Because I'm a noob

[Little Kid]

[hv=d=s&s=sq95hakdk7542cq62]133|100|1♦ - 2♣

 ?

[/hv]

1♦ is 4+ and 2♣ GF, what is your rebid playing standard 2/1?

[jjbrr]

2NT

 

If partner bids 3m, I'll cooperate

[peachy]

The trouble with saying "standard 2/1" is that there are many standards. In some styles, 2C is 100% gameforcing. In other styles 2C is GF only if responder does not bid 3C next round. Agreed continuations also differ.

 

In Hardy style, opener's first responsibility is to tell if he has 5+ diamonds or not, so 2D with this hand, unlimited hand. 2NT would have denied 5+ diamonds and is either 12-14 balanced or 18+ balanced. However, judgement is allowed and with this soft hand I might well bid 2NT even when it denies 5+ diamonds.

 

Do not raise clubs with only three of them.

[Gerben42]

With my previous partner I would have bid 2♦ as 2NT shows extras. With my current partner I bid 2NT since it doesn't show extras.

[Little Kid]

2♣ is 100% GF and a 2NT rebid would be 12-14 or 18/19 balanced.

[mikeh]

2♣ is 100% GF and a 2NT rebid would be 12-14 or 18/19 balanced.

hacen't you answered your question? Yes, it's 14 with a 5 card suit and I love to upgrade, but you have half your hcp in your doubleton, on an auction where they don't rate to be promoting length in partner's hand and you have no texture anywhere. So this sure looks like 12-14 balanced to me.

[Fluffy]

2♣ is 100% GF and a 2NT rebid would be 12-14 or 18/19 balanced.

hacen't you answered your question? Yes, it's 14 with a 5 card suit and I love to upgrade, but you have half your hcp in your doubleton, on an auction where they don't rate to be promoting length in partner's hand and you have no texture anywhere. So this sure looks like 12-14 balanced to me.

I believe its too late to upgrade mike, that had to be done the round before opening 1NT.

[Free]

Don't know about standard 2/1, but I always rebid 2♦ showing 5+♦ or showing minimum, whatever our agreement.

[Little Kid]

Basically the question is: do you bid 2♦ to show 5+♦ or 2NT to show a minimum balanced hand, neither of which would promise more than a minimum. I guess I could have made that clearer in the OP :D

[ONEferBRID]

[hv=d=s&s=sq95hakdk7542cq62]133|100|1♦ - 2♣

 ?

[/hv]

1♦ is 4+ and 2♣ GF, what is your rebid playing standard 2/1?

Max Hardy says "first priority" is to rebid 2D .... to show at least 5 cards, even if you have a 4 card Major.

There is plenty of room to find ( or not ) a 4-4 Major fit .

[Codo]

I have the agreement that I have to show my five card suit.

 

But if I have a to make a descission between 2 NT and 2 ♦, this is the clearest 2 NT hand I could possible hold.

[ArtK78]

Partner is unlimited. He may be interested in a diamond slam if I let him know that I have long diamonds.

 

Therefore, I rebid 2♦.

 

The 2♦ rebid does not deny a balanced hand. There is plenty of time to bid NT later. But if I don't show the 5th diamond now, I will never be able to show it later.

[Free]

Definitely 2♦ to show 5+♦, not 2NT!

[rogerclee]

Yeah seriously, if you play 2D shows 5 or more diamonds, and 2N tends to deny holding 5 diamonds, I have no idea why this hand would be the exception.

[peachy]

Yeah seriously, if you play 2D shows 5 or more diamonds, and 2N tends to deny holding 5 diamonds, I have no idea why this hand would be the exception.

With a partner with whom I have agreements, I make my early bids all honest and systemic in the auction so definitely 2D.

 

With an unknown pickup, I would be comfortable with 2NT since the hand is balanced and it has those queens that could be positional values AND the suit is ratty.

[jdeegan]

:) 2♦ = 100 Anything else = 0. There are lots of ways to get to 3NT, your most likely contract - a no brainer, just bid it at some point. What concerns you now is the lesser possibility of a 6♣ or 6♦ slam or even 5♣ or ♦ if pard has a stiff ♠ and a minimum. So, you start by showing your rebiddable (barely) ♦ suit. Your hand is a bit more than a minimum opposite QJxx in ♦ with good contols and a fitting ♣ card. By bidding 2♦, you may get a chance to bid 3♣ next round thus avoiding 3NT when pard has the dreaded stiff ♠.

[Codo]

What really surprises me is, that so many people are unable to reach club or diamond slams after a 2 NT rebid, but are easily finding their 5-3 diamond slams after 1♦ 2 ♣ 2 ♦ and avoid the 5-2 slam on the same time. Amazing.

[Little Kid]

It seems like most people play 2♦ as 5+♦ and by default 2NT therefore denying 5♦, which is fair enough. I haven't read the Hardy book that has been referred to so I may have missed some obvious reasons for this. But is there any merit to playing 2♦ as 5+♦ but allowing balanced 5332 hands to rebid 2NT?

 

Possible arguments for:

1) Take some pressure off the 2♦ bid, which can still be a fairly large set of hands at this point. Makes auctions after 2♦ somewhat easier for partner knowing that these (fairly common) balanced hands are excluded.

