showing 2-suited hands

[straube]

Bergen doesn't like ambiguous Michaels after they open a major. He plays...

 

2M=other major and D

3C=other major and C

 

He also plays...

 

(1D) 3C =C + S

(1C) 3C =D + S

 

I don't really like giving up the club preempt. I was thinking to combine Top and Bottom (except 5/5, not 4/6) with a jump cue to show the two highest

 

So after 1S...

 

2S=H and C

2N=C and D

3S=H and D (with less strength, H and D hands overcall 2H)

 

 

And after 1D

 

2D=S and C

2N=H and C

3D=S and H (with less strength, S and H hands overcall 1S)

 

The other day I held a very strong 6H/5D hand. After 1S on my right, I wanted to show the 2-suited nature of my hand so I started with a cue of 2S. Predictably LHO competed to 3S and it was passed around to me. Rather than show the diamonds now, I rebid the hearts which were longer and stronger. Point is that partner never knew what my second suit was. With this scheme, after 1S, I would jump to 3S and then rebid 4H (as needed) to show stronger hearts.

[Trinidad]

I don't play it my self, but I think it is an interesting idea to play:

 

1M-2M: OM + ♣

1M-2NT: OM + ♦

 

and to forget about the minors all together.

 

A feature of this approach is that there always is an intermediate bid (2NT or 3♣) that can be used to ask for the strength of the hand.

 

Rik

[TWO4BRIDGE]

You still have to give up something.

You don't like giving up the 3C preempt:

( 1S ) - 3C

 

But now you are giving up the Western Cuebid:

( 1S ) - 3S! ( asking for a stop for 3NT ... since you have a long running suit but no Sp-stop )

[aguahombre]

 

But now you are giving up the Western Cuebid:

( 1S ) - 3S! ( asking for a stop for 3NT ... since you have a long running suit but no Sp-stop )

 

This is called Reverse Treadwell. Regular Treadwell 3S shows a stopper and asks for a long-running suit.

[the hog]

I prefer Roman Jump overcalls.

[straube]

You still have to give up something.

You don't like giving up the 3C preempt:

( 1S ) - 3C

 

But now you are giving up the Western Cuebid:

( 1S ) - 3S! ( asking for a stop for 3NT ... since you have a long running suit but no Sp-stop )

 

I don't think I'm giving up much. 1m-3m as a preempt and 1M-3M as a stopper-ask seem relatively infrequent.

[whereagles]

I've been bundling two-suiters into 2 bids for like 15 years now and it's worked fine:

 

(1M) 2M = OM + minor

(1M) 2NT = minors

 

(1m) 2m = majors

(1m) 2NT = om + major

 

Can give you my follow-ups if you're interested.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

The other day I held a very strong 6H/5D hand. After 1S my right, I wanted to show the 2-suited nature of my hand so I started with a cue of 2S. Predictably LHO competed to 3S and it was passed around to me. Rather than show the diamonds now, I rebid the hearts which were longer and stronger. Point is that partner never knew what my second suit was.

Using "regular" Micheals ( or similar where only ONE suit is known ) you bid the UNKNOWN to show the stronger hand:

 

( 1S ) - 2S! - ( 3S ) - p

( p ) - 4D! - ( p ) - ?? now partner knows you have the strong RED hand and acts accordingly.

[straube]

Using "regular" Micheals ( or similar where only ONE suit is known ) you bid the UNKNOWN to show the stronger hand:

 

( 1S ) - 2S! - ( 3S ) - p

( p ) - 4D! - ( p ) - ?? now partner knows you have the strong RED hand and acts accordingly.

 

I don't think 4D would show longer and better hearts.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

I used to think showing "specific" 2-suiters was better.

But it involves either a higher "jump-cue" ( like your system ) or 3C ( which usually shows the "2-lowest unbid" ) .

Besides having to give up the natural 3C bid, another problem is partner PASSING 3C when you don't want him to -- since you have the strong 2-suiter.

 

The conventional Michaels/Un2NT 2-suiter bids also have another failing.

Often times you lose the ability to show SPADES and another.

