Cheaper minor -- 4- total points; North gets me again

[barmar]

A popular response system over strong 2♣ openings is to play than 2♦ is a waiting bid, and responder can show a very weak hand by bidding the cheapest available minor suit on the 3 level on their next bid. So if opener rebids 2♥ or 2♠, responder bids 3♣ to show less than 4 points; if opener rebids 3♣, responder rebids 3♦ to show this. Any other rebid is natural and shows 4+ HCP.

 

A problem is obvious if opener rebids 3♦ -- there's no longer a cheaper minor available. In this case, 3NT takes the place of the cheaper minor. It's not an offer to play NT.

 

Also, none of this applies if opener rebids NT; responder knows the combined strength and becomes captain. They can use the same response structure as after a 2NT opening.

[barmar]

A popular response system over strong 2♣ openings is to play than 2♦ is a waiting bid, and responder can show a very weak hand by bidding the cheapest available minor suit on the 3 level on their next bid. So if opener rebids 2♥ or 2♠, responder bids 3♣ to show less than 4 points; if opener rebids 3♣, responder rebids 3♦ to show this. Any other rebid is natural and shows 4+ HCP.

 

A problem is obvious if opener rebids 3♦ -- there's no longer a cheaper minor available. In this case, 3NT takes the place of the cheaper minor. It's not an offer to play NT.

 

Also, none of this applies if opener rebids NT; responder knows the combined strength and becomes captain. They can use the same response structure as after a 2NT opening.

[morecharac]

You get the hand below, counting winners and losers, you optimistically upgrade your hand to 2♣.

The following bidding takes place.

What does Norths bid mean in humanspeak? The word 'Cheaper' is the most confusing bit for me.

[hv=pc=n&s=s8haj85dak9752cak&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=2cp2dp3dp3n(cheaper%20minor%20--%204-%20total%20points)p]133|200[/hv]

What a nonsensical agreement, almost as bad as upgrading that particular 19-point hand to 2♣. It's far better and more safely described with a 1♦ opener, assuming some variation on Standard American.

 

It's the first time I've heard cheaper minor over a 2♣ opener meaning something other than using second negative (2♣-2♦-2M-3♣ or 2♣-2♦-3♣-3♦) to indicate a bust hand.

 

I voted Pass because on the principle of Make It Partner's Fault.

[Douglas43]

Like Zelandakh I've played Acol twos and Benji in my time. I found Acol twos in the majors useful but never got on so well with them in the minors.

 

There is a considerable difference between making 10 tricks opposite a hand that would have passed a one-level opening and making 11 tricks.

 

Acol 2H and 2S, with the weak twos in a multi 2D is a good structure. With my regular partner I just play 3 weak twos, and that some 2C sequences are not GF: 2C-2D-2S-2NT-3S can be passed (2D and 2NT both being negatives)..

On the OPs hand, I would have opened 1D.

 

[barmar]

It's the first time I've heard cheaper minor over a 2♣ opener meaning something other than using second negative (2♣-2♦-2M-3♣ or 2♣-2♦-3♣-3♦) to indicate a bust hand.

That is what this means.

 

As I pointed out above: when there's no available minor suit to bid, 3NT takes its place as the 2nd negative.

[HardVector]

That is what this means.

 

As I pointed out above: when there's no available minor suit to bid, 3NT takes its place as the 2nd negative.

Larry Cohen says that after 2♣-2♦-3♦ then 3♥ is the negative bid.

https://www.larryco.com/bridge-articles/general-approach-2c-opening-part-2

[barmar]

Larry Cohen says that after 2♣-2♦-3♦ then 3♥ is the negative bid.

https://www.larryco.com/bridge-articles/general-approach-2c-opening-part-2

When I've played that, I call it "cheapest 3 bid = 2nd negative". I think Larry confuses things by calling it "cheaper minor" when it's not always a minor.

 

Of course, that's also true when 3NT is the 2nd negative. But names of bridge conventions aren't always logical. E.g. when you play 2-way New Minor Forcing, one of your minor rebids will usually not be "new". And Unusual 2NT is common, it hasn't been unusual for generations.

[pilowsky]

That is what this means.

 

As I pointed out above: when there's no available minor suit to bid, 3NT takes its place as the 2nd negative.

 

Thanks Barry. 👍

Isn't it more usual for a negative bid to be one level up from the previous bid in a forcing auction?

eg 1(major) - P - 1NT (I have points but no support for your Trump) - - I vote for the other guy.

or 2(diamonds multi) - P - 2♥

...and so on.

