2/1 rebid question

[ajm218]

[hv=s=saxhkxxdakjt9xcxx]133|100|[/hv]

1♦ 2♣

?

 

Is this good enough for a 3♦ rebid? If not what is the minimum hand?

 

Also what is a rough minimum hand for the following uncontested auctions playing 2/1?

 

1♦ 2♣

2♥

Is this even extras?

 

1♥ 2♣

2♠

 

1♠ 2♥

3♣

 

1♥ 2♣

3♥

[han]

Good questions, though of course some of the answers depend on your agreements.

 

I think this hand is good enough for 3D, you have extra values and the diamond suit is great. If you don't show extrra values now then you won't be able to below 3NT.

 

I don't play that 1D-2C-2H shows extras. I do play that it shows an unbalanced hand. You could play it differently.

 

For me 1H-2D-2S shows about a king more than a minimum.

 

1S-2H-3C shows extras. When I'm 5-5 this doesn't have to be a lot of extras, but a sound opening with good suits. With 5-4 I would again need about a king more than a minimum.

 

I play that 1H-2C-3H shows a semi-solid suit and at least a king above a minimum.

[TylerE]

I'd be very tempted to open the example hand 1NT. (And I'd probably accept an invite...

[han]

Hell yeah if you open 1NT you should accept an invite!

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I would bid 2D with your hand, the main reason is, it will

allow partner max. room to describe his hand, the pure

values and the good suit quality would justify a 3D bid,

but I think the room consideration is more important.

 

For most peoble, a reverse promises add. strength, but this

is an area, which each partnership needs to discuss, there

are pro / cons. (search the forum for reverses).

This is valid for your 2nd and 3rd aucton (they are similar),

the 4th auction should show add. strength (but if you treat it

similar as the 2nd and 3rd this is also ok.

 

The last seq. showes add. strength, and should more or less

set trumps, partner may insist on his suit or suggest NT, but

elsewise it sets trumps.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Finch]

Are you asking because you want to develop a good 2/1 regular partnership, or because you want to play 2/1 with pick-up BBO partners?

 

There's a big difference between the two, because 1D - 2C auctions are generally quite difficult and do reward playing a bit of artificiality if you are in a regular partnership.

 

And just because someone says they play "2/1" doesn't mean they necessarily play 1D - 2C as game forcing.

[ArcLight]

I think 3♦ is ok. Lets say pard has a nice 2 clubs bid.

S: K x x

H:A x x

D: x x

C: A K x x x

 

This can take 12 tricks if the dime Q is onside. This is a nice hand, but not unreasonable. I wouldn't expect it, but its possible.

Add a spade or club, and remove a heart and you can ruff the third heart, and make 13.

With another type of hand pard can look for 3NT or 6NT.

3♦ shows more than a minimum (this is more than a minimum)

and a solid suit, which I think this is because of the interior quality.

 

 

 

 

In the Mike Lawrence notes on 2/1

1♦ - 2♣

2♥

would not show anything extra, because you are hunting for 3NT.

 

but

 

1♥ - 2♣

2♠

 

does constitute a reverse.

 

 

1♠-2♥

3♣

Is a high level reverse and requires extras.

 

Jump rebidding your major – 2 treatments:

a) Solid suit: AKQJxxx – JTx – x – Kx. With Qx of C, its not a 3S rebid. (good hand) Suggests slam.

;) <Mikes choice> Solid or semi-solid suit. The rest of the hand must be good. AKJTxx AQJTxx KQJTxx AQJ98xx (Blackwood may keep you from getting too high)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Frances raises 2 good points.

In my experience - "2/1 with pick up pards (at least the ones I get who tend to be 'advanced')" doesn't mean much because all they know of 2/1 is:

- 1NT in response to 1M is forcing

- a 2/1 is forcing to game

 

They abuse or misunderstand jumps especially.

 

As for 1D - 2C - that is an area requiring discussion. No way pick ups will get it right.

[brianshark]

After 1♦-2♣(GF), I like to play:

 

2♦ = any hand with 5+ ♦s

2♥ = 44, usually a balanced hand, and therefore in the 12-14 or 18+ range

2♠ = same

2NT = 12-14 or 18+ without a 4 card Major or 5 card minor

[blackshoe]

Pet peeve: when you bid two suits as opener, not raising partner, the second suit being higher ranking than the first and bid at the two level, you have reversed. Period. What the reverse shows is a separate question.

[han]

I second Frances's comment, this is a good auction to discuss in more depth with your regular partner.

