2[he] or 2[sp]?

[lexlogan]

Much as I respect Peter Gill's comments, the next time you bid 2H you will have:

 

void

KQT9xx

xxx

Qxxx

 

Partner with her

5143 shape will believe you have the posted hand and will pull to 2S. What you gain on the swings, Peter, you lose greatly on the roundabouts. Your posted construction is just too much of a rara avis.

A priori*, a specific 5422 shape occurs 16 times as often as a specific 6430. Even if we lose half a board every time responder is 0634, we only have to gain 3.1% on all the 2524 shapes to break even.

 

* I know I haven't taken into account the effects of responder's shape, but I don't believe it will make a significant difference.

Responder doesn't need to be 0634 for it to be wrong for opener to correct. Hog's assumption was opener would run with 5143 -- so we'll also lose when responder is 1633. And responder's shape does matter -- with 6 in the suit, opener is significantly more likely to have 0 or 1.

 

It seems like sound strategy on a minimum hand to bail it in the first, known playable spot (2♠) rather than chasing the ideal.

[PeterGill]

There has been much discussion here about the number of trumps, but not much about trump quality.

 

The fewer trumps your side has, the more important trump quality is. To give an extreme example, AKQJx opposite a singleton is usually an adequate trump holding, but 9xxxx opposite a singleton would not be.

 

With the uncomfortable (for 2H) 5143 shape, partner with KQJ10x, x, KQ10x, Jxx can correct 2H to 2S due to the good suit quality in spades. With Axxxx, J, Axxx, Axx or the like, partner can pass 2H. The 5-1 heart fit is about as good a place to play as any.

 

2H does not bypass 2S, but 2S bypasses 2H. Justin Lall's good point about 2D over 2C is similar - the cheapest available rebid does not rule out higher contracts and thus might well be bid on Q109xx or KJ10xx or some other decent suit, or perhaps even on less than decent suits. The vital cards for having good trump texture are the K, Q, J, 10 and 9.

 

Remove H9 or H10 - then the case for 2S instead of 2H becomes stronger.

 

Peter Gill

[gwnn]

I like 2♥, looks like an imaginative bid. Also, we will sometimes win when partner pulls 2♥ to 2♠ when he would have been tempted to 3♠ over our 2♠ :rolleyes: Agree with Peter Gill though that with Qxxxx or even Q9xxx it would be a worse bid.

[benlessard]

I play the treatment that 2H by a passed hand tend to show 5H and 2S. Without a H fit partner is pulling to 2S.

 

If you reverse the 2D/2H in 2 over 1.

 

1S------???

2D show hearts 8pts +

2H show diamonds GF

 

You can play this treatment too. Because partner is more likely to have 5H than 6H when he bids 2H after 1Nt forcing.

[mtvesuvius]

2♠, I believe in raising partner's suit when I can... and to not do so I think needs a high quality 5 card suit, or at least 6♥.

[kenrexford]

I think the 'standards' (Hopefully STu won't jump on me about 'style') for responder's rebids after a 1N response are:

 

--show a new minor: 6 cards

--show hearts: 5 cards

I don't see why bidding 2D over 2C would show 6. It is routine to bid 2D on almost any 1453 over 2C playing forcing NT. If you don't you will get to a lot of 3-3 fits.

I would get to a lot of 3-2 fits if I did that. LOL