What to do with strong 2 hands in 2/1

[thepossum]

Hi all

 

A situation which comes up from time to time. The strong two hand when playing weak twos. There is a risk of partner passing when you only need a few points or one more Trump or trick for a low point game. An example is when you can see 7 and half tricks, know that it doesn't take much for the other 2-3 tricks and partner may not have 6 points or 3 trumps for a fit.

 

You are not supposed to abuse 2C although I have stretched that a bit sometimes. If you use length points rather than short points you can sometimes justify it.

 

What does everyone do. Do you stretch 2C or open one and risk missing out

 

Cheers P

[hrothgar]

 

What does everyone do. Do you stretch 2C or open one and risk missing out

 

 

Not sure what this has to do with 2/1. Same issue crops up with most any system that doesn't use strong twos and that covers a lot of ground.

 

In any case, in answer to your question I can definitively say "It depends".

 

• Some hands will get opened at the one leve
  
• Some hands with get opened 2!C
  
• Some hands may even get opened 2N
  

 

If you want a more definitive answer you might consider posting an actual hand that you are unsure about...

[Stephen Tu]

7.5 tricks is nowhere near where you have to worry about game. Think about it, without a huge fit and ruff values, how can partner have 2 tricks and not have 6 points? You'd have to have something like qjt98x akx akx x and partner would have to have exactly the red queens. It is too low probability to worry about. Opening 2c you will end up forcing to far too many poor games vs hands where there are miracle games when partner will pass your one opening.

 

Even Acol style strong 2s are closer to 8.5 tricks not 7.5

[thepossum]

No need to be so defensive about 2/1. Of course it applies to any weak 2 system but there are other forcing bids

 

Also I played strong 2s and ACOL for years and don't need a lecture

 

I'm talking about situations where you don't want partner to pass under any circumstances

 

It seems a few people are still in patronising mode. What a shame

[smerriman]

As hrothgar said, it depends. What you should do is consider the hand that you have, and how the auction is likely to go based on what you open, no matter how strong your hand is.

 

For example, if you have AQ-Q-KQJxx-AKJxx:

 

If you open 2♣, the auction is almost sure to start as follows:

 

2♣ - 2♦ - 3♦ - 3♥ - 4♣.

 

What are you going to do over each of your partner's responses? (Eg, if they bid 5♣ you might be going down in game, or have a cold slam.. with no idea which).

 

Conversely, if you open 1♦, then jump to 3♣, you get to hear two descriptive bids from partner and you're at a much lower level. The risk? What if partner passes, and you can make slam? Can you really think of any set of hands where none of the three players at the table are able to bid 1♥ or 1♠? The chances of that happening are virtually 0. The risk of opening 2♣ - where you're going to be in the wrong contract almost every time - is far greater.

[thepossum]

Let's make this easier.

 

Let's say I have 8 and half tricks but not enough for 2C

 

What I'm getting at is that there is a big gap between a strong 1S and 2C in many circumstances

[nige1]

Hi all

A situation which comes up from time to time. The strong two hand when playing weak twos. There is a risk of partner passing when you only need a few points or one more Trump or trick for a low point game. An example is when you can see 7 and half tricks, know that it doesn't take much for the other 2-3 tricks and partner may not have 6 points or 3 trumps for a fit

You are not supposed to abuse 2C although I have stretched that a bit sometimes. If you use length points rather than short points you can sometimes justify it.

What does everyone do. Do you stretch 2C or open one and risk missing out

 

thePossum highlights a hard problem, which responder can mitigate, to some extent, by stretching to keep the bidding open, on poor hands. Also, you can try redefining some openers:

• 1♣ = ART F1 (e.g. Precision, Polish, "Phony").
• 2♣ = ART F1 like 2/1 but extended to include most ~4 loser hands.
• 2♦ = ART F1 (e.g. Benjamin, Multi) to cater for those ~4 loser hands.
• 2N = BAL or semi-BAL i.e Treat some strong shapely hands as balanced e.g. open 2N not only with 5332, 6322, 5422 but also with 4441, 5431, etc, where the singleton is a minor..
• 3N = ART F1 Long strong major c 8-10 tricks.
• 4N = ART F1 Long strong minor c 9-11 tricks.

