XYZ question

[rbforster]

On the auction

 

1♦-1♥

1♠-?

 

I play XYZ, such that 2♣ forces 2♦ by opener, usually to show an invitational hand or to play 2♦ (2♦ would show a GF hand). My question is whether 2♣ really needs to force 2♦?

 

With a very distributional hand and lots of diamonds, maybe something like this thread with 4x7x it's not like you're afraid of being passed in 2♦ (and you'll make 3♦ with a fit). Especially in standard where opener could still have a pretty big hand, I could see various possibilities:

 

after 2♣:

 

2♦ catchall

2♥ strong hand with 4351 shape, prefering to play 2♥ over 2♦ opposite weak partner

2♠ strong hand with 5x6x shape

2N 18-19 bal and we always rebid 1♠ with four :lol:

3♦ distributional hand with very good diamonds (and 4 spades)

 

What do you think? Depending on how you play XYZ, I don't think there are any weak hands in the 2♣ relay except those that want to get out in 2♦ (3♣ direct would be the weak x4x6). As such, it seems like showing strong distributional hands with diamonds can't get you in too much trouble opposite an invite or a diamond signoff, although you'd want to discuss continuations after opener's various relay breaks.

 

Thoughts? Do you already do this?

[ulven]

Do you already do this?

Yes.

 

2C only forces 2D after a 1NT-rebid.

[Jlall]

You just bid over 2C as you would have over a 2D bid in a standard system. So a 2D bid means you would have passed, other bids are normal and show extras.

[Fluffy]

I play that

 

1♣-1♥ (actually 1♦ transfer)

1♠-2♣

3♣

 

doesn't show extras, but no real tolerance for diamonds, this is the only sequence where it doesn't show extras for us, not sure if its standard.

[jjbrr]

I play that

 

1♣-1♥ (actually 1♦ transfer)

1♠-2♣

3♣

 

doesn't show extras, but no real tolerance for diamonds, this is the only sequence where it doesn't show extras for us, not sure if its standard.

I would have thought this shows extras and I'm not sure I like your treatment so much. It seems there are more hands that need to be able to show extra strength than the 4207 minimum hands that need to bid 3♣

[Phil]

Right, there are several hand types where you can't risk partner passing 2♦.

 

Its especially an issue starting with 1♦ - 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♣. Picture opener with a good 4♠-6/7♦ for instance.

 

After 1♣ - 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♣, I'm not sure I'd ever want to bid 2♦ on any 4=3=0=6. With stronger hands I'd want to take some kind of forward going action as with a really good 4=0=4=5.