Two Clubs

[661_Pete]

I'm 'Acol'. But all the natural systems, as I understand it (Benji excepted) have 2♣ as a game-force, unless the bidding goes 2♣-2♦-2NT. This is surely one of the first things beginners learn!

 

So what do I do with this?

[hv=pc=n&s=sakjhak3dakqj93c2]133|100[/hv]

Clearly can't end up in NT unless partner can look after the clubs! And if partner makes the negative 2♦ response they will quite likely end up playing the hand.

 

With hindsight, I wonder if it might have been better to simply open 5♦ - three apparent losers notwithstanding - possibly missing the slam?

[Kungsgeten]

I wouldn't worry too much about who is playing the hand. In the specified hand, it might even be better for partner to declare since he may have the clubs protected on the lead.

 

I would start 2C-2D; 3D. If partner bids 3M you can raise to four.

 

Some people who play multi choose to include GF hands with diamonds in the 2D opening bid. In Sweden it is popular at higher levels to play 2D as weak in a major or GF with diamonds as the primary suit, a possible continuation could then be:

 

2D-2H; (multi - pass/correct)

Pass = Weak with hearts

2S = Weak with spades

2NT = Semi-balanced GF with diamonds

3C = 5+ diamonds and a 4 card side suit (3D asks)

3D = 6+ diamonds, single-suited no shortness

3H = 6+ diamonds, short hearts

3S = 6+ diamonds, short spades

3NT = 6+ diamonds, short clubs, non-forcing

4C = 6+ diamonds, short clubs, forcing

 

So given the example hand the bidding would probably start 2D-2H; 3NT.

[Cyberyeti]

If you want to play 5♦, open 4N, if partner has no ace, settle for 5♦ which you play, if he has A♣ then 6 is no worse than a finesse if the diamonds come in.

 

The danger is that your best spot could easily be in a major.

[wank]

as i'm on his ignore list, perhaps someone else can direct this query to the novice/beginner section. it doesn't even have much to do with natural bidding.

[billw55]

2♣-2♦-3♦ is fine. It doesn't matter who plays the hand in this case.

[Jinksy]

So what do I do with this?

[hv=pc=n&s=sakjhak3dakqj93c2]133|100[/hv]

Clearly can't end up in NT unless partner can look after the clubs! And if partner makes the negative 2♦ response they will quite likely end up playing the hand.

 

With hindsight, I wonder if it might have been better to simply open 5♦ - three apparent losers notwithstanding - possibly missing the slam?

 

As others have said, rightsiding is all but irrelevant here, but even as a general rule, it should be near the bottom of your list of priorities when thinking about how to bid a hand, especially early in the auction when you have no idea what each other have.

[Kaitlyn S]

As others have said, rightsiding is all but irrelevant here, but even as a general rule, it should be near the bottom of your list of priorities when thinking about how to bid a hand, especially early in the auction when you have no idea what each other have.

Agree. Although you may get the hand rightsided anyway. Open 2C, partner bids 2D, you bid 3D, partner either bids a 5-card major, or probably bids 3NT without one. I'd rather have partner playing 3NT. If partner doesn't have a 5-card major, I'd rather shoot out 3NT than 5D.

[rmnka447]

I also agree 2 ♣ is right. Whatever else transpires, you always have the option of bidding 5 ♦ later. When you do, partner will know the bid is based on strength and is not preemptive like x xx AKQxxxxxx x. And every once in a blue moon, you might hit partner with a good hand and be able to find slam.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=sakjhak3dakqj93c2]133|100|661_Pete "I'm 'Acol'. But all the natural systems, as I understand it (Benji

excepted) have 2♣ as a game-force, unless the bidding goes

2♣-2♦-2NT. This is surely one of the first things beginners learn! So what do I do with this? Clearly can't end up in NT unless partner can look after the clubs! And if partner makes the negative 2♦ response they will quite likely end up playing the hand.With hindsight, I wonder if it might have been better to simply open 5♦ - three apparent losers notwithstanding - possibly missing the slam?"