 

Bailey Cuebids solves this problem:

 

In General:

 

( 1A ) - 2NT! = 2 lowest unbid ( this is the same Un2NT! ).

 

( 1A ) - 2A! = Highest and ONE of the 2 lowest unbid.

 

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

Take this deal for example:

( 1D ) - ??

 

Overcaller has a good hand, but can't show his Spade 2-suiter with one "regular" Michaels bid :

A Q x x x

x

A x

A 10 x x x

 

With Bailey's:

( 1D ) - 2D! = ♠ & either ♥ or ♣ .

[Free]

There's also something like Ghestem, or modified Ghestem, which also uses 3♣. Personally I'm not a big fan because I've never tried it, although I must admit that showing your 2 suits at once can be very useful indeed. The Italians play something more complicated based on Ghestem and Michaels cuebid. If it's good enough for them, it should be good enough for everyone. B-)

[straube]

I used to think showing "specific" 2-suiters was better.

But it involves either a higher "jump-cue" ( like your system ) or 3C ( which usually shows the "2-lowest unbid" ) .

Besides having to give up the natural 3C bid, another problem is partner PASSING 3C when you don't want him to -- since you have the strong 2-suiter.

 

The conventional Michaels/Un2NT 2-suiter bids also have another failing.

Often times you lose the ability to show SPADES and another.

 

Bailey Cuebids solves this problem:

 

In General:

 

( 1A ) - 2NT! = 2 lowest unbid ( this is the same Un2NT! ).

 

( 1A ) - 2A! = Highest and ONE of the 2 lowest unbid.

 

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

Take this deal for example:

( 1D ) - ??

 

Overcaller has a good hand, but can't show his Spade 2-suiter with one "regular" Michaels bid :

A Q x x x

x

A x

A 10 x x x

 

With Bailey's:

( 1D ) - 2D! = ♠ & either ♥ or ♣ .

 

 

I'm going to argue for my method. It recognizes that the least problematic 2-suited hands are those with both the highest ranking suits. Let's say they open 1S and I have hearts and diamonds. I can show both by bidding 2H and then competing to 3D. No doubt I lose if they bid 3S before I can show diamonds, but such would be the case if I used a traditional Michaels bid (1S (2S)) as well. I am, however, able to outbid 2S or 3C.

 

When, however, I have a big hand with both of the higher-ranking suits, I have the double jump cue bid available. Compared to a simple cue bid or a jump bid to 2N, this is the least attractive bid to make...but I only use it when I want to show that I have more playing strength. It is an optional bid.

 

Hands with both lower ranking or top and bottom risk being lost in competition. I want the cue bids to identify those patterns right away. The direct cue bid keeps the top suit in play at the 2-level (except with H and C opposite a 1S opener) while the 2N unusual recognizes that we're probably going to have to compete to the 3-level if we want to take the bid.

[rbforster]

I don't think I'm giving up much. 1m-3m as a preempt and 1M-3M as a stopper-ask seem relatively infrequent.

Its not just for a stopper ask - if you start facing light openings, you'll realize that as overcaller your only forcing bid is 1M - (3M), at least aside from your direct cue for some two suiter. What if you have a slam invitational 1 suiter too good to bid 4OM? Double can be passed after all, and when you're very distributional this is more of a risk and could be a bad result ieven if they go down.

 

If you want to show a nice set of two suited hands, take a look at Overcall Structure (although they do use the 3-cue for a stopper ask but you could use it as something else's if you want).

[straube]

Its not just for a stopper ask - if you start facing light openings, you'll realize that as overcaller your only forcing bid is 1M - (3M), at least aside from your direct cue for some two suiter. What if you have a slam invitational 1 suiter too good to bid 4OM? Double can be passed after all, and when you're very distributional this is more of a risk and could be a bad result ieven if they go down.

 

If you want to show a nice set of two suited hands, take a look at Overcall Structure (although they do use the 3-cue for a stopper ask but you could use it as something else's if you want).

 

Have a link?

[wclass___]

Have a link?

 

I guess he means this one: overcall structure

[straube]

I like the idea of switching dbl and NT. Seems like dbl has to handle most 15+ though so it really doesn't imply a balanced hand, does it? Are experts taking to this?

