1m-1M-?? when to rebid 2m or 3m

[Mbodell]

Assuming appropriate shape (I.e., a six card minor suit, and a hand pattern/body that shouldn't either rebid some number of nt or raise partner or bid a new suit), where is the threshold for where you will first be more likely to rebid 3m instead of 2m over an auction that starts 1m and gets a 1M response from partner (I.e., for instance, if you have 1=3=6=3 shape and open 1♦ and partner bids 1♠, how strong can you be to still bid 2♦ versus how weak can you be to bid 3♦?). I realize that it may not be strictly continuous based on hcp and may depend on quality of your suit, your honor placement, fit with partners suit, vulnerability, form of scoring, and many other things, but try to estimate as best as possible for the poll in the general case.

 

For instance if you vote for "average 16 count" it means that with the majority of the "bad 16 counts" you'd bid just 2m (and likewise with good 15 and worse) but with the majority of average 16 counts you'd bid 3m (and likewise with good 16 and better). It would still be correct to vote that way if there were a minority of the "good 15 counts" that would get a 3m and/or a minority of bad 17 only bid 2m. I hope that isn't too confusing of a poll and explanation.

[mike777]

Jump rebids in a minor can have quite a wide range.

 

On average an average 16 AND stiff or void for me. That means I open or rebid nt often with long minor and no shortness.

[JLOGIC]

With only a 6 card suit then either bad 16 or good 15

[billw55]

A test I sometimes use: change an ace to a small card. Would you still open the hand at the one level? If yes, jump to 3m.

 

Also, some 6-card minor hands may be opened 1NT.

[JLOGIC]

So 14 is good enough for you bill? :P

[billw55]

So 14 is good enough for you bill? :P

No rule is absolute obv. But if the resulting 10-count is good enough to open 1m, I would at least consider 3m. I suspect that my baseline for opening 1m is higher than yours.

[Phil]

It seems like qualifying the poll with a "six card suit" would help.

 

I don't know if thats what you meant by "assuming appropriate shape"

[Vampyr]

It seems like qualifying the poll with a "six card suit" would help.

Why? A longer suit may improve the hand from, say, bad to average, or may have no effect. I don't see that it's a big deal.

 

I don't know if thats what you meant by "assuming appropriate shape"

 

The way this was described in the OP was basically a hand where rebidding your suit at some level was the main option you would consider.

[JLOGIC]

A seventh trump will always have a big effect imo Vampyr. For instance I think everyone would bid 3D on x Ax AKQxxxx xxx. Some might if it was AKJTxxx. So minimums are probably a queen lighter or maybe more with a seventh diamond. It is hard to describe in terms of points what a 3D bid is with 7 diamonds, I think it's much easier when you hold only 6 diamonds.

[PhilKing]

A seventh trump will always have a big effect imo Vampyr. For instance I think everyone would bid 3D on x Ax AKQxxxx xxx.

 

There is still time to be the first to select "good 13".

 

Edit: taken.

[mgoetze]

There is still time to be the first to select "good 13".

The trouble is just that the OP seems to think that a "good 13" is worse than a "bad 14", and I would never rebid 3m with a bad 14.

 

Personally, I think trying to put a point number on this decision is just futile.

[mcphee]

The re-bid of 3m after the major response shows a hand with 6 1/2 -7 playing tricks facing a minimum response. It also shows some defensive values. The idea being to help your side reach a close 3NT. The idea is to stress your suit in an attempt to reach 3NT. I see examples of Ax AKQxxx and yes I would like to be a leaper with this and expect partner will bid 3N where I pass and take my score what ever happens, at times you go down. I think this hand type is a bit thin, but you live and die with the result. What manages to turn my head is when I see the leap with Aj9xxx and 15hcp more scattered values. For me, this just is not what I expect.

[helene_t]

The trouble is just that the OP seems to think that a "good 13" is worse than a "bad 14", and I would never rebid 3m with a bad 14.

 

Personally, I think trying to put a point number on this decision is just futile.

