bidding goes 1D-1S-2D-2H

[raist]

your hand is

 

Kx

Qx

KQxxxx

Kxx

 

you open 1D, partner bids 1S, you rebid 2D, now parnter bids 2H

(usually natural F1, with inv values)

 

 

what do you rebid?

should/does 2S usually promise 3?

[mike777]

your hand is

 

Kx

Qx

KQxxxx

Kxx

 

you open 1D, partner bids 1S, you rebid 2D, now parnter bids 2H

(usually natural F1, with inv values)

 

 

what do you rebid?

should/does 2S usually promise 3?

of course not.......

 

 

 

it shows 2s with 6d and nothing.

[raist]

related qn

 

a pretty std approach to this sequence:

 

1C-1S-2C

 

is to use 2D now as some sort of NMF. thus, following the NMF, 2H or 2S would promise 4 and 3 cards respectively.

 

you are expected to rebid 2N, 3C or 3D otherwise

how is that different from the original situation?

[mike777]

related qn

 

a pretty std approach to this sequence:

 

1C-1S-2C

 

is to use 2D now as some sort of NMF. thus, following the NMF, 2H or 2S would promise 4 and 3 cards respectively.

 

you are expected to rebid 2N, 3C or 3D otherwise

how is that different from the original situation?

fwiw i PLAY 2D AS ART AND 100% GF

 

 

1C=`1S

2C=2D!

-------------

 

 

tHERE MUST BE 100 threads about this sequence on the forum ....good luck.....

[whereagles]

seems like an easy 2NT to me <_<

[Codo]

2 ♠ normally shows 3card support to me. You may bid it with KX if you have no other describtive bid avaiable.

 

But this is not the case here, I have an easy 2 NT bid.

[bluecalm]

I think 2♠ should show 3.

I bid 2NT and consider it clearcut.

[jdonn]

The way I play I can easily bid 2♠ on a doubleton and would do it here. I believe strongly in that style. However I'm sure 2NT would be the majority choice.

[EricK]

The way I play 2♠ almost guarantees doubleton support. With 3 card support, I would generally have raised on the previous round (the exception being something like ♠xxx ♥Ax ♦KQJxxx ♣Jx where the only reason I opened was because of the great diamond suit)

[JLOGIC]

2S seems pretty obvious even if you never raise with 3 to begin with.

 

2S showing exactly 3 is a huge waste since it's our cheapest bid, and having 3 spades will be one of the least likely possibilities, so we won't be bidding it very often. Additionally, it leaves us stuck for a bid fairly frequently if we have no club stopper. I guess people will bid 3C 4sf.

 

Now distinguishing between Hx and xx will becomes impossible, 2N followed by 3S or 3C followed by 3S are necessary to show our doubleton. I believe that this distinction is very important in figuring out when to play 5-2 spade fits and when not to.

 

I don't know why 2S showing 3 is even useful, it's not like it will be hard to clarify later whether or not we have 3 spades, we'll just rebid 3S.

[peachy]

I like 2S, even if it in your system promises 3-card spades, but why should it promise 3-card spades? Opener needs to have a way to give preference. 2H cannot be passed and insisting on NT at this time does not seem the right thing to do. We might end up in failing 2NT or 3NT when 4S is cold. The club stopper in the hand is just what I would call "an illusion" or "red herring" something like that.

[Siegmund]

Put me down for a clearcut 2NT. Partner asked us if we have a club stopper, and we do.

 

It does depend on the rest of your agreements - but in my world, opener very rarely raises on 3 immediately, and responder almost always finds a way to show 6 spades if he has them ... 2H will on rare occasion uncover a 4-4 heart fit, but you might as well call it "third suit forcing," asking for 3-card spade support or for a club stopper.

 

The 2S bid doesn't quite promise 3 (on extremely rare occasion youll have a 2-3-6-2 with no club stopper, and be endplayed into a 2S rebid on 2, yes)... but my jaw would drop in shock at a 2S bid on the posted hand opposite a solid unknown with no understanding beyond "2/1".

 

It is an eye-opener to see several good players recommending 2S. (And I am quite surprised by the suggestion that opener holding 3 spades is a rare holding, but I've not run a sim to confirm or deny it.)

[bluecalm]

I agree that being able to bid 2♠ on Hx is sometimes very useful so 4th suit can be bid with little something in clubs and hands like Kx xx AQJxxx xxx bid 2♠.

I don't understand bidding 2♠ on this hand though. We have balanced shape and scattered honors it seems to me that 2NT convey the message.

If partner wants to know if we have double stopper in clubs he is free to bid 3♣ after 2NT as fourth suit (can't be natural as he would bid 3♣ instead of 2♥ i guess).

[peachy]

Put me down for a clearcut 2NT. Partner asked us if we have a club stopper, and we do.

I don't see responder asking anything. He showed five+ spades, then 4+ hearts, and an invitational (or better) hand because he did not pass 2D. What would you bid if responder did not "ask" anything, but instead he "showed" what I think he showed?

[JLOGIC]

We have balanced shape and scattered honors it seems to me that 2NT convey the message.

2N neither shows a balanced hand nor scattered values so I'm not sure why you think 2N conveys either of those. x xxx AKxxxx KQx would obviously bid 2N, and that is concentrated values with an unbalanced hand.

[bluecalm]

2N neither shows a balanced hand nor scattered values so I'm not sure why you think 2N conveys either of those. x xxx AKxxxx KQx would obviously bid 2N, and that is concentrated values with an unbalanced hand.

 

Ok, I agree with that. I would also bid 2NT with this hand.

I need to think about it more I guess.

 

Btw, I don't think 2♥ should promise 4 of them like some posters seem to suggest. Do you agree with that ?

[the hog]

2N neither shows a balanced hand nor scattered values so I'm not sure why you think 2N conveys either of those. x xxx AKxxxx KQx would obviously bid 2N, and that is concentrated values with an unbalanced hand.

 

Ok, I agree with that. I would also bid 2NT with this hand.

I need to think about it more I guess.

 

Btw, I don't think 2♥ should promise 4 of them like some posters seem to suggest. Do you agree with that ?

I certainly do not agree with you. 4H shows 4+H unless you have decided to play some artificial gadget. You have not suggested a gadget here, merely questioned whether an ostensibly natural bid can be made with less than 4.

Perhaps you enjoy playing lots of Moysians?

[JLOGIC]

Btw, I don't think 2♥ should promise 4 of them like some posters seem to suggest. Do you agree with that ?

Yes I certainly agree. I would consider 2H a normal bid on any of the following:

 

AQJxx Axx xx Kxx

AQxx AKx Axx xxx

AQxxx AJ Jxxx xx

AQxxxx Kxx Ax xx

AQJx xxx Axx Jxx

 

etc etc.

 

The notion that 2H shows 4 hearts is bizarre to me, it would require you to play a completely artificial 3C bid and would force you to bid 3C on a hand like:

 

AQxxxx Kxx Axx x!

 

So I don't accept that 2H is natural unless playing some artificial bid, since 3C is perforce a completely artificial force if 2H shows 4.

 

2H is a much better convenient force than 3C since it is cheaper and allows way more bids, if 3C was artificial and forcing it would be tough to sort everything out (you don't know which round suit partner has stopped if any, if he has long spades or diamond support or a 3N bid with one suit unstopped or a slam try or...)

 

This is why I was very surprised at awms suggestion that 2H shows 4 hearts if I understood him correctly.

 

And if 2H does not show hearts necessarily and is also not GFing, I don't see how bidding constructively is possible. You overload the 3C 4sf in order to create a GF, and you also have nothing to do with 4 hearts! If 3H shows 4 hearts and a minimum, and 4H shows 4 hearts and a maximum, the 4H bid is unplayable if 2H didn't show 4 hearts, you've eaten up too much room.

 

I thought it was normal bridge that 2H was just a semi-artificial game force, since it seems like the only logically playable method unless you use 2N artificial. I have always thought of these auctions as "3rd suit forcing."

 

Both 3rd suits cannot be natural since you have no GF bid with spades, or with diamond support. Playing 2H as GF and not promising 4 hearts makes bidding much simpler.

[bluecalm]

I thought it was normal bridge that 2H was just a semi-artificial game force, since it seems like the only logically playable method unless you use 2N artificial. I have always thought of these auctions as "3rd suit forcing."

 

One possible treatment is that 2♥ is seminatural invite+ and it contains:

-any GF with no other convienient bid (thus values in hearts almost certainly)

-invite+ with 5♠ - 4♥

 

After that you may try to bid naturally. Of course you don't ever raise hearts to 4level. the idea is that if you have 4 of them you bid 3♥ and if partner happens to have 5S-4H invite then we will be in game but it shouldn't be bad as both hands has a lot of shape (one is 6♦-4♥ and the other 5♠-4♥ so game can't be that bad and shooting for 3♥ seems bizzare).

 

One other gadget is that jump to 3NT after 2♥ shows 4♥ and stopper in 4rd suit (clubs here) so :

3♥ = 4 hearts, no ♣ stop

3NT = 4hearts + ♣ stop

 

Playing that way it seems sensible that we may stop in both 2♠ and maybe even 2NT.

I am not saying I am big fan of this treatment but I think it's sensible and probably good if you have to worry about 5♠-4♥ inviting hands (I don't worry about them in my pet system cause those hands don't bid 1♠ to begin with thanks to Mr. Rodwell's treatment so 2♥ is just any game force without other bid).

 

Perhaps you enjoy playing lots of Moysians?

 

See above. No moysians in sight...

 

EDIT: btw in Poland it was standard some time ago to play 2NT as forcing and asking in this sequence (you showed ♠ support and shortnesses after that). I think this sucks but many players here like it and still play it. It was recommended in "polish club 2000" by the way.

[peachy]

JLOGIC convinced me to change my mind to agree that 2H does not promise a 4-card suit. I've played 3C artificial forcing while 2H is natural, but the other way begins to look better and better.

[JLOGIC]

EDIT: btw in Poland it was standard some time ago to play 2NT as forcing and asking in this sequence (you showed ♠ support and shortnesses after that). I think this sucks but many players here like it and still play it. It was recommended in "polish club 2000" by the way.

Funny, as far as I can tell 2N forcing is becoming more popular in USA than it used to be, but still kind of a fringe agreement. I love it personally.

[bluecalm]

And yet another option is:

2NT = transfer to 3♣, one of the following:

 

1)to play in 3♣ (weak hand 4+♠-6+♣)

2)game forcing 2suiter ♠ and ♥ or ♣

3)slam try with solid/semi solid ♠ suit (you bid 3NT/4m after accepting the transfer)

4)strong slam try in ♦ with shortness

 

This one is taken from Ambra.

 

Polish version was ask about shortness/♠ support. Answers were as follows:

 

3♣ = club shortness

3♦ = spade shortness

3♥ = heart shortness

3♠ = spade support but no shortness

3NT = no shortness and no ♠ support.

 

Pick your poison, I prefer natural 2NT ;)

[Codo]

Funny how many people still play that 1 ♦ 1 ♠ 2 ♦ 2 ♥ shows hearts. it is bizarre but it funnily works...

[hanp]

Codo, I don't know how often you have said that whatever you play "works". I believe it to take that you are content playing what you play, not that you have actually taken an effort to see how well you did on the hands where this agreement came up. I also suspect that when you have a GF hand like AJxxxx KJx Ax xx and you get into trouble because you can't bid 2H, you don't file that hand under the heading "2H natural didn't work this time". Am I correct or do these statements have more content that I assume?

[Codo]

Han, yes it is just my way. I am the only one who bids majors he actually possesses. I actually invented this idea. ;)

 

Look after the examples in the recent BB books to see that better players then you and me are surprisingly doing the same.

 

It is not problem free? It does not work on any given hand? Now, what a surprise.

I happily concede that not all hands are biddable with the methods I prefer.

 

Your approach does always work? It is so easy to find out whether you hold a 4/4 or 5/3 heart fit or a 5/3 spade fit and/ or stoppers in clubs. Wow. Impressive.

 

For your example hand: If you play some very old and ancient stuff like nmf you bid 3 club and you can find out whether you have stoppers in the unbid suits and or a 5/3 fit in spades.

 

So if you claim that this does not work, may you say me where?

 

If he holds nothing in hearts and clubs, he will rebid diamonds or raise spades.

If he holds stuff in both suits, he bids 3 NT.

 

Give partner

Kxx, Axx,KQJxxx,x and he rebids 3 spade (if he plays a stlye where he cannot raise 1 Spade with this hand...)

 

Give him

Kx, xx,KQJxxx,AQx and he bids 3 Heart showing a club stopper, denying a heart stop. You can gladly bid 3 NT.

 

Give him

 

Kx, AQxx,KQJxxx,x and he rebids 3 Diamonds and after your 3 HEart- showing a stopper- he bids 3 Spade, denying anything in clubs.

 

Isn't this hand type a problem for your approach? How do you find out that you do not have a heart fit and at the same time find out whether 3 NT or 4 Heart or 4 Spade or even 5 Diamond is the superior game?

F.e. compared to x, AQxx,KQJxxx,Kx or x, AQxx,KQJxxx,xx

 

So, where exactly is your problem with the ancient approach that 2 ♥ shows 4 hearts?