2/1 Bidding Problem

[kriegel]

Vulnerable at IMPs you hold:

 

♠9xxx

♥AK10

♦K

♣AKQxx

 

Playing partner's preferred methods, a simple 2/1 with strong notrump, partner opens 1♦ in first seat. You respond 2♣, and partner rebids 2♦. You haven't discussed whether 2♦ denies a 4-card major or whether a reverse would promise extra values. Over to you.

 

1♦ - 2♣

2♦ - ?

[lycier]

After 2♣,the opener's first priority is to clarify the length of ♦,so rebid 2♦ showed partner's hand with 5 card ♦ at least,I think its showing was nothing with majors,now responder can bid 2♥ simply showing some controls in ♥ suit with denied control in ♠ .it was a simple thing,what else?

[aguahombre]

It is not as simple as that. The early priority in a 2/1 G.F. auction is to establish strain, not controls.

[mike777]

2/1 has the well known problem of strain vs level....that is the weakness of 2/1.

 

 

Here I will start with 2nt, I will assume opener can be very lite.

 

One can debate rebidding 6d vs 4 card major by opener.

often rebidding the 6 card minor shows a minimum ....showing the 4 card major shows extras...and rare..

 

at some point i bet I will bid 4nt quant.( ya pard can be that junky) pard should move on in the context 2d is minimum junk.

[Vampyr]

2/1 has the well known problem of strain vs level....that is the weakness of 2/1.

 

This is a common problem with systems of all kinds; I think that this is a strength of 2/1GF in that you establish a GF very early and can agree to show your shape without extra values. I would do this in the OP problem, because this seems to me the more sensible approach.

[mike777]

This is a common problem with systems of all kinds; I think that this is a strength of 2/1GF in that you establish a GF very early and can agree to show your shape without extra values. I would do this in the OP problem, because this seems to me the more sensible approach.

 

 

Vamp i agree with your points...except 2/1 still has the prbl of strain vs level...but.....your other points valid

[JLOGIC]

I would bid 2S because I have 4 spades. I understand 2N and maybe I'm being too simplistic. Also it might be necessary for partner to declare 6N with like Kx or AQ of spades though this is a lesser concern.

[JLOGIC]

One other thing, we can still get to 6N instead of 6S if the auction makes it likely that that's right. It is harder to get to 6S after bidding 2N which as far as I'm concerned denies 4M. We can also show our exact shape after 2S which we can't do after 2S, but of course stiff K might be huge and showing 4315 might hurt us with the DK.

 

I dunno, I currently feel that 2S is right but I'm willing to be convinced. I don't feel that sure.

[mike777]

I agree getting to 6s after my 2nt is too tough.

[aguahombre]

If I am going to play 2/1 (I am), I don't get to dwell on whether the system has "level" problems. I just go with the strain search early and the level issues later, like experienced 2/1 pairs do.

 

2S is the system bid, and that's what I bid. Can understand people choosing 2NT instead, but they are operating. 2H is just wrong, since this is not a "stopper" auction at the point of responder's rebid. 2H might be a great bid in some other system, but not in 2/1.

[mike777]

what does operating mean with 2nt and nt 2s?

[aguahombre]

what does operating mean with 2nt and nt 2s?

Operating means showing 3-3-2-5, when you have 4-3-1-5 in this case. In general, it means breaking system because we think we are smarter than our agreements. Operating is not always a bad thing; but you are maneuvering your partner instead of conducting a partnership auction.

 

When the right hands come along, we find "operating" partner to be successful. I don't see this being one of those cases.

[mike777]

Operating means showing 3-3-2-5, when you have 4-3-1-5 in this case. In general, it means breaking system because we think we are smarter than our agreements. Operating is not always a bad thing; but you are maneuvering your partner instead of conducting a partnership auction.

 

When the right hands come along, we find "operating" partner to be successful. I don't see this being one of those cases.

 

 

io HAVE NO idea what this crap means.....i suppose you do

 

edit...perhaps my syntex could have been more polite.

[TwstofLime]

Back to the question. If you show partner GF and pard rebids diamonds, go up the line. 2♥--a forcing bid, says, "Show me your stuff, pard." (i.e., Cohen: KISS)

[Antrax]

I don't understand the attraction of 2NT without stoppers in the unbid suits. 2♠ shows the club suit is real and shows the 5-4 shape with no 3-card ♦, so it seems like the way to go.

