competetive bidding

[Codo]

Fred made a nice example of a contested auction:

 

(1 ♠) 2 ♥ (pass)

 

You look at around 10HCps, no spade stopper, no heart fit.

So a really everyday problem.

 

What I never understand is, why is it still so common to use 2 ♠ here as the good heart raise?

 

My reg. partner an I basically switched 2 NT and 2 ♠ so that you use 2 NT as the invite and 2 spade for this hand. (I.E. showing inviting or bigger strength but denying a stopper, a one suiter and a fit in hearts.

 

The downside is that you lose the natural 2 NT bid. But this is something we lost in more then one situation, so I am not sure if this lost is so big.

After all, we sit in front of the spades, so it needs quite a special hand for us to wish to play exactly 2 NT.

 

And as always it comes down to frequency and the imps you lose or win with the right bidding tool.

I think that hands with no fit, no clear direction and no great stopper are much more often dealt then hands with around 11 HCPS, no fit, no onesuiter and a good spade-stopper (Sitting in front of the spades).

 

So, is the cue raise still so widely used because it is common and traditional or are there more reasons, which I fail to see?

[helene_t]

The useful space principle comes to mind. The hearts raise is the call that needs the least bidding space for further investigation, while 2♠ is the call that leaves the most bidding space. So it is inefficient to allocate the 2♠ bid to the raise. Using 2NT is a step in the right direction, but using 3♦ would probably be even better.

[Hilver]

Just play Transfer advances.

http://homepage.mac.com/bridgeguys/pdf/Smi...ferAdvances.pdf

http://franksbridgesystem.com/182.html

 

You don't lose your natural 2NT.

[y66]

I play new suits by advancer are not forcing here and 2S = good heart raise (usually) OR a good hand without clear direction. Have no idea if that's more standard than new suits are forcing and 2S = good heart raise.

 

Am not familiar with other methods for handling this problem area. Will think about that 2N idea and read up on transfer advances.