cayne match

[jjsb]

hello there :)

 

despite our terrible bad match that i/we played yesterday on that "jec's match" (sorry for those watching lol ) there is few boards that i really want to share

ur seated in East

 

1) none vulnerable

 

ur holding

xx

Kx

Qxxx

Kxxxx

 

W N E S

3S P 4S

x P ?

 

2) all vulnerable

ur holding

xx

xx

AKQxxxx

xx

 

W N E S

P

1S 2C ?

if u double ur partner bid 2H , ur turn

if u bid 2D South bid 3C ur partner bid 3H , to u

 

now 2 theorical question

i believe there is a different vision (or at least i heard there is) in 2 over 1 fg about the basic start of auction 1M 2m.

where "i am" (and i think its mostly a french concept) we considere that other bid than repetition shows extra . and so repetition doesnt show 6 cards .

to make it clear

1S 2C

3C shows extra

 

1S 2D

2Nt also extra

 

1S 2D

3C also extra

etc

what do u think about all that ?

 

in that match i did have for exemple

KQ10xx

Kxx

void

A10xxx

on a 1S 2D i didnt want to rebid 3C (my D void scared me)

 

last one :

u hold

xx

Kxx

AKQxx

AQx

 

open 1D and on 1S u bid 2nt and ur partner "quant" u with 4nt

for me assuming that i have opened 1D i didnt have to bid 6D to show 5 , 5D w

[jjsb]

sorry i try again as its very confusing to read ..

1)

[hv=pc=n&e=s96hk7dq643ck6432&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=3sp4sdp]133|200[/hv]

2)

[hv=pc=n&e=s94ht5dakq8654c52&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=p1s2c]133|200[/hv]

if u bid 2D then its :

[hv=pc=n&e=s94ht5dakq8654c52&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=p1s2c2d3c3hp]133|200[/hv]

if u double then its :

[hv=pc=n&e=s94ht5dakq8654c52&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=p1s2cdp2hp]133|200[/hv]

 

(dont ask me why there is 3C in one case and not in another ... its what happened at the table ...

[paulg]

(1) Double with my regular partner as this only shows two places and does not guarantee hearts. With anyone else I'd bid 4NT to find our minor fit.

 

(2) Two diamonds. I would not give double any points in a bidding competition :). Now I'd bid three spades, probably wishing I was bidding four diamonds.

[Fluffy]

double is completelly disallowed online paul, not sure if it would be a good idea face to face.

 

I would pass on first and bid 2♦+4♦

[paulg]

<best call removed>(1) Double with my regular partner as this only shows two places and does not guarantee hearts. With anyone else I'd bid 4NT to find our minor fit.</best call removed>

I'll pass then :)

[awm]

(1) I would bid 4NT, asking partner to pick a minor. Passing could work out, but partner's double is takeout here and it seems likely enough to me that we can make five (or six!) of something to forgo the probably +300 defending.

 

(2) 2♦ now; with such a source of tricks it cannot be right to pass. Double shows hearts which I obviously don't have. I'd correct partner's 3♥ to 3♠.

 

On the theoretical questions, good players in the US agree that bidding a new suit at the three-level in a 2/1 sequence (the so-called "high reverse") shows extras, although most will do so with extra shape despite lacking extra points. Devaluing for the diamond void and rebidding 2♠ on your example hand seems pretty reasonable. However, I think most playing 2/1 GF would treat a 2NT rebid as possibly minimum with a suitable hand (not extras) and would consider raising partner's suit automatic when holding four-card support (so not really extras). The "French Style" does agree with the "SAYC Style" but typically 2/1 GF players feel more free to show their shape (rather than rebidding 2M to deny extras) at least here in the US.

 

On your last hand I think you have to accept the slam invite (AKQxx is too good) and you want to offer 6♦ along the way in case this is a better slam. I'd try 5♦ and then pass 6♦ from partner or bid 6NT otherwise at next turn.

[Finch]

(1) Double, responsive. No way does or should this promise hearts.