[bbochev]

Our pair use unlimited transfer bids combined with Raptor over 1st level suit openings. Its deals well with most hands (including twosuiters) with cons of having to bid clubs at 3th level.

 

So:

2 NT is good overcall with clubs, 3 clubs and above are preempts;

Dbl and transer for two suits (exclude clubs and opened suit);

1♠ (or dbl on 1S) = T/O dbl or strong Balanced hand (after simple answer from partner new suit = 4 cards and 16-18, 2 NT=19-20 etc.)

1 NT - Raptor - 4M-5+m, outside opened suit

Cue after minor - 5-5both majors unlimited

Cue after M - unlimited Michaels

Jump 2 M -> 6 (7 Vuln) tricks AND good 6+ suit.

 

We played transfer to opener's suit as 4441 t/o. It is matter of choice - for this shape "ordinary" t/o (1♠) could be used, and transfer to suit and major cue-bid could show exact twosuiter OM + lower/upper minor for example.

[gwnn]

Violently hate (1m)-2nt=om+any major :(

[mike777]

I like Astro cuebids.

 

(1s)=2s=4h and longer clubs.

(1h)=2h=4s and longer clubs.

 

(1d)=2d=4h and longer clubs

(1c)=2c=4h and longer diam.

 

double when you have the higher unbid major and higher unbid minor.

1) over 1s double when you have 4h and longer d.(convert club bid to d at the equal level)

2) over 1h double when you have 4s and longer d. ( convert club bid to d....)

3) over 1d over call 2c with 4s and longer clubs

4) over 1c overcall 1d with 4s and longer d

[gnasher]

Violently hate (1m)-2nt=om+any major :(

 

Is that the only suggestion in this thread that attracts your hatred? I have a rather longer list (though I like Trinidad's suggestion).

[dake50]

I really love to make a 2-suited bid that helps

opponents find their perfecto game.

Save your 2-suiter bids for real value hands.

Not S:x H:QJxxx D:KJxxx C:xx

BUT S:x H:AQJxx D:KQ109x C:xx

Some near 5-loser hand.

[rbforster]

Have a link?

Here's my version.

[whereagles]

Is that the only suggestion in this thread that attracts your hatred? I have a rather longer list (though I like Trinidad's suggestion).

 

From my experience of playing 1m-2NT as om+M, I think your reluctance is quite exaggerated :)

[Zelandakh]

Over 1m I quite like to play a multi defence...

 

2m = wjo in a major or strong S + om

2H = majors, weak

2S = S + om, weak

2N = H + om, weak or strong

3m = majors, strong

[straube]

Based on Hardy's method (but tweaked)

 

1) cues are top and bottom (lower ranking is longer). A cue also serves to describe a 5/5 hand which is too strong to make a simple overcall; this hand plans to rebid the higher ranking.

 

2) dbl shows either a 3-suited hand or the two higher ranking (equal level conversion) or a strong hand. Strong hands must rebid NT, cue, 2S or higher (or partner will take it as ELC).

.....Dbl is the way to introduce 5/5 in the majors if the hand is not strong. Dbl does not handle any strong 2-suited hands

 

3) NT is natural except by a PH

 

4) 1C-2D shows 4+H/5+D and is limited

 

5) 1C-2N shows 5H/5D and could be strong

 

6) 1D-2N shows 4+H/5+ clubs and could be strong (Hardy used 3C for this, but I want the club preempt)

 

7) 1M-2N shows 5/5 minors but diamonds are never longer

 

8) most 5M/4+m start with a simple overcall. 5S/4H starts with 1S (Hardy used 1S and then 2H to show a stronger hand but he's not able to show the relative lengths)

 

9) jump cue bids show 5/5s in highest ranking and are strong. For example 1D (3D) shows 5/5 majors and a good hand. 1H (3H) shows a strong 5S/5D hand. Hardy didn't use this bid thusly, but I think it is hard to describe 2-suited with the higher ranking without these bids. Two-suited of higher ranking and moderate strength can dbl (in the case of both majors) or can introduce the higher ranking and then the lower ranking one at a time.

 

Thoughts?