2/1 Bidding Problem

[gnasher]

What Ken said. Or the first few paragraphs, anyway.

[ArtK78]

This hand is funny. I can fully understand why a player would not want to introduce 9xxx of spades on this auction, especially if partner could have bid spades naturally over 2♣ without showing extras (which is my preferred method). If one mentally moves one of the spades to diamonds and treats the hand as if it were 3325 then you have a balanced hand and 2NT would make sense....

 

EXCEPT for the fact that your spades are 9xx (mentally). You don't want to declare notrump from your side (or anything else, for that matter). So, since you can't raise diamonds and you can't rebid clubs and you don't want to bid notrump, you are left with 2 options - bidding your crappy 4 card spade suit naturally or bidding your AKT of hearts as if it were a 4 card suit.

 

While it is the overwhelming choice of the posters to bid the 9xxx of spades, I can see bidding 2♥ naturally over 2♦. I don't know that I would have the guts to do it at the table.

 

Having said all that, I am not sure if Ken and I are in agreement. I had trouble following the last few paragraphs of his post. :)

[steve2005]

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.

yes noticed 19, but you got no fit yet, with a spade fit easily having 2 losers, the minors having slow losers unless opener has semi-solid ♦ or can raise ♣(that would geet me excited) or has J♣

I think in ♠ your gonna need AK♠ for good chance. I guess with your controls can be safe at 5 level, so 4♥ or 4N keycard immidietely or delayed would be ok to find out

[PhilKing]

You could easily 7NT opposite weak spades and a minimum:

 

♠Axxx ♥xx ♦AQJxx ♣Jx.

 

This hand is not really about spades.

[rhm]

You could easily 7NT opposite weak spades and a minimum:

 

♠Axxx ♥xx ♦AQJxx ♣Jx.

 

This hand is not really about spades.

Amen.

 

2♠ is terrible in my opinion. It is not even close.

For 6♠ to be playable, opener spades need to be at least ♠AKxx or ♠KQJx and even then 6NT or a grand in diamonds or clubs (opposite ♠AKxx) might still be better.

Without specific agreements, I do not understand why a good player would prefer to rebid diamonds in a game forcing auction, when holding such a major side suit unless his diamonds are excellent, in which case I have no need for spades.

Over the years the principle of avoiding weak suits on good hands has served me well.

No matter what people claim, assuming you have a 4-4 fit in spades and rebid 2♠ now, I very much doubt you will later be able to make a rational decision, whether to bail out of spades or not.

You will end up in spades far more often when you belong somewhere else by bidding 2♠ than you will miss spades should you rebid something else.

Again this is not close. You are kidding yourself if you believe you can sort out strain (and level!) later after a 2♠ rebid.

 

The choice is between 2♥ (my preference, followed by 3♣ if opener bids 2♠, but I would rather agree diamonds than spades) and 2NT.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[gnasher]

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.

 

Suppose that your methods are that a reverse would have shown extras, and 2♥ is a relay. You relay, and partner shows four spades. Now what?

[rhm]

Suppose that your methods are that a reverse would have shown extras, and 2♥ is a relay. You relay, and partner shows four spades. Now what?

Give up on spades. 4-4 major suit fits are often best, but they are clearly overrated. Most players simply don't know when to avoid them.

Chances opener having 4 of the top 5 spade honors is 4%, chances of him having three of the top 4 honors is 16%.

These apriori percentages increase a bit since opener must have opening bid values but not by much.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

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.

I could not agree less.

Agreements cover the general case, not the specific and in Bridge there are plenty of exceptions.

I do not share the believe, we let our smart agreements run and out drops the right level and strain time and again.

If this were the case Bridge would be boring and we would act like robots.

By the way the fact that robots to date can not bid as well as experts, even though you can make agreements much more complex than suitable for human beings, shows that this is simply not true.

 

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

I do.

Though I would not call it "operating" partner, but using judgment, not on his hand but mine.