2) Most auctions will lead to 3NT anyway, by rebidding 2NT on these hands you get there faster and provide the defence with less information.

3) You still have the option to get to 6♣/♦ if partner bids 3m next or even after a quantitative 4NT.

4) 2NT describes these kinds of hands pretty accurately with regards to both shape and strength (aside from the 5th ♦). Can simplify bidding for partner.

5) Partner might get too enthusiastic about playing in ♦s with a fit if you bid 2♦ here, even though these balanced hands could well play better in NT despite the fit.

6) If you play inverted minors and partner didn't bid it with a GF hand and 4♦s chances are he can still support ♦s after 2NT. He probably didn't bid it because he has a source of ♣ tricks and wants to show that before showing the fit. This he can also still do over 2NT.

 

Arguments against:

1) Evaluation of slam prospects in ♦ could be significantly affected by finding out about 5th ♦.

2) You will usually get to 3NT when it is the right contract.

3) You take up more room and may end up in 3NT when it is wrong because you don't have room to bid out your shape.

 

Meh, writing this I actually kind of managed to convince myself to just bid 2♦ with these hands :)

[hanp]

What really surprises me is, that so many people are unable to reach club or diamond slams after a 2 NT rebid, but are easily finding their 5-3 diamond slams after 1♦ 2 ♣ 2 ♦ and avoid the 5-2 slam on the same time. Amazing.

Do you also have a partner that keeps raising your overcalls to slam on a small doubleton?

[Gerben42]

If 2NT is an option on this hand because it has the right strength, I guess you should go for it. After all, if partner is interested in slam he can still bid 3♦ with three of them (with 4 he would have bid 1♦ - 2♦ and not meddle around with ♣).

 

Maybe it's helpful that I don't open 1♦ on 4432 but people who don't do so always tell me that it isn't much of a difference anyway. I don't know, this seems like one of these situations where having 4♦ for sure is helpful.

[mikeh]

What really surprises  me is, that so many people are unable to reach club or diamond slams after a 2 NT rebid, but are easily finding their 5-3 diamond slams after 1♦ 2 ♣ 2 ♦ and avoid the 5-2 slam  on the same time. Amazing.

Do you also have a partner that keeps raising your overcalls to slam on a small doubleton?

I don't (and I like an entirely different set of rebids after what is, in standard methods, one of the more awkward sequences in 2/1) but I have come across the occasional partner who thinks Q10x is slam-suitable support for a rebid suit. In fact, I am one of them when the rest of the hand is slam suitable.

 

I think it silly to argue: 2N denies 5♦s and therefore one must rebid 2♦. And it is clear that the OP methods are NOT like that...if they were (and in my view that would be a very poor agreement to hold.....do we rebid 2♦ with AQx AQx xxxxx Qx?), this wouldn't be a problem.

 

I think it far more sensible to argue that when my suit is Kxxxx, if this is slam suitable, we need partner to make an encouraging voluntary noise in the suit, so I will limit my shape and strength via 2N.

 

Were I KQxxx in diamonds, with an appropriate weakening elsewhere, while preserving at least a stopper in each major, now I'd bid 2♦ rather than 2N. Even Jxx is slam suitable support if we have the side suits adequately handled.

[aguahombre]

Everyone seems to know "Hardy", and that is hard to do, since there were several Hardy publications --each with subtle changes to the style.

 

A very old variation of Hardy --- fortified by West Coast people who used it as a base --- has the 2NT rebid as a very specific hand (weak NT and exactly 4-4-3-2, in that order).

 

First priority was to support clubs.

Second was to bid 3D with five.

3rd was to bid a major with, say, 3-4-4-2.

extra strength came after Responder had subsided as to strain.

 

So, this hand would have rebid 3C ---allowing explorations for 3NT or proper strain to follow. Just introducing some history, not trying to recommend what we do.

[Codo]

What really surprises  me is, that so many people are unable to reach club or diamond slams after a 2 NT rebid, but are easily finding their 5-3 diamond slams after 1♦ 2 ♣ 2 ♦ and avoid the 5-2 slam  on the same time. Amazing.

Do you also have a partner that keeps raising your overcalls to slam on a small doubleton?

No but not even Ax opposite makes 6 diamond the contract of my choice.

 

I do not doubt that you can find out the support partner has for your suit, so can I.

 

But obviously this is impossible to some posters after a simple 2 NT rebid.

[peachy]

Everyone seems to know "Hardy", and that is hard to do, since there were several Hardy publications --each with subtle changes to the style.

 

A very old variation of Hardy --- fortified by West Coast people who used it as a base --- has the 2NT rebid as a very specific hand (weak NT and exactly 4-4-3-2, in that order).

 

First priority was to support clubs.

Second was to bid 3D with five.

3rd was to bid a major with, say, 3-4-4-2.

extra strength came after Responder had subsided as to strain.

 

So, this hand would have rebid 3C ---allowing explorations for 3NT or proper strain to follow. Just introducing some history, not trying to recommend what we do.

Couldn't we all agree to play nice and stop quoting the "very old" versions of Hardy.

[aguahombre]

O.K. will just call it an old style of unknown origin ---just to keep things nice.