Jump to content

2/1: do you play this is passable?


  

22 members have voted

  1. 1. In your 2/1, can responder pass?

    • Yes
      18
    • No
      4


Recommended Posts

Assuming strict 2/1 with no comp, off in comp...

 

1H 1S 2C P

2H P ?

 

Can responder pass?

 

Our meta-rule states the following is not forcing after 2/1 in competition: either side rebids his suit, raises, or bids 2NT. However, I can see why this might be an exception. What do you think?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was 2 forcing or just a free bid?

This. I play 2 after an overcall differently with my partners, but whatever its meaning opener may rebid 2 with 16 or even 17pts and 6+. You bid accordingly.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't a 2/1 sequence per se. We've had many discussions about SAYC and the intelligent SAYC pairs claim its perfectly playable for the 2 bidder to promise one more call.

 

Sequences like this are rapidly becoming artificial btw.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you agreed that the auction could be dropped if "either side rebids his suit", what auction did you have in mind if not this one?

 

Anyway, I think it's normal to play this as non-forcing. The idea of playing 2/1 responses in competition as not game-forcing is so that you can make them on weaker hands. If you play 2 as forcing to 2NT, or as promising a rebid, you're only shaving a point or two off the lower limit, so you might as well be playing it as game-forcing.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks all for the responses.

 

When you agreed that the auction could be dropped if "either side rebids his suit", what auction did you have in mind if not this one?

 

Our rule is primarily to keep responder from having to bid over a raise of his minor or 2NT ... both iof which come up often. However you make a good point - this should be a top consideration.

 

Anyway, I think it's normal to play this as non-forcing. The idea of playing 2/1 responses in competition as not game-forcing is so that you can make them on weaker hands. If you play 2 as forcing to 2NT, or as promising a rebid, you're only shaving a point or two off the lower limit, so you might as well be playing it as game-forcing.

 

Another very good point ... good reason to keep it NF.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am surprised so many in my poll in the other thread said NF. Re-learn something every day...or something? I am not surprised that especially English people play it as NF.

 

I still play this as forcing (I think you are forced to 3 of the lowest suit bid so far, or 2N). Given OPs meta agreements, seems like he plays it as NF without prior discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can always bid the opponent's suit with a strong hand. So if the 2 bidder doesn't think there is game opposite the limited 2 (whatever the limit actually is) then he should be allowed to pass.
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...