Minors in 2/1

[Hanoi5]

After a minor suit operning there are many conventions that can be played in order to support the minors:

 

1m 2m Inverted minors, 11+ and support (?)

1m 3m Pre-emptive support or 6-10 (?)

1♦ 3♣ (?)

1♣ 2♦ (?)

1m 2♥ (?)

1m 2♠ (?)

Splinters (How strong?)

 

What are the differences? Can you play all of them?

 

Thanks for your help.

[ArtK78]

With most of my partners, I play:

 

1m - 2m Game Forcing

 

1m - 3m Preemptive. Typically 3-7 HCP.

 

1♣ - 2♦ Limit Raise of clubs

 

1♦ - 3♣ Limit Raise of diamonds

 

1m - 2M Weak jump shift

 

Splinters are self explanatory.

 

These methods leave a hole formerly occupied by a standard 1m - 2m. This is handled by making some bid at the one level (whether in a 3 card major or 1NT) with the intent of raising the minor suit later on, if it seems appropriate. Often, the minor suit is never raised.

[han]

We just play inverted minors.

[jdonn]

My favorite is essentially inverted minors, but over 1♣ I use 2♦ as the inverted raise, and 2♣ as a 'standard' raise, which also helps clarify the weak raise as particularly weak.

[mike777]

I stopped playing inverted minors a while ago to play CrissCross and I do not miss them. 1minor=2minor comes up alot, less than invite but can be constructive. 1 minor =3 minor is often more distributional than 1 minor=2 minor, weak, and can be weaker than 1minor=2minor.

 

CrissCross:

1minor=2s=invite, unbalanced very often.

1minor=jump in other minor=game force. 1c=2d or 1d=3c.

[MarkDean]

I often play:

 

2m = natural raise, NF

2m+1 (cheapest jumps shift) = invitational, support

2S = GF raise

3m = weak (supports 3NT opposite 18-19 balanced red, but not white)

 

I also play 1C - 2H = balanced invite, 1C - 2NT = GF

 

Many methods are fine, but I do find that having invitational and GF raises in the same call can be tough without thorough discussion of followups.

[skjaeran]

I used to play:

 

1♣-2♣ = GF raise

1♣-2red = 2-way transfer, wjs/sts in M

1♣-2♠ = unbalanced/semibalanced raise (8+-11)

1♣-2NT = nat inv

1♣-3♣ = preemptive

 

1♦-2♣ = nat 2/1

1♦-2♦ = GF raise

1♦ - 2M = wjs

1♦-2NT = nat inv

1♦-3♣ = as 1♣-2♠

1♦-3♦ = preemptive

 

I've been thinkink of using the same responses to 1♦ as to 1♣, with 2♣ being either natural or a GF raise and 3♣ show some specific GF ♣ hands (split the GF ♣s in two according to diamond length (0-2 and 3+)).

[Finch]

You've missed out the possibility of using 2NT as a minor suit raise, as well!

 

As with many systemic choices, you can't just look at raising partner's suit, you have to think about the rest of your system.

 

For example, how do you treat hands with clubs in response to partner's 1D opening? If you play 2C as game forcing, what do you do with an invitational club hand; if you play 2C as not game forcing, how do you show a game force in clubs? In order to solve this problem, I play a 2C response as natural, not game forcing (with some artificial continuations), and 1D - 2C - (something) - 3C as game forcing. This leaves me needing some way to show an invitational hand with clubs, for which we use 1D - 3C.

 

All that diversion was to explain why we don't want use 3C as a diamond raise.

 

Similarly, if you are going to end up in a situation where you might respond in a 3-card major, then you need to reconsider your policy for raising as opener with 3-card support, which might affect all your continuations. (And of course you will alert the 1M response.)

 

Clearly you don't need all these bids to raise partner's minor, given there are so many other hands you might have. But what you will need is some type of trade-off; to create a good system you either need

 

i) lots of different ways of raising

or

ii) not many ways of raising, but well thought through continuations to distinguish between the various possible hand types

[Gerben42]

After 1♦, it depends if you play 1♦ - 2♣ as GF or not. If not, you can use 3♣ as ♦-raise. This is what I do, and some gadget to figure out the hand types:

http://www.geocities.com/gerben47/bridge/1d2c.html

 

BTW I really like 1m - 2NT = 13 - 15 balanced. Whenever 1m - 3NT comes up, I seem to have a hand that MIGHT have slam interest, but after this start it's hit or miss.

 

As I prefer to play 5542, no preemptive ♣ raise is needed, so:

 

1♣ ?

 

2♣ = Inv+

2suit = 5 - 8, 6-card

2NT = 13 - 15 balanced

3♣ - 6 - 9, long ♣

3suit = Preemptive

4♦ = Ace asking for ♣

 

 

1♦ ?

 

2♣ = Inv+

2♦ = Inv+

2M = 5 - 8, 6-card

2NT = 13 - 15 balanced

3♣ = Mixed raise

3♦ = Pre

3M = Preemptive

4♣ = Ace asking for ♦

 

Chthonic will be glad that no splinters are included.

[Winstonm]

I have always thought an advantage of an inverted minor depended on how it was to be used - in my thinking it should be a 1-round force and guarantee nothing more than 4-card support.

 

Partner opens 1C and you hold xxx, xxx, Axx, AKxx to my thinking the best bid available is 2C. This 4-card raise fits with the continuation scheme pointed out in the Oct 2008 Bridge World.

 

I use criss-cross as MS game force/slam try.

1N is catchall for most weaker semi-balanced minor hand

 

1m-3m=5-8 and 5 card support

[Cascade]

Not standard but I really like fit jumps to 2Major over 1minor.

 

Our definition for 2Major is 4+ Major 4+minor 10+ hcp.

[jdonn]

Not standard but I really like fit jumps to 2Major over 1minor.

 

Our definition for 2Major is 4+ Major 4+minor 10+ hcp.

I've never played them by an unpassed hand, and I doubt I want to give up what I do play. But I certainly remember at least a few times that it would have been very nice to have fit jumps available there.