[thepossum]

Here is one recent example. I considered 2C or 2NT here but obviously didn't like 2NT and thought it was too weak under the system for 2C. I know it's borderline but you have good control

 

Ignore subsequent bidding and lay of cards. I'm talking about S hand only

 

[HV=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|thepossum,~~M3844jcs,~~M3908o4g,~~M39719gf|md|2SAKT864H4DAKQCA63,S9HJT2D9653CKQ875,S75HAK875DJT82CJT,SQJ32HQ963D74C942|sv|o|rh||ah|Board%208|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|mb|1S|an|Major%20suit%20opening%20--%205+%20!S;%2011-21%20HCP;%2012-22%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|1N|an|2-%20!S;%206-11%20HCP;%2012-%20total%20points%20|mb|P|mb|2S|an|6+%20!S;%2011+%20HCP;%2012-16%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|3S|an|2%20!S;%2011-%20HCP;%2010-12%20total%20points%20|mb|P|mb|4N|an|Blackwood%20(S)%20--%206+%20!S;%2016+%20HCP;%2016-%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|5D|an|One%20or%20four%20key%20cards%20--%202%20!S;%2011-%20HCP;%2010-12%20total%20points%20|mb|P|mb|5N|an|Query%20kings.%20Have%20all%20keycards.%20Does%20not%20promise%20extras%20--%206+%20!S;%2016+|mb|P|mb|6H|an|King%20of%20H%20--%202%20!S;%2011-%20HCP;%20!HK;%2010-12%20total%20points%20|mb|P|mb|6S|an|Signoff%20--%206+%20!S;%2016+%20HCP;%20!SQ;%2016-%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|CK|pc|CT|pc|C2|pc|CA|pc|H4|pc|HT|pc|HA|pc|H6|pc|HK|pc|H3|pc|C3|pc|H2|pc|H5|pc|H9|pc|S4|pc|HJ|pc|SA|pc|S9|pc|S5|pc|S2|pc|SK|pc|D9|pc|S7|pc|S3|pc|ST|pc|C8|pc|CJ|pc|SJ|pc|SQ|pc|S6|pc|D3|pc|D2|pc|HQ|pc|S8|pc|D6|pc|H7|pc|DA|pc|D5|pc|D8|pc|D7|pc|DK|pc|C5|pc|DT|pc|D4|pc|DQ|pc|C7|pc|DJ|pc|C9|pc|C6|pc|CQ|pc|H8|pc|C4|]600|400[/HV]

[TylerE]

 

What I'm getting at is that there is a big gap between a strong 1S and 2C in many circumstances

 

There really isn't.

[thepossum]

Of course there is a big gap. You can bid 1S with 11 or 20 points and you need 22 for 2C

[TylerE]

Oh my god, I might have to open 1♠ (or 2NT) with a 21 count, the horror!

[smerriman]

Of course there is a big gap. You can bid 1S with 11 or 20 points and you need 22 for 2C

But your second bid after 1♠ tells partner whether you are at the low end, or at the high end. So there is no "gap" - if you have 19-21 points you can tell your partner that just as easily as when you open 2♣ to show more.

 

But as mentioned, you aren't required to have a certain number of points to open 2♣. Some hands with more than 22 shouldn't be opened 2♣, and some with less should, based on how you expect the auction to go. I would open your hand 2♣ because 1♠ could easily be passed out, and you have a comfortable way to show your hand and find out what you need after 2♣ - 2♦ - 2♠.

[nige1]

♠ A K T x x x ♥ x ♦ A K Q ♣ A x x

 

thePossum provides a good example hand with a reasonable chance of game opposite a balanced Yarborough.

[TylerE]

♠ A K T x x x ♥ x ♦ A K Q ♣ A x x

 

thePossum's provides a good example hand with a reasonable chance of game opposite a balanced Yarborough.

 

Don't overthink it and just open 4♠? (Or 4[di[ if you're lucky enough, in this case, to be playing namyats)

[Stephen Tu]

22 is for balanced hand hcp. With unbalanced and solid long suit you can open 2c on considerably less; some 19s, occasional 18s, depending on length and solidity of the main suit, side controls. The top end of 1s is the boundary of the bottom end of 2c, there is no gap, you either judge it just good enough for 2c or not quite. The exact location of the boundary is going to be a judgement call and differ from player to player. On a lot of hands it won't matter, at the edges sometimes you will regret opening 2c if it gets too high, on others regret opening 1s if you get too low. Some of this is luck or not of partner's hand mesh. But generally you are trying to decide whether not opening 2C misses game/slam too much, or if opening 2c gets to too many hopeless games, or slams if partner plays you for more, over all the hands.

[smerriman]

Don't overthink it and just open 4♠?

Really? I would pass a 4♠ preempt with most hands where we're making slam/grand slam.. and wouldn't be very happy with partner..

[TylerE]

Really? I would pass a 4♠ preempt with most hands where we're making slam/grand slam.. and wouldn't be very happy with partner..

 

In a world where you're deathly afraid of partner passing 1♠ and are too much of a point counter to open 2♣...

[The_Badger]

In a human (as opposed to a robot-playing) world this is how I see things. For the hand you posted - a good example - I would open 2♣. The reason is I have 6 quick tricks, a good 6 card suit, and need as little as Qx in the ♠ suit for game. (Or similarly other small cards.)

 

If you make the 2♣ bid not universally game-forcing, allowing responder to bid negatively twice, opener is allowed to let the bidding rest in three of a major, or four of a minor if they want. Some players do use this caveat in the SAYC system.

