SimonFa Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 I haven't been playing very long and we play a system based largely on SAYC as that is the system my more experienced regular partner was already playing when I met him (apparently we don't say its SAYC on our CC as we would have to play it by the book?). I am sure that this situation isn't unique but I can't find anything about it in the forum. It occurred last night at my club when playing with a new partner who was familiar with our system as she had played with my regular partner a few times, As dealer I picked up my cards and had:♠AKQx♥QJx♦Tx♣Jxx Red Vs white I didn't like the look and feel of it for some reason. The bidding went:1♣,P,1♠,p2♠, all pass Partner made 5 tricks and it turned she had something like: ♠Txxx♥xxxx♦Jxx♣xx As she said during the break, she didn't feel she could leave me in 1♣and I tend to agree with her as in this case its likely we would have been lucky to make 2 tricks. Indeed I have raised this a few time with my regular partner as I believe a 1♣should be at least forcing for 1 round but he isn't sure. What is the current thinking about this rare dilemma? It was a Pairs even and as it is in UK our opponents were playing Acol. PS RHO confirmed that he would have left me in 1♣as he was sat with 5 to the AKQ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 What's the problem of going down in 2♠? Opps are cold for 3NT. Same thing for 1♣ being left in. Anyway, back to the main point: if you can't stand leaving 1♣ in, you might as well play a polish-style 1♣ and do something useful with the 2♣ opening. In other words: with less than 5 hcp you just pass 1♣, period. The exception is you having a decent 6-card suit playing weak jump shifts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordontd Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 As dealer I picked up my cards and had:♠AKQx♥QJx♦Tx♣Jxx Red Vs white I didn't like the look and feel of it for some reason. I wouldn't either - my reason would be that it only has twelve cards :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordontd Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 What's the problem of going down in 2♠? Opps are cold for 3NT. Same thing for 1♣ being left in.At this vulnerability 1♣-5 is -500, and 3NT= is -400 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 The system doesn't really cater to responses lighter than about 5 HCPs. This is because opener will rebid 2NT with 18 points and if responder has less than about 5 HCPs, 2NT will often go down while 1♣ would have made. Also, the rebid of 3♣ with 15-17 points and a 6-card club suit may work badly when responder is very weak. Worse, it might go1♣-(p)-1♠-(3♥)3NT-(dbl) You can take a view and respond with a very weak hand, gambling that it turns out well, but you have to take responsibility when opener makes a normal rebid and you get too high. With the actual hand, pass is very clear. A 2NT rebid would be disastrous and besides, if opener raises to 4♠ it is unlikely to make. You should only make a weak response when there is at least a reasonable chance of making game opposite a maximum with 4-card support. BTW, with 4-4 in the majors the correct response is 1♥. Why did he bid 1♠? Because his spade suit was better? That's a very poor reason. If you want to play 1♣ as forcing you will need some artificial responses, allowing opener to rebid 1NT with 18-19 so that you avoid the 2NT rebid. But then you need to do something else with 12-14 points. A popular method in Netherlands and Poland is that responder bids 1♦ with a very weak hand, and opener now rebids a 3-card major with 12-14 balanced. This gets complicated though, and depending of where you live you may also run into system regulations issues. So I don't really recommend it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonFa Posted April 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 Thanks everyone for the prompt and very helpful responses. I hadn't thought about the 2NT bid from opener with 18pts if responding light. But even if he did that would be 21pts, inside the 2NT opening so I suppose that could be safe-ish. The Polish style looks a bit complicated. We already have a number of conventions that we haven't used enough times to iron out the problems, so I don't want to suggest adding to that problem. On balance I think we'll stick to where we are and take a risk with the very rare occasions when we might end up going down a lot in 1♣. Once again, many thanks everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.