inverted minors openers next bid

[dickiegera]

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp2dp]133|100[/hv]

 

 

What should these bids mean

 

2♥

2♠

2NT

3♣

3♦

3NT

 

Thank you

[Stephen Tu]

This is one of those "up to partnership agreement" areas. One can do a lot of artificial things here to optimize/preserve bidding space.

Without discussion, 2nt/3d are natural NF and minimum, 3nt is 18-19 balanced, new suits are stopper showing with extras.

With discussion, you can do things like play 2nt as forcing (either 1rd or to game), with maybe something like 2H first step showing minimum willing to pass responder's min 2nt/3d rebid, and various ways for either partner to show shortages and stoppers afterward.

 

[Cyberyeti]

Depends completely on what 2♦ shows:

 

F1/FG and does it deny 4M ?

 

also 3 or 4 card diamond ?

[dickiegera]

Depends completely on what 2♦ shows:

 

F1/FG and does it deny 4M ?

 

also 3 or 4 card diamond ?

 

I play it as 10+pts 4+ Diamonds and no 4 card M

[ggwhiz]

I play it as 10+pts 4+ Diamonds and no 4 card M

 

You can do better than that. We added criss-cross where 1♣ - 2♦ or 1♦ - 3♣ shows exactly a limit raise of openers suit and therefore a single raise is a game force.

 

Without that and where responder can have 10 or 20 and opener pretty close to the same I don't see any way to make a response structure that works. ie. with us 2♥/♠ initially shows stoppers up the line and since we are on a GF, 2nt (and everything else below game) after that is forcing etc. and we have plenty of bidding room to make slam tries or bid where we live to get to the right game.

 

Note that this is more frequent and comfortable if you do not play a short club. Something else you might specify since a 1♣ opener and raise would be the same kettle of fish.

[steve2005]

Also depends on what does 1♦ mean? You didn't say how many ♦ are promised or strength.

Playing Precision/strong club you will get completely different answer.

Even playing weak nt probably completely changes your methods.

 

Your question is far to vague to be asking about specific bids. Then you don't even ask about 3♥/3♠.

I think some independent research is in order. B-)

[Winstonm]

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp2dp]133|100[/hv]

 

 

What should these bids mean

 

2♥

2♠

2NT

3♣

3♦

3NT

 

Thank you

 

2H, 2S, 3C = singletons or voids

2N=NT shape minimum

3D=6 card suit, minimum

3NT=NT shape, max

[helene_t]

We bid stoppers up the line. I think this is "standard" among pairs pairs for whom 2♦ denies a fourcard major.

 

Stopper bids don't promise extras, as long as we don't bypass 3♦.

 

2NT is 12 or modest 13. Whether 3NT is 18-19 or 14(13+) is a matter of agreement.

 

There are better agreements out there, though:

 

- 2♦ shouldn't deny a 4-card major, imo. It is just too awkward to show a GF hand with diamond support unless you show it straight away.

- If 1♦ promises 4+ diamonds, it should be forcing to 3♦

- It is not good to show stoppers before having clarified whether the hand is balanced or not

[TylerE]

For me: 2M = cheapest stopper, 2NT=Minimum, but stoppers in both majors and _probably_ the 4th suit as well.

[igt3]

I am not a huge fan of showing stoppers. It makes you stay out of a 3NT contract lacking a stopper in one of the majors, but on the other hand it might make with a favorable lead.

[Cyberyeti]

This is also a place where playing a weak NT really helps, not having to deal with the weak NT means that over 1♦-2♦ 2N is GF and usually balanced although can include some unbalanced hands.

 

Over 1♣-2♣ use 2♦ as your artificial relay showing extras to allow easy signing off if you don't have game values.

 

Our structure would not help you, as we play weak NT and can have 4M.

[pescetom]

There are better agreements out there, though:

 

- 2♦ shouldn't deny a 4-card major, imo. It is just too awkward to show a GF hand with diamond support unless you show it straight away.

- If 1♦ promises 4+ diamonds, it should be forcing to 3♦

- It is not good to show stoppers before having clarified whether the hand is balanced or not

 

These are among the reasons why we prefer to play 2♣ as a game forcing 2/1 over both minors.

Of course this fits best with short club; no inverted minors, 1♣ - 1♦ semi-artificial and 1♦-2♦ weak denying 4cM.

[Winstonm]

My original thought (October 2008 Bridge World - Showing Shortness After An Inverted Raise) was why should a NT-shaped hand not bid NT simply because of playing inverted minors? After all, over some such auction as 1C-1D we don't then bid stoppers.

 

One of the huge advantages of inverted minors is finding a minor-suit fit at a low level. This should make minor suit game and slam bidding much easier - but instead we play NT find. It makes no sense.

 

By utilizing a 2N bid like a 1N bid after 1C-1D, all those other bids are freed for better usage.

[spotlight7]

Bob Hamman has used the first step as weakness and

 

2nd step as GF. Higher bids show shortness and GF.

 

 

This min./max. range showing bids avoid silly

 

contracts when opener is minimum and responder 10+.

[steve2005]

I am not a huge fan of showing stoppers. It makes you stay out of a 3NT contract lacking a stopper in one of the majors, but on the other hand it might make with a favorable lead.

Agreed showing stoppers just increases the chance you will go down in 3NT.

2M should be used for something useful. For those where 2♦ hasn't denied a major you need to clearly show a 4-card major somehow..

Going completely artificial after 2♦ makes a lot of sense, but most partnerships can't do that.

[msjennifer]

FOR ME,

2H= a two suited hand with 5D and 4H or sometimes 4441 with a singleton club

2S=two suites hand with 5D and 4S

2NT= a minimum balanced hand with a stopper in side suits.

3C-= A two suited with 5/4 or 4/5 in D and C

3D= Either a minimum single suited hand or a hand lacking a stopper in one of the majors

[rmnka447]

For most playing inverted minors in NA, the raise denies a 4 card major. Opener's rebids are

 

2 ♥, 2 ♠ = Stopper, good minimum (13-14)+, 4+ ♦ looking possibly for NT

 

2 NT = minimum range 12-14 balanced hand usually with 3 ♦.

 

3 ♣= presumably 5-4 in minors but might be 5-5 or 4-5

 

3 ♦ = minimum ♦ hand, often 11-12, responder can pass with 10-11.

 

3 NT = 15+ balanced.

[kenberg]

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp2dp]133|100[/hv]

 

 

What should these bids mean

 

2♥

2♠

2NT

3♣

3♦

3NT

 

Thank you

 

 

Using 1D - 2D as 10+ and no four card major is pretty standard and fine with me. So you want a way out when suitable, that's the first thing.

 

I like:

 

1D-2D is either a gf or, when not a game force, is on a five card suit. The 2D bidder plans to bid 3D next, very passable.

 

Should 1D-2D-2NT be passable? The GIBs play it as passable, Bridge World Standard says that it isn't. There is some sense to saying that it isn't if we play that the 2D bidder either has a gf or else a hand suitable for a 3D rebid.

 

 

As for the other bids, if I am generally balanced I think 2NT is fine. If partner bids 3D I pass, if he raises to 3NT that's likely to be as good a game as any. I think bidding 2M should show a somewhat unbalanced hand. NT could still be right, but if partner is also unbalanced then a partscore or a game in the minor might be better.

 

This is not super-precise but asking for too many detailed artificial bids seems wrong to me.

[bilalz]

You can do better than that. We added criss-cross where 1♣ - 2♦ or 1♦ - 3♣ shows exactly a limit raise of openers suit and therefore a single raise is a game force.

 

Without that and where responder can have 10 or 20 and opener pretty close to the same I don't see any way to make a response structure that works. ie. with us 2♥/♠ initially shows stoppers up the line and since we are on a GF, 2nt (and everything else below game) after that is forcing etc. and we have plenty of bidding room to make slam tries or bid where we live to get to the right game.

 

Note that this is more frequent and comfortable if you do not play a short club. Something else you might specify since a 1♣ opener and raise would be the same kettle of fish.

 

Can you please say what the continuations after the criss cross are and what 1m-2nt is in that system (and any other details)? Quite like the idea and would like to include it in our inverted minor system. Cheers

[Dumoti]

I cannot speak for how others play, as it is a matter of personal preference.

 

When playing inverted minors, I normally prefer that the responder not have a mentionable major. 2♦ would show 10+ and 4+ diamonds with no 4-card or longer major.

 

As opener, I would bid 2NT with the right shape and no extras and 3♦ with the right shape and no extras. Similarly, I would bid 3NT with enough for that and no slam interest. Anything else should show 1st or 2nd round control and slam interest. It would commit the side to game.

[Vampyr]

One use for 1m-2NT is your weakest m raise. Then 1m-3m is semi-constructive (ie good 5 to medium 9). I have found this distinction to be very useful.

[dokoko]

...

 

Without that [...] I don't see any way to make a response structure that works.

 

...

 

Very generous on your part to share your universal wisdom with us mortals.

[dokoko]

Can you please say what the continuations after the criss cross are and what 1m-2nt is in that system (and any other details)? Quite like the idea and would like to include it in our inverted minor system. Cheers

 

After those criss-cross responses, 2nt (if available) and 3m are to play. Everything else is forcing to game and tends to show stopper. Just a normal structure after a minor raise.

 

BTW I like to play 1m-3m as very weak (warns opener not to bid 3nt with 18-19) and use the criss-cross bids to show about 7-9 with 5cd-support.

 

1m-2m shows 10+, opener bids 2nt or 3m with a min or shows a stopper with 14 (gd 13) or more. Responder can then try to sign-off with 2nt or 3m, everything else forces to game.

 

1m-2nt would be natural.

 

All these responses deny a 4cd major (else respond 1M).

 

Not quite complicated, but you may add splinter rebids or other gadgets if you so please.

[nofr]

IMO, You can read a very good chapter about inverted minors in the last book of Rodwell bidding topics.