checkback

[shevek]

Playing Checkback, I don't like opener to rebid at the 3-level, though some pairs use these to show shapely maximums. Are they right?

 

For instance:

1♦ - 1♠

1NT - 2♣

3♥ ??

 

Assume 1NT rebid = 12-14. Responder may not want to hear 3♥ with

 

♠AQT5   ♥A73   ♦KJ762   ♣8

 

Assume this is a suitable hand for checkback followed by 3♦ forcing, in case 5♦ or 6♦ is better. Or

 

♠AJ65   ♥5   ♦T6   ♣QT9875

 

2♣ then 3♣ is the normal way to sign-off in 3♣. Many (most?) play 3♣ directly over 1NT as strongish, maybe 5-5.

 

What is usual in your neck of the woods?

 

Nick

 

PS. Writers of textbooks need feedback on these sorts of questions. Most don't want to go to print then find themselves promulgating an unpopular method.

[Fluffy]

I don't know wich checkback you are using, nowadays I play XYZ (2-way checkback I think it is also called).

 

I used to play 'Roudi' wich is a checkback with step responses:

 

1x-1y

1NT-2♣

 

2♦ minimum with 2 cards in y

2♥ minimum with 3 cards in y

2♠ maximum with 3 cards in y

2NT maximum with 2 cards in y

 

 

If you are to find a 4-4 heart fit after 1♣-1♠-1NT, you start with Roudi, and then bid 3♥, you can find the new fit at the 3 level, there is no rush for opener to jump.

[gnasher]

1♦ - 1♠

1NT - 2♣

3♥  ??

 

Assume 1NT rebid = 12-14. Responder may not want to hear 3♥ with

 

♠AQT5   ♥A73   ♦KJ762   ♣8

If 3♥ shows a 2452 or 1453 maximum, I think responder should be delighted to hear this.

♠AJ65   ♥5   ♦T6   ♣QT9875

 

2♣ then 3♣ is the normal way to sign-off in 3♣.

If 2♣ includes this hand-type, it's obviously unplayable to allow opener to bypass 3♣ (unless, I suppose, you restrict this action to hands with good club support).

 

Regarding your main question, most of the people I play with prefer 2-way Checkback.

[mike777]

Playing Checkback, I don't like opener to rebid at the 3-level, though some pairs use these to show shapely maximums. Are they right?

 

For instance:

1♦ - 1♠

1NT - 2♣

3♥  ??

 

Assume 1NT rebid = 12-14. Responder may not want to hear 3♥ with

 

♠AQT5   ♥A73   ♦KJ762   ♣8

 

Assume this is a suitable hand for checkback followed by 3♦ forcing, in case 5♦ or 6♦ is better. Or

 

♠AJ65   ♥5   ♦T6   ♣QT9875

 

2♣ then 3♣ is the normal way to sign-off in 3♣. Many (most?) play 3♣ directly over 1NT as strongish, maybe 5-5.

 

What is usual in your neck of the woods?

 

Nick

 

PS. Writers of textbooks need feedback on these sorts of questions. Most don't want to go to print then find themselves promulgating an unpopular method.

two way checkback

 

1d=1s

1nt=?

2c=invite checkback (you can never play in 2c)

2d=game force checkback( you can never play in 2d)

3c or 3d=long minor and weak with 4 spades.

also add:

1minor=2h=5 spades and 4hearts....decent hand but less than invite. has many names including "reverse flannery"

[CSGibson]

2d=game force checkback( you can never play in 2d)

Merry Christmas.

 

In the version of 2-way checkback that I play, 2♣ is a relay to 2♦, which allows you to play there or show an invitational hand of some sort, so saying that you can never play in 2♦ is not entirely accurate depending on your system.

[matmat]

my understanding is that it is a standard part of classic new minor forcing for opener to jump with max hands

 

http://www.bridgeguys.com/Conventions/NewMinorForcing.html

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

For us, 3H denies 3 spades, showes 4 hearts

and a max.

A 2H response would deny 3 spades, showing

4 hearts and a min.

 

The first hand you gave for responder: you know

diamond will play better, because the partnership

has at most 4 clubs between them, actually the

partnership will have precisly 4 clubs between them,

ignoring the fact, that opener bids 1NT with 4441,

and I am not sure, if you want to play 3NT in this

case.

 

The 2nd hand you gave: well I would pass 1NT, but

I usually play NMF, but who tells you, that 3C plays

better than 1NT.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe