2/1: Delayed 2N By Responder?

[gurgistan]

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=skjhkj65dqj642c92]133|100|Scoring: IMP

In an uncontested auction, partner is dealer and opens 1♣. I bid 1♦. Partner bids 1♠. I bid 2N. Partner bids 3N. It is passed out.

 

Questions:

 

1. Was 1♦ an appropriate initial response?

 

2. Does anyone initially repsond 1N and then 2N to show 11-12 hcp and desire to play in notrumps.? I did not because of two doubletons.

 

3. Is 2N bid correct? I thought 1N would show much weaker hand.[/hv]

[peachy]

If it was 2/1 system, then respond 1H.

The auction could have been 1C-1D-1NT, where opener can have one or both 4-card majors and he is just limiting his hand as balanced minimum. You will miss 4-4 heart fit opposite invitational or weaker responder if responder does not bid his major first. With gameforcing hands, it is correct to respond 1D first and then over opener's 1NT, to bid hearts. 1C-1D-1S tends to show an unbalanced hand.

 

To answer your questions:

1. No.

2. Yes, but only with hands that do not have a 4-card major.

3. N/A

[Stephen Tu]

1. Was 1♦ an appropriate initial response?

 

Depends if your agreement is "Walsh" or not. There are some proportion of bidders who will always show 4 cd major in preference to a longer diamond suit when holding less than a game-forcing hand. In combination with this, opener does not rebid a major holding a min balanced hand, he rebids 1nt. There are both pros and cons to this treatment, you can do a search on "Walsh".

 

Unlike what peachy said ("If 2/1, respond 1h"), it is perfectly reasonable to be playing 2/1 and not be playing Walsh. Or be playing "inv- Walsh", where you don't bypass diamonds on invitational hands either.

 

2. Does anyone initially repsond 1N and then 2N to show 11-12 hcp and desire to play in notrumps.? I did not because of two doubletons.

 

You can't bid 1nt then 2nt to show 11-12 when partner opens a minor, because 1nt is non-forcing, unlike over a major. Over a minor, 1nt is limited to 10 pts or so. With 11-12 and no 4 cd major, some people play an immediate jump to 2nt (1m-2nt) as this range. Other people play that immediate jump as GF, then with the invitational hand and no 4 cd major you have to bid the other minor first.

 

And in any case you'd not do this holding a 4 cd major since you want to find 4-4 major fits. Even if you are balanced, partner may be unbalanced. If you bid NT, this denies a 4 cd major, and partner will often not bid his major and you may end in the wrong contract.

 

3. Is 2N bid correct? I thought 1N would show much weaker hand.

It's fine given the start of the auction.

[pooltuna]

1) if you are not playing Walsh then it is standard. If you are playing Walsh you should start with 1♥ since I don't oonsider this a GF hand.

 

2) Not with a biddable 4 card major. With an unbiddable 4 card major and 2NT as a forcing call then 1NT would be a possibility.

 

3) I presume you want 2NT to be an invitational call and this hand seems about right. There is no point in bidding ♥s as partner does not have 4

[Stephen Tu]

) Not with a biddable 4 card major. With an unbiddable 4 card major and 2NT as a forcing call then 1NT would be a possibility

 

What the hell is an "unbiddable 4 card major" in a 5cM system context?

 

If partner is systemically not opening a major on AKJx, I am going to bid my 5432 suits quite readily (though would prefer 1d response to a bad major if not playing Walsh & holding diamonds). I don't think it makes any sense to have suit quality requirements to respond 1M if playing strict 5cM. If you were playing some 4cM system, then having suit quality minimums makes more sense.

[bucky]

Agree with Stephen's first post. And this is not about 2/1, rather standard natural bidding in general. And again, I feel that although it is not wrong to discuss it at "SAYC and 2/1 forum", the "beginner and intermediate" forum is a more suitable place for these posts as these discussions really benefit beginners.

[the hog]

I also agree with Stephen's first post. Many people do play Walsh and so would bid 1H rather than 1D; however this is NOT a requirement of 2/1 or sayc, and again proves that some people do not really know what they are talking about when defining these systems and insist that such and such, (eg Walsh etc), are a part of it - there are so many flavours.

[pooltuna]

) Not with a biddable 4 card major. With an unbiddable 4 card major and 2NT as a forcing call then 1NT would be a possibility

 

What the hell is an "unbiddable 4 card major" in a 5cM system context?

 

If partner is systemically not opening a major on AKJx, I am going to bid my 5432 suits quite readily (though would prefer 1d response to a bad major if not playing Walsh & holding diamonds). I don't think it makes any sense to have suit quality requirements to respond 1M if playing strict 5cM. If you were playing some 4cM system, then having suit quality minimums makes more sense.

For me something like 9543. Of course I have to bid this when I hold both majors in a 4432 context. And despite your tone I assume you know I get to bid the hands however I choose and don't have to obey your bidding rules. In fact I could tell you where to get off so have a nice hike. :P

[gwnn]

Nothing to do with 2/1.

 

This hand is just a choice everyone has to make, I don't mind either style, and slightly prefer to bid my 5+ card diamond suit no matter how weak my hand is. Well, actually I prefer transfers but that's another story.

[manudude03]

Just one thing that no-one else seems to have mentioned. A 1NT response to 1♣ isn't forcing. The Forcing 1NT only applies to 1♥ or 1♠ openers. Partner will not necessarily strain to find another bid.