(2) The two auctions given are not consistent with each other. On the first I double, promising hearts, and partner can only bid 2H showing a minimum possibly with only three hearts, but if I bid 2D, showing diamonds, partner is suddenly prepared to introduce his hearts at the 3-level showing significant extra values? I would have bid 2D, and over partner's 3H (natural and game forcing) I would bid 4D.

 

Your last question, on 2/1 auctions, is simply a matter of agreements. Both styles are possible.

 

Sorry I read the first one as 3S x 4S ?

Edited October 16, 2012 by FrancesHinden

[awm]

(1) Double with my regular partner as this only shows two places and does not guarantee hearts. With anyone else I'd bid 4NT to find our minor fit.

 

(1) Double, responsive. No way does or should this promise hearts.

 

This must be some sort of British thing, but when your partner doubles and your RHO passes, you cannot then double. While I can understand that this might be named a "responsive double" (double in response to partner's double) the opponents have to actually make another bid (not pass) before your side can double a second time. I understand that people play differently on that side of the pond, but I think the laws of bridge remain the same. ;)

[Codo]

1. 4 NT to show the minors

 

2. 3 ♠. I surely had raised spades before with a real fit and I do not want to go beyond 3 NT.

 

2 3 ♦ as this is the way to show a non forcing hand with just diamonds, isn't it?

[nigel_k]

1. Pass. I have no shortage or other reason to want to play at the five level.

 

2. 2♦. Would not consider double or anything else. I assume 2/1 GF is off in competition but even if 2♦ was GF I would still do it.

 

3. Depends on agreement. It's not just a French thing that a reverse requires extras. But it's less than what you need for a reverse after a 1/1. KQTxx Kxx - ATxxx has pretty good values, shape and intermediates and is actually quite a lot better than a minimum opening bid so I would bid 3♣. 2♠ is ok though.

 

4. I would definitely accept the invite. You can bid 6♦ in case partner prefers that, otherwise 6NT.

[MrAce]

This must be some sort of British thing, but when your partner doubles and your RHO passes, you cannot then double. While I can understand that this might be named a "responsive double" (double in response to partner's double) the opponents have to actually make another bid (not pass) before your side can double a second time. I understand that people play differently on that side of the pond, but I think the laws of bridge remain the same. ;)

 

:D

[rmnka447]

Hand #1 - If you believe the opposing bidding partner can't have more than 1 ♠ unless South has raised on 2. I'm bidding 5 ♣.

 

Hand #2 - 2 ♦ followed by 4 ♦.

 

As to the "theoretical" question, the view you suggest that a simple rebid of the major denies extras was the original conception of 2/1. I know Edgar Kaplan/Alfred Sheinwold certainly explained it that way back in their 1960 book "How to Play Winning Bridge" which laid out their Kaplan Sheinwold bidding system [2/1 with weak NTs]. Basically, they said that any new suit or NT bid should show extras.

 

As a practical refinement, you might want to consider one refinement/exception to that rule. The rebid of 2 ♥ after a 1 ♠ opener followed by a 2 m response does not necessarily show extras. That way you don't risk losing a 4-4 ♥ fit.

 

As for a raise of the 2/1 response, they suggested it showed at least 3 to an honor and 15+ in support of responder's suit.

 

So where you are is very close to the original 2/1 concept which is still a very good approach. By using a simple rebid to limit opener's hand, it starts to let the partnership assess the potential of the the hand very quickly -- both when it is used and it isn't used. It adheres to a principle of good bidding that someone has to start limiting their hand at some point in the auction.

 

I think what has happened over the years is that as 2/1 has become more mainstream, people have tried to adapt more "standard" bidding agreements into it. I'm not sure that has been as successful as they believe.

 

I think 2 ♠ is exactly right with the hand with a void in partner's 2/1 suit.

 

Finally, the hand where you rebid 2 NT and partner invites quantitatively with a 4 NT call. As long as you and partner are on the same page bidding, then any move over 4 NT should be viewed as an acceptance and a further description of your hand. So I'd believe 5 ♦ is fine with this hand.