[pclayton]

I don't like a 3♦ rebid with the 1st. It preempts our most likely game (3N) and I'm not even sure that diamonds should be trump here. I'll bid 2♦.

 

Re: the reverses, at least an Ace more than a minimum is a good rule of thumb.

 

Echo Frances' thoughts about 1♦-2♣. They are a different beast.

[kenrexford]

1NT seems obvious to me.

 

If you open 1♦ and hear 2♣, there is no bid to show a hand that should have opened 1NT. So, you decide whether it is more like a hand that is not good enough to open 1NT or too good to open 1NT. I hate that decision with a hand that looks smack-dab ion the middle, a 15-count that is really worth 16. If I took the real range for 1NT, and broke it down by maximum adjustments both up and down, and then had an absolute minimum and an absolute maximum, and then found what would be exactly in the middle, it would be this hand.

[jdonn]

1NT seems obvious to me.

 

If you open 1♦ and hear 2♣, there is no bid to show a hand that should have opened 1NT. So, you decide whether it is more like a hand that is not good enough to open 1NT or too good to open 1NT. I hate that decision with a hand that looks smack-dab ion the middle, a 15-count that is really worth 16. If I took the real range for 1NT, and broke it down by maximum adjustments both up and down, and then had an absolute minimum and an absolute maximum, and then found what would be exactly in the middle, it would be this hand.

I don't have a huge problem with 1NT, but I think you are missing a major point. The hand is very suit oriented. It's entirely possible to think this shape is possible for 1NT, think this hand falls in the range for 1NT, and not want to open 1NT.

[peachy]

There are different styles and agreements. There are even some people who think 1D-2C is not a GF when playing 2/1 (I am not one of them!) and some who have agreed to play that way.

 

1D-2C is a difficult auction as it is, and despite this start, our best fit may still be in a major suit which is why it is unwise to go jumping.

My structure for opener's rebids are easy :blink:

- 2D shows 5 or more diamonds and that is opener's primary job to tell (whether has five or more diamonds). Since GF is on, I would not jump unless I insist that diamonds are the agreed trump NOW.

- 2M shows a suit and does not promise extras (denies 5-card diamonds)

- 2NT is either 12-14 or 18+ (denies 4-card major, 5-card diamonds and 4-card clubs)

- 3C shows 4 card support (denies 4-card major and 5 card diamonds)

[kenrexford]

1NT seems obvious to me.

 

If you open 1♦ and hear 2♣, there is no bid to show a hand that should have opened 1NT.  So, you decide whether it is more like a hand that is not good enough to open 1NT or too good to open 1NT.  I hate that decision with a hand that looks smack-dab ion the middle, a 15-count that is really worth 16.  If I took the real range for 1NT, and broke it down by maximum adjustments both up and down, and then had an absolute minimum and an absolute maximum, and then found what would be exactly in the middle, it would be this hand.

I don't have a huge problem with 1NT, but I think you are missing a major point. The hand is very suit oriented. It's entirely possible to think this shape is possible for 1NT, think this hand falls in the range for 1NT, and not want to open 1NT.

I understand and sypmathize with the theory, but I just don't get it. I don't have to love my hand for spades to open 1♠. So, why do I have to be "notrumpy" to open 1NT? I mean, partner is not required to raise to 2NT or 3NT if I open 1NT. Trying to handle the "feel" of a hand with an opening bid of 1♦ just leads to problems like what to do after the likely 2♣ response.

 

Plus, I'm not so sure I agree that this hand is not "notrumpy." I see two hand types as typical for notrump contracts -- hands with a scattered mess and hands with quicks and a running minor. I have quicks with a running minor.

[cherdano]

You don't have a running minor, Ken.

[kenrexford]

You don't have a running minor, Ken.

If partner opened 1NT, and you held ♠xx ♥xxx ♦AKJ10xx ♣xx, would you be thinking 3NT because of your trick source?

 

Sure, it is not a solid suit. But, it is at worst case "running" after yielding to her honor if you must. The point is that notrump contract look like clouds or T's.

 

A cloud is a jumbled mess of honors and 10's and 8's scattered about where the opponents and Declarer screw around here and there until someone emerges with either 9 or 5.

 

A "T" is a set of controls and a trick source, where Declarer and the opponents try to get to 9 or 5 first.

 

This is a "T" 1NT opening.

[jdonn]

I don't have to love my hand for spades to open 1♠. So, why do I have to be "notrumpy" to open 1NT?

Do you really want me to answer that??