Using 2/1 is 2[_CL] over 1[DI] opener GF?

[francosca]

Happen to have a good 10/11 HCP hand w/ 6 nice ♣ in a 1-3-3-6 hand, so I bid 2♣ after partner opened 1♦... could not stop partner's bidding and ended up in an unmakeable contract. I claim that 2♣ after a 1♦ opener should not be treated as an absolute GF.. thus proceed with caution ? :)

[Stephen Tu]

It's a separate case, and up to partnership agreement. There are plenty of people who play 2/1 GF over a major but not 1d-2c. But there are also people who still play 1d-2c as GF.

 

The latter group has to use stuff like 1d-3c as invitational NF, and 1d-2nt inv NF, or other gadgets to deal with inv range hands that can no longer bid 2c.

[jillybean]

Have a look here

 

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=18928&st=15

[h2osmom]

The post you referred to, by AWM, refers to SAYC, not 2/1.

[jillybean]

The post you referred to, by AWM,  refers to SAYC,  not 2/1.

Sure, but if you read further in the post MikeH comments about 1♦:2♣ in both sayc and a 2/1 context.

 

Come back Mike, youre missed!

 

Warning: the following discussion is not entirely suitable for the B/I thread ;)

 

The rebid issue after 1♦ 2♣ is a theoretical quagmire in standard methods. Established expert partnerships usually develop special agreements for it. I know of several approaches: Richie Riesig has a good one. My preference is actually close to what JB suggested.

 

I use the 2♦ rebid by opener as essentially a noise: it may well only be on a 4 card suit, if opener is unable to make any other call within the confines of the method. This is, obviously, less than perfect, but there is no perfect, simple method here.

 

2Major is about a King more than a minimum... so, say a working 15 count, and guarantees 4=5 or better shape.

 

2N is balanced, with both majors stopped, and at least 2♣s. It does not deny a 4 card major, but if we have one, we are 4432 shape with a weak notrump hand.. this way, if responder reverses into a 4 card major at the 3-level, and catches opener with a raise, a lot is known about opener's hand (and opener can cue en route to 4Major with some hands)

 

2♦, the catchall, is not necessarily a minimum, alho as a matter of practice it often is, if bid with only 4 or 5 ♦s.

 

For those who play that opener should rebid a 4 card major on all habds possessing one, some my objections have already been voiced by earlier posts.

 

If we are playing SAYC, then 1♦ 2♣ has not yet established a gf. We need some way of doing so, and it will sometimes be opener who has to make that announcement. Since 2♣ promises 10+ hcp, it makes sense that opener have 15 or the playing equivalent to gf.. and this is one very cogent reason why opener's rebid of 2Major should show that strength: it creates a gf. If it did not, then the partnership will often be floundering on the next round. Responder, with gf values and a strong ♣ suit, cannot rebid 3♣ over 2major, if 2major could be a minimum, since opener may pass.. so does he have to invent an abominable 4th suit forcing?? Imagine: 1♦ 2♣ 2♠ 3♥.... with 3♥ a noise... we have destroyed an enormous amount of bidding space and yet have exchanged very little information!

 

Now, playing 2/1, particuarly a style in which 2♣ is gf, at least eliminates that difficulty. But 2/1 has its own areas of difficulty: especially with strong but not huge hands facing equally strong but not huge hands. Thus it is not uncommon for 2/1 players to reach 3N with 16 opposite 16, when opener was offshape for 1N (if playing strong notrumps). 1♦ 2♣ 2♠.. .if responder knows that this promises extras, then he will not be afraid to probe beyond 3N... and 3N is a kind of bidding trap for bridge players with no major suit fit. If 2♠ is wide-range, then responder will be leery of reaching 4N on 12 opposite 16... yes, it may make, but the cost of going down 1 in a voluntarily bid 4N makes most of us cringe.

 

I could go on... but I have some work to do.

[gwnn]

more threads:)

 

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=23262

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=23261

 

BTW play 1♦-3♣ as 9-11 with a good 6 card suit ;) it works!

[mike777]

Happen to have a good 10/11 HCP hand w/ 6 nice ♣ in a 1-3-3-6 hand,  so I bid 2♣ after partner opened 1♦... could not stop partner's bidding and ended up in an unmakeable contract.  I claim that 2♣ after a 1♦ opener should not be treated as an absolute GF.. thus proceed with caution ? ;)

I am stuck bidding 1nt with that hand. I live with it.

 

 

1d=2c=100% game force.

1d=3c=game force raise in D, unbalanced hand often but not 100%.

[mtvesuvius]

3♣ as the 9-11 with clubs works quite nicely, otherwise I live with 1 or 2NT on those hand types... or even 1M :) I play my 1♦-2♣ as GF, and it seems to work well enough.

[Fluffy]

I don't play 1♦-2♣ GF.

 

To stop in time 1♦-2♣-2♦ is minimum, maybe balanced, and maybe only 3 cards, partner can now bid 2NT and we can pass.

 

1♦-2♣-2NT is forcing, normally 14 or very good 13, but might be 18-19.

[Gerben42]

I play this:

 

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