 

I am more inclined to open 1♣ if the hand is ♠Axx ♥x ♦AKQ ♣AK10xxx. The reason why is that with 2/1 partner is encouraged to bid a major at the one level with a poorer hand than standard in the hope of finding a major suit fit as more-than-occasionally the ♣ bid is made on a three carder. The same applies to a 1♦ opener.

 

If you open 1♣/1♦ there is also more chance the opponents will overcall at the one level, allowing you to bid again whereas a 1♥/1♠ opener means the opponents have to bid at a higher level to compete and statistically you will have less opportunity to bid again.

 

A ♠Axx ♥x ♦AKQ ♣AK10xxx opener is looking for 3NT or 5 of a minor contract, and for that to occur you need partner to have more cards to make it happen, so you're less likely to miss anything if partner hasn't got a bid. And as I said with the hand you posted, four of a major is achievable with just Qx in the trump suit.

[billyjef]

Really? I would pass a 4♠ preempt with most hands where we're making slam/grand slam.. and wouldn't be very happy with partner..

 

4S in the pass out seat?

[gordontd]

No need to be so defensive about 2/1. Of course it applies to any weak 2 system but there are other forcing bids

 

Also I played strong 2s and ACOL for years and don't need a lecture

 

I'm talking about situations where you don't want partner to pass under any circumstances

 

It seems a few people are still in patronising mode. What a shame

Here you go again. You ask questions and then abuse those who take the time to answer them in a perfectly reasonable manner. Carry on like this and they won't bother.

[smerriman]

4S in the pass out seat?

Sure. After three passes partner is bidding 4♠ to make, and will already have taken into account I'm likely to have a few points. I won't be thinking Qx Axxx xxxx Kxx means we have 12 top tricks.

[FelicityR]

22 is for balanced hand hcp. With unbalanced and solid long suit you can open 2c on considerably less; some 19s, occasional 18s, depending on length and solidity of the main suit, side controls. The top end of 1s is the boundary of the bottom end of 2c, there is no gap, you either judge it just good enough for 2c or not quite. The exact location of the boundary is going to be a judgement call and differ from player to player. On a lot of hands it won't matter, at the edges sometimes you will regret opening 2c if it gets too high, on others regret opening 1s if you get too low. Some of this is luck or not of partner's hand mesh. But generally you are trying to decide whether not opening 2C misses game/slam too much, or if opening 2c gets to too many hopeless games, or slams if partner plays you for more, over all the hands.

 

Most sensible comment on here along with the badger's. You can't bid any hand perfectly. Standard 2 club opening bids - and we know there are exception to the rules - should have a minimum of 5 quick tricks. I don't look at the point count but the playability opposite a Yarborough or near pointless hand. That's what you expect for the majority of time opposite a 2 club opener: partner with very little.

[Tramticket]

One obvious answer, if you are finding the transition from Strong Acol Two's to Weak Two's is to consider playing Benjamin Two Bids.

 

Benji has a bad reputation and I would certainly agree that there are downsides to Benji (as with any system), but it is playable and it gives a good stepping-stone away from Strong Two's. In essence, the 2♣ bid is used for the 8+ playing trick hands and the 2♦ bid (which isn't particularly effective as a Weak Two) is then unconditionally game forcing.

 

What I'm getting at is that there is a big gap between a strong 1S and 2C in many circumstances

 

There really isn't.

 

Sorry TylerE, but ThePossum is addressing a genuine issue. If 2♣ is forcing to game, then the range between a minimum one-level opening (say 10+ for most of us) and a hand, just short of a a game-force is uncomfortably wide. Precision and other strong club systems is one effective way to reduce this gap. Acol Strong Twos or Benji also reduces the range of a one level opening (at a cost).

 

The current standard practice to deal with this is to tend to reduce the strength requirements for a 2♣ opening and not make it 100% forcing to game, combined with a reduced requirement for a one-level response (5+ is normal these days). But compromises are involved and it is disingenuous to pretend that there is no issue.

[hrothgar]

 

Also I played strong 2s and ACOL for years and don't need a lecture

 

 

Then what the ***** are you doing posting so much nonsense in the Novice forums?

[Winstonm]

Let's make this easier.

 

Let's say I have 8 and half tricks but not enough for 2C

 

What I'm getting at is that there is a big gap between a strong 1S and 2C in many circumstances

 

What you are discussing is the flaw in approach-forcing style of bidding. If you go into the history of bridge, no less of expert than Howard Schenken wrote a book about the inadequacies of American bidding compared to the Italian Blue Team, adopting a forcing club system himself to overcome the very problem you are discussing.

 

The short answer to your question is this: pick a method and live with the results. If you open those hands 1, you will miss game on occasion; if you open them 2C, you will get too high on occasion and have difficulty clarifying hand strengths.

 

If you don't like those choices, adopt a strong club system to fill the gaps in approach-forcing.