2nt positive over 2c

[Bridgebum_]

Is it possible to replace this with 2♦waiting? 2nt always ruins the sequence

[johnu]

That's quite a definitive claim. Do you have half a dozen examples where you got to a bad contract after a 2NT response?

[42krunner]

Is it possible to replace this with 2♦waiting? 2nt always ruins the sequence

 

I'd hate to see that. Having SOME positive response is better than none, IMHO (which is supported by Marty Bergen and others).

[steve2005]

 

I'd hate to see that. Having SOME positive response is better than none, IMHO (which is supported by Marty Bergen and others).

 

I don't think Bridgebum_ was suggesting get rid of all the positive responses (like 2♥/2♠/3♣/3♦)

 

If opener's primary suit is a major, 2N really burns up bidding space.

 

 

 

 

 

[Bridgebum_]

That's quite a definitive claim. Do you have half a dozen examples where you got to a bad contract after a 2NT response?

 

for example where I was going to rebid 2nt, all stayman and transfers are taken away, so do I just rebid 3nt or bid a 4 card suit?

Like I said awkward. Or where I have 5,4,3,1 the bid is a pushed up a level prematurely.

[Bridgebum_]

I don't think Bridgebum_ was suggesting get rid of all the positive responses (like 2♥/2♠/3♣/3♦)

 

If opener's primary suit is a major, 2N really burns up bidding space.

 

 

I like the idea of the responder getting out of the way and allowing the 2 club opener the chance to fully describe their hand

[iandayre]

I agree that 2NT as a natural response should be dumped. I don't think this response has been used by any strong pairs in 50 years. i guarantee you that Bergen does not advocate it.

 

Personally I would like to see 2H as an artificial negative and 2NT the H positive (5+, 2+ of top 3). Once weakness has been shown at responder's first opportunity, further calls are natural. Or with Qxxx, xxx, Qxxxx, x you could splinter in support of Spades if partner bids them.

[1eyedjack]

It is one thing to say that most players do not use 2N as a balanced positive.

 

It is another thing to say that there is another single specified treatment that is either more popular in the outside world or more popular among BBO players.

 

Another treatment with some following would be for it to be a transfer

 

 

 

[johnu]

for example where I was going to rebid 2nt, all stayman and transfers are taken away, so do I just rebid 3nt or bid a 4 card suit?

Like I said awkward. Or where I have 5,4,3,1 the bid is a pushed up a level prematurely.

 

With the 2NT hand, you either show extra values at a low level, ie 2NT, or at a high level, how high and what bid??? since 2♦ almost always tells nothing about your hand. I think some systemic bids over 2NT would do what you want to do, but I wouldn't hold my breath for that big of a change to the bidding.

[johnu]

I agree that 2NT as a natural response should be dumped. I don't think this response has been used by any strong pairs in 50 years. i guarantee you that Bergen does not advocate it.

 

I have zero Bergen books so I have no idea if you are correct about his methods, but if you quote some pages from a book, I'm sure others can verify. If I sat down with an expert player and they bid 2NT, I would expect it to be about a positive, natural response. What else do you think it would be in an expert partnership if 2♥, 2♠, 3♣, 3♦ are all positive, natural bids?

[helene_t]

With no discussion DNE (unless we play 2♥ as artificial in which case 2NT shows hearts) but of course it ought to be something. Maybe 5-5 in the minors if we want to keep it simple and (otherwise) natural.

[steve2005]

In another discussion bidding goes 2C-2H-2S-6N (ridiculous)

 

If Gib is going to take over the bidding as responder to 2♣ it doesn't matter what system you use. Responder should be describing their hand as best as possible not jumping to slam or using Blackwood/Keycard.