It would probably be better to give an example hand and ask how much it would have to improve (as in "change ♦9 to the T/J/Q/K/A") for the hand to be worth a 3m rebid.

 

It doesn't take too much fantasy to figure out that the idea is that there are two strengths between the average 15 and the average 16. Then again, having a 6-card suit already makes the hand better than an average (say) 15-count, so we might interpret the options slightly different.

[TylerE]

A lot more to do with suit quality and loser/winner count than HCP.

[xx1943]

A lot more to do with suit quality and loser/winner count than HCP.

That's it.

Ax, xx, xxx, AKQ109x will jump to 3m

but

AK, Ax, AQx, Jxxxxx will jump to 2NT

Ax, Ax, Axx, QJ5432 will rebid smootly 2m

[billw55]

A test case I was dealt just now:

 

♠xx

♥AJx

♦AKQTxx

♣xx

 

p - 1♦ - p - 1♥

p - ?

 

With partner's heart bid, I judged it was good enough for 3♦. Agree? Or not?

[lalldonn]

I think of 1m then 2m as 11-15 and 1m then 3m as 16-18. Obviously there are plenty of reasons you might upgrade or downgrade, such as a good suit or extra length in the suit. It is my feeling that many people have too low of a minimum for 3m, essentially making the two ranges the same size when it's clear to me the lower one should be wider.

 

I answered good 15 since I take that to mean a 15 that's as good as a normal 16.

[Zelandakh]

I answered good 15 since I take that to mean a 15 that's as good as a normal 16.

I answered bad 16 for exactly the same reasons as you gave and agree with everything you wrote.

[mgoetze]

A test case I was dealt just now:

 

♠xx

♥AJx

♦AKQTxx

♣xx

 

p - 1♦ - p - 1♥

?

 

With partner's heart bid, I judged it was good enough for 3♦. Agree? Or not?

This is certainly a borderline hand IMHO. I would bid 3♦ with 3-1 in the blacks but only 2♦ as is, but perhaps I overrate that aspect. I do agree that the holding in partner's suit is an important consideration.

[WrecksVee]

I am not sure what I would answer in 2/1 or SAYC. But playing with microcap (Misadventures of Rex and Jay) we have three ranges: 2m <= average 15; 3m good 15 to bad 18; 2NT long minor GF good 18+. So the likely 3m is 16-17 HCP. I think 2/1 or SAYC the same when a false reverse or jump shift is used for the GF single suited hand.

[mikl_plkcc]

It depends most on the suit quality and less on point counts.

 

For me, 1m - 1M - 3m shows a near GF hand that responder is supposed to bid 3NT with stoppers in other suits even when minimum, and 5m with extra strength. It shows at least a good 6-card suit.

 

For example,

 

♠QJ

♥A9

♦A5

♣AQ97632

is certainly a 3♣ after 1♥ response, partner is supposed to bid 3NT with a stopper in the other major.

 

♠KQ

♥AK

♦Q97532

♣A73

is rebid 2NT.

 

♠Q8

♥K6

♦AKJT97

♣AJ3

is rebid 3♦ after 1♥, even with only 15 HCPs since the ♦s are near solid and there is a good chance that the ♦ will run in 3NT.

 

♠K73

♥A7

♦KJ8654

♣A5

Although the above hand contains also 15 HCPs, the quality of the suit is bad so 2♦ is rebid.

 

♠Q75

♥7

♦32

♣AKQJT98

This is a borderline hand, since partner will not expect 7 good ♣s with 1♣ - 1♥ - 2♣.

[the_dude]

This auction is so space-consuming and awkward - responder has little room to investigate anything (particularly when the minor is Diamonds). Therefore opener must be good enough for responder to bid 3NT on any excuse. It's hard to describe that in terms of points ... it's more about tricks and good side cards.

 

Therefore, I tend to only bid 2m with anything up to non-exceptional 14s and bad 15s - I expect my partner to look at his hand and be able to figure out to invite on marginal hands that include Qx of my suit :)