I do not make it a habit violating my own agreements and I do not even claim doing so is always successful, but judgement not agreements rules this game.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[TWO4BRIDGE]

2C = 4+♣, 2/1 GF values ; does not deny a 4 card Major.

 

2D = 1st obligation is to show 5+♦; does not deny a 4 card M .

Now the entire 2-level is still available to find a 4-4 Major fit.

So any 2-level Major bid next shows 4 cards - - NOT just values in the suit .

 

I'm ready to see Opener's hand .

[PhilKing]

Suppose that your methods are that a reverse would have shown extras, and 2♥ is a relay. You relay, and partner shows four spades. Now what?

 

It's an imaginary auction for me. If I did play relays here 2♥ would be a relay without diamonds and 2♠ would be a relay setting diamonds, 3♣ would show 4♠ and I would relay again rather than bid 3♠.

 

2M for me is potentially a three-card suit, and yes, partner can have a four-card major.

[rhm]

2C = 4+♣, 2/1 GF values ; does not deny a 4 card Major.

 

2D = 1st obligation is to show 5+♦; does not deny a 4 card M .

Now the entire 2-level is still available to find a 4-4 Major fit.

So any 2-level Major bid next shows 4 cards - - NOT just values in the suit .

 

I'm ready to see Opener's hand .

This is one way of playing.

If you do the choice is between 3♣ (my preference) and 2NT.

2♠ is still terrible in my view.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[Free]

If you're afraid of losing a 4-4 ♠ fit after 1♦-2♣-2♦, then you should've considered responding 1♠ instead of 2♣.

 

I consider this a "1♦-2♣-2♦-2♠ WTP" auction.

[PhilKing]

If you're afraid of losing a 4-4 ♠ fit after 1♦-2♣-2♦, then you should've considered responding 1♠ instead of 2♣.

 

Oh my.

 

Some of us, ie those who would not bid 2♠, are afraid of finding a spade fit.

[Free]

Oh my.

 

Some of us, ie those who would not bid 2♠, are afraid of finding a spade fit.

What's your point? Some say A, some say B, isn't that typical in a discussion? OP asked a question, I responded. Is that a reason to think you have an obligation to point out to me in a derogatory way what I already know by reading the other responses? :rolleyes:

[PhilKing]

What's your point? Some say A, some say B, isn't that typical in a discussion? OP asked a question, I responded. Is that a reason to think you have an obligation to point out to me in a derogatory way what I already know by reading the other responses? :rolleyes:

 

I don't know what you know, but you did use the dreaded "WTP," whilst suggesting the One Spade "solution" for what you correctly surmise to be a non-problem.

 

You probably would not bid One Spade in a million years on this hand. Am I wrong? So I don't really get why you are so bothered by an "oh my" for such a terrible bid. :P

[helene_t]

Free I don't get it. If I need to respond 1♠ to find a spade fit, presumably 2♠ now doesn't show four spades. What does it show then? If 2M now shows a stopper rather than length because we play MAFIA, then mark me down for a 2♥ WTP ( :) ) bid.

[aguahombre]

Some of us, ie those who would not bid 2♠, are afraid of finding a spade fit.

I would be afraid of finding a spade fit, if I were also afraid we couldn't later determine partner's spade quality; or if I were afraid partner wouldn't pay attention to her spade quality later on. Otherwise, no fear.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

2C = 4+♣, 2/1 GF values ; does not deny a 4 card Major.

 

2D = 1st obligation is to show 5+♦; does not deny a 4 card M .

Now the entire 2-level is still available to find a 4-4 Major fit.

So any 2-level Major bid next shows 4 cards - - NOT just values in the suit .

 

I'm ready to see Opener's hand .

 

Bidding 2S now ( showing 4 ) also denies 4 cards ♥... which should be worth something to aid partner's next call if can't bid 3S .

[kenrexford]

For those who did not quite follow the last half of my analysis, there is a different way to understand what I am saying.

