 3N to 4N on a misfitting 17-count).

[Cascade]

That's what I play in GF auctions.

 

Fast arrival opposite an unlimited partner makes little or no sense. Partner sets up a GF to explore for slam and you take away his bidding space by jumping to game and giving little or no useful information - if partner who is slammish was to guess he would assume you are minimum. Minimum is also the most likely holding so you need to preserve your bidding space on these common hands to allow for more accurate slam exploration.

[Stephen Tu]

A lot of players believe in fast arrival, hence the jump shows a min - about 13-14. I believe this is more sensible as it gives the stronger hand more room

 

I believe this is less sensible, for several reasons:

 

- 13-14 is more common, if you have set up a game force it's valuable to keep the 3 level to explore for alternate game strains. If you jump to 3nt just to show a minimum you've just voluntarily given up your supposed space savings from 2/1 being GF. When holding the extra values, it's less necessary to explore other strains, 3nt will often be better/playable just on the extra power.

 

- you no longer get a clear distinction between the 15-17 range & the 18-19 range, when both are lumped into 2nt. On some auctions it will be difficult to sort out.

[pclayton]

This is a normal agreement, but I've come across a few top players that either didn't know about it, or thought that it was a total waste of bidding space.

 

In Lawrence's 2/1 workbook he specifically talks about 1x - 2y - 2N being either 12-14 or 18-19 and 3N being 15-17. I suppose the same logic can be extended to 1x - 2y - 2z - 2N/3N and similar sequences.

 

Arend, every few months I come across an agreement that I didn't know about that is pretty common among top players. You'll come across more I'm sure.

[benlessard]

The way ive learned it is that

 

1♠-----2♦

???

 

2nt showed 12-14 or 18-21

3nt showed 15-17

 

This is because you want to separate the 15-17 troublesome range so your partner with a 15-16 count isnt force to go over 3nt. Also if you always open 1nt with 15-17 and a 5 cd major when you bid 3nt your telling partner you have a stiff in his suit.

[ArcLight]

>In Lawrence's 2/1 workbook he specifically talks about 1x - 2y - 2N being either 12-14 or 18-19 and 3N being 15-17. I suppose the same logic can be extended to 1x - 2y - 2z - 2N/3N and similar sequences.

 

Actually Mike says that since opener could have opened 1NT and didn't it should imply something in addition, and suggests it shows 2 cards in responders suit.

(there should be some reason Opener avoided NT)

[Elianna]

I thought that this (jump to 3NT in GF auction is extras, but not in a suit) was basic standard.

 

And if you're asking why you never learned it, I have no clue. :)

[barmar]

Actually Mike says that since opener could have opened 1NT and didn't it should imply something in addition, and suggests it shows 2 cards in responders suit.

(there should be some reason Opener avoided NT)

Now that I think about it, I'm trying to come up with a hand where a jump to 3NT would be right.

 

As you say, there must be a reason why opener didn't open 1NT, and it's presumably because his shape is wrong. But in that case, doesn't he have a second suit he can bid? Since he has extra values, there's no problem going to the 3 level to show the second suit.

 

I suspect this sequence only comes if you won't open 1NT with a 5-card major.