[the hog]

2S. I have 4S do I not? Why would I show a 4 card H suit instead?

[Raff90]

i bid 2 spade as well.

you will never find yout fit again if you dont bid it now.

and if partner has a spade fit its way easier to figure out in which level you want to be.

5-7 spades. everything is possible.

[lowerline]

Vulnerable at IMPs you hold:

 

♠9xxx

♥AK10

♦K

♣AKQxx

 

Playing partner's preferred methods, a simple 2/1 with strong notrump, partner opens 1♦ in first seat. You respond 2♣, and partner rebids 2♦. You haven't discussed whether 2♦ denies a 4-card major or whether a reverse would promise extra values. Over to you.

 

1♦ - 2♣

2♦ - ?

 

I don't consider this a bidding problem (yet). This is a 2♠ bid in any natural system. If partner comes back with 3♦ over my 2♠, well now I have something to think about...

 

Steven

 

 

 

[aguahombre]

I don't consider this a bidding problem (yet). This is a 2♠ bid in any natural system. If partner comes back with 3♦ over my 2♠, well now I have something to think about...

Yes. This would be the time to start thinking level and controls. 3♥.

[pigpenz]

I myself would still reverse with 2♠ dont like the quality of the suit

but want to show my shape and strength, I would bid 2♥ before I would bid 2NT

[aguahombre]

never mind.

[steve2005]

I myself would still reverse with 2♠ dont like the quality of the suit

but want to show my shape and strength, I would bid 2♥ before I would bid 2NT

i would bid 2♠ only way to find 4-4 ♠ fit, but would rebid 3N over a raise.

The problem comes if partner doesnt raise. If he bids 2N raise to 3N. Over 3♦ i'm gonna bid 3♥ to show stoppers, so opener can bid 3N. Hopefully he has a ♠ stopper.

 

Im not convinced though, can easily be in 3N with 4♠ losers without 9 winners

[aguahombre]

i would bid 2♠ only way to find 4-4 ♠ fit, but would rebid 3N over a raise.

Do you notice your 19 count? Or maybe you are using 3NT as the dreaded "serious"? I think if partner is inconsiderate enough to raise 2S to 3, I will try 4H ---quite serious, and we don't even use the convention on this auction.

[PhilKing]

This hand worries me.

 

Bad things will often happen if we play in spades. What I really want to be able to do is relay with Two Hearts without denying a major.

[kenrexford]

I am not sure which is more absurd:

 

1. Playing without agreements sufficient to enable finding 4-4 major fits in a simple auction, or

2. Analyzing the bidding anyway.

 

I mean, if 2♦ denies a 4-card major, then 2♠ is an idiot bid. It does not show spades, it is a notrump probe and asks for help in hearts. That seems totally wrong.

 

Conversely, if 2♦ does not deny a 4-card major, then 2♠ surely shows four or the agreements are really obscure. If it shows four, it cannot possibly be a reverse, so I do not know what that nonsense was about. So, 2♠ seems obvious.

 

Now, it is possible that 2♦ does not deny a 4-card major and that 2♠ does not show a 4-card major, and this could be logical. I have played something similar (after a lot of discussion). In that event, IF Opener raises RESPONDER"s major, and if RESPONDER continues on in that strain, THEN the major is agreed. This is really tricky.

 

 

In that event, you probably have a converse, where perhaps you could have this auction:

 

1♦-2♣

2♦-2♥

2♠-3♠

4♠

 

In that plausible auction, 2♥ was not necessarily four hearts, and 2♠ not necessarily four spades. 3♠ agreed spades and is thus four-card, and Opener can confirm true spades then by bidding 4♥ or 4♠ (4♥ as a "GPS" Cuebid).

 

In that scenario, 2♥ seems plausibly right. Responder is not promising four hearts but is maintaining the ability to confirm a 4-4 spade fit. This has some mild risk if Opener can have 4-4-5-0 shape, perhaps, but maybe that is not possible, or maybe remote enough to not F with what feels right.

 

I like that last interpretatiopn enough to throw down. 2♥ is right, and all other bids are idiotic. (Just kidding with the hyperbole.)