 

After the start 1♦-P-2♣-P-2♦, initial major bids show positive honor values in the major but not necessarily length. "Raises" of positive honor value bids are offers to play that strain, however.

 

So, consider the actual hand. A-K-x in hearts is clerarly a positive honor value. A "positive honor value" is perhaps another word for a stopper or two, but somehow I think this is somehow different. Responder would clearly bid 2♥ in this approach, because he has a positive honor value in hearts but not one in spades. 2♥ does not technically deny a positive honor value in spades, but it sure sounds like it. So, all is good.

 

As to length, 2♥ does not show 4-card and does not deny 4-card. Rather, as the focus is at this point on honor strength and not on length, 2♥ tends to imply greater honor strength than that in spades, but nothing is said about respective lengths. Hence, with say xxxx-AQ in the majors (4-2 shape), 2♥ is right.

 

After an honor strength bid is made, raising that suit to also show honor strength is somewhat redundant, for the obvious reason that the issue is the fourth suit. Hence, Opener's move in bidding, say, 3♥ after [1♦-2♣, 2♦-2♥, 3♥] is to now seek strain, and hence the "raise" should be legitimate about length and ambiguous about honor strength. However, as Responder's first call was honor strength and not length, only Responder can continue this strain discussion. (A bid of the fourth suit NOW wouyld be a GPS cuebid.)

 

Now, technically Opener might then bid 2♠ (1♦-2♣-2♦-2♥-2♠) and that might sound like strain seeking, as the redundancy issue seems equally applicable. However, Opener might need a bolster in that fourth suit. Hence, as 2♠ makes sense as a further probe for this reason, and as the level is so low, and as general agreement consistency is a good thing, I simply default to all major bids being honor bids but raises are strain offers.

 

The question, then, might be whether there is a solution for when Responder has AKx in spades with xxxx in hearts, as 4♥ might be the ideal contract. The relevant auction would start as follows:

 

1♦-2♣

2♦-2♠

3♥-?

 

3♥ is not a strain offer but rather a bolster ask. But, Responder cannot "raise" hearts below 3NT by bidding 3♥. So, he uses the surrogate of 3♠ to offer a heart strain. Hence, you could have this crazy auction:

 

1♦-2♣

2♦-2♠(spade honor values)

3♥(do you have a heart bolster?)-3♠(I have four hearts)

?

 

3NT = That's nice as a bolster, I guess

4♥ = Let's play 4♥ then

Other = Cue in support of hearts, slammish

[kriegel]

The full deal was:

 

Partner:

♠K

♥Qxx

♦AQ109xx

♣Jxx

 

You:

♠9xxx

♥AK10

♦K

♣AKQxx

 

Diamonds do not split.

[aguahombre]

So, after the 2S rebid the club strain is found. Unless diamonds not splitting means 5-1 (not the stiff jack?), we like our chances in 6C.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

The full deal was:

 

Partner:

♠K

♥Qxx

♦AQ109xx

♣Jxx

 

You:

♠9xxx

♥AK10

♦K

♣AKQxx

 

 

1D - 2C!

2D - 2S

2NT - 3C

3D - 3H

4C! ( Minorwood ) - 4D ( 0/3 )

4H ( ♣ Q-ask ) - 4NT ( yes + ♥K : NT shows asking suit feature )

6C

[the hog]

The full deal was:

 

Partner:

♠K

♥Qxx

♦AQ109xx

♣Jxx

 

You:

♠9xxx

♥AK10

♦K

♣AKQxx

 

Diamonds do not split.

 

Who cares about the Ds? I want to be in 6C.

[kriegel]

Who cares about the Ds? I want to be in 6C.

 

Of course. But it seems to be the only possible piece of relevant information about the East-West hands.

[mike777]

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♦ - ?

 

 

the debate is 2s vs 2nt?

 

I will try 2nt but 2s has it points.