 

A 2♣ opening bid gives you time to explore and partner space to co-operate in finding the best contract. For example....

After 2♣ - 2♦ - 3♦,

- You right-side a no-trump contract when partner has e.g. ♠ x x x ♥ x x x x ♦ x x x ♣ K x x

- You can reach a good major contract when partner has e.g. ♠ x x ♥ Q x x x x x ♦ x ♣ J x x x. This hand also illustrates how little you need for a slam.

[/hv]

[billw55]

I also agree 2 ♣ is right. Whatever else transpires, you always have the option of bidding 5 ♦ later. When you do, partner will know the bid is based on strength and is not preemptive like x xx AKQxxxxxx x. And every once in a blue moon, you might hit partner with a good hand and be able to find slam.

Partner doesn't need all that much for slam. I think "once in a blue moon" is pretty pessimistic.

 

 

[Cyberyeti]

Partner doesn't need all that much for slam. I think "once in a blue moon" is pretty pessimistic.

 

Indeed, xx, xx, 10xx, xxxxxx is not terrible.

[mycroft]

Different system, different hand, but last week we had:

 

2♣-(x)-2♦;

3♦-4♦;

4♥-4♠;

4NT-6♣;

7♦.

 

Claimer from either hand after the opening lead didn't get ruffed. With the strong hand having the ♣A, 7NT would have worked as well (and wouldn't have worried about the opening ruff). Yes, strong hands with diamonds are unfortunate, and strong two-suiters with a major and primary diamonds are hellish, but if you have to do it (because the chance of playing 1♦+5 is very high), you have to do it. There are better systems for strong hands, but pd and I had 4 2♣ openers in two sessions Friday, which matches our total for an average quarter, so we focus on the hands we're more likely to get.

[Caitlynne]

First, you are incorrect that (in systems like SAYC) that 2C-2D, 2NT is the only sequence in which a 2C opener is not committing the partnership to game. Most play that the 2C opener bids a suit and then rebids it cheaply, this is not forcing.

 

Consequently, the only reason to not open

 

x

AKJ

AKQJxx

AKx

 

or something like that with 2C and, should partner respond 2D, rebid 3D is because you are a hand hog and cannot tolerate partner declaring the hand.

 

On the hand you gave, it is unlikely you will play the hand. But on the one I have given, should partner now bid 3S, you can rebid 3NT and you most likely will play it there.

 

And that is just one reason you don't open 5D: you don't want to take 3NT out of the picture.

[Jinksy]

First, you are incorrect that (in systems like SAYC) that 2C-2D, 2NT is the only sequence in which a 2C opener is not committing the partnership to game. Most play that the 2C opener bids a suit and then rebids it cheaply, this is not forcing.

 

This is almost certainly false. I doubt anyone here does, I've never encountered it in a club, and would certainly not assume it in a pickup partnership.

[mycroft]

I would assume the following in North America (which has provenance since Goren at least, and as far as I know has not been commonly repudiated):

 

If 2♥ shows an immediate double-negative, then 2♣-2♦ is absolutely game forcing, and replace 2♦ below with 2♥.

 

2♣-2♦; 2NT can be passed.

2♣-2♦; suit bid-and-rebid (but not immediately raised below game, that's a slam try) can be passed. So:

2♣-2♦; 2♥-3♣ (whether that's artificial or not); 3♥ can be passed, as can 3NT. Anything else is still forcing;

2♣-2♦; 2♥-2♠; 2NT-3♠ can be passed.

 

I wouldn't assume this with anyone still in flight B, but then I wouldn't assume that 2♣-2♥ (denies A or K}; 3♥ could be passed either, but it was. It won't be again, though, at least by that pair! That has nothing to do with pickup and everything to do with "if you can't play 2/1, you can't play."

[Kaitlyn S]

This is almost certainly false. I doubt anyone here does, I've never encountered it in a club, and would certainly not assume it in a pickup partnership.

I play those sequences the same way Caitlynne does.