 

[Stephen Tu]

Larry Cohen says that after 2♣-2♦-3♦ then 3♥ is the negative bid.

https://www.larryco....-opening-part-2

 

I suppose that's *a* way to play, but I think it's terrible. Surely it's better to use 3H/3S there to find a potential major fit? You were constrained from bidding 2H/2S earlier from lack of positive values or sometimes suit quality depending on agreements. I want to be able to bid hearts to show hearts. And with spades I want to be able to show length there even if I'm broke, may 4s makes when partner has a fit. Can't show spades below 3nt if you have to bid 3H first.

 

If you are going to show a 2c-...-3d hand, IMO it's best to just be game forced, and not have any double negatives. If responder is broke, oh well, don't contrive schemes to stop in exactly 4D. If you are uncomfortable with that open 1d.

 

[pescetom]

When I've played that, I call it "cheapest 3 bid = 2nd negative". I think Larry confuses things by calling it "cheaper minor" when it's not always a minor.

 

Of course, that's also true when 3NT is the 2nd negative. But names of bridge conventions aren't always logical. E.g. when you play 2-way New Minor Forcing, one of your minor rebids will usually not be "new". And Unusual 2NT is common, it hasn't been unusual for generations.

 

Not to mention various "Law"s. Agree with all your comments, dislike either 3♥ or 3NT as a negative for the reasons spelt out by StephenT above.

[HardVector]

I suppose that's *a* way to play, but I think it's terrible. Surely it's better to use 3H/3S there to find a potential major fit? You were constrained from bidding 2H/2S earlier from lack of positive values or sometimes suit quality depending on agreements. I want to be able to bid hearts to show hearts. And with spades I want to be able to show length there even if I'm broke, may 4s makes when partner has a fit. Can't show spades below 3nt if you have to bid 3H first.

 

If you are going to show a 2c-...-3d hand, IMO it's best to just be game forced, and not have any double negatives. If responder is broke, oh well, don't contrive schemes to stop in exactly 4D. If you are uncomfortable with that open 1d.

I kind of agree with that, but I'm not going to argue with Larry on it. I'm sure he is more in touch with what is standard than I am. I personally prefer to use 3n for the trash bid so that 3h/3s can show suits, but I also insist that if partner opens 2c then bids 3m they have 9 1/2 tricks in their hand.

[johnu]

A popular response system over strong 2♣ openings is to play than 2♦ is a waiting bid, and responder can show a very weak hand by bidding the cheapest available minor suit on the 3 level on their next bid. So if opener rebids 2♥ or 2♠, responder bids 3♣ to show less than 4 points; if opener rebids 3♣, responder rebids 3♦ to show this. Any other rebid is natural and shows 4+ HCP.

 

A problem is obvious if opener rebids 3♦ -- there's no longer a cheaper minor available. In this case, 3NT takes the place of the cheaper minor. It's not an offer to play NT.

There is a cheaper minor available, and that is 4♣. But that bypasses 3NT and 3NT may be the last makeable contract. So the programmer implemented 3NT as the double negative bid for better or worse. That makes opening 2♣ with a long diamond suit a bad idea unless you can, or nearly can, make 3NT in your own hand, or playing in diamonds when you are going to guessing at what level.

[barmar]

There is a cheaper minor available, and that is 4♣. But that bypasses 3NT and 3NT may be the last makeable contract. So the programmer implemented 3NT as the double negative bid for better or worse. That makes opening 2♣ with a long diamond suit a bad idea unless you can, or nearly can, make 3NT in your own hand, or playing in diamonds when you are going to guessing at what level.

I don't think this came from the mind of the GIB programmer. I'm pretty sure I heard it decades ago as the usual way that cheaper minor is played, and we adopted it into the GIB system for that reason.

 

As others have pointed out, cheaper minor is not really a great convention to begin with. But it's very common among the hoi polloi, and most decisions about GIB conventions were based on what would be familiar to average duplicate players, not advanced and expert players (except perhaps for the choice of using 2/1 Game Forcing as the basic system).

[pescetom]

As others have pointed out, cheaper minor is not really a great convention to begin with. But it's very common among the hoi polloi, and most decisions about GIB conventions were based on what would be familiar to average duplicate players, not advanced and expert players (except perhaps for the choice of using 2/1 Game Forcing as the basic system).

 

So Two-way game tries, Sandwich 1NT, Soloway Jump Shifts, 3♣ as transfer to diamonds and other 3-level responses to 1NT as splinter were concessions to the hoi polloi rather than a deliberate choice to torture future generations? B-)

[sfi]

So Two-way game tries, Sandwich 1NT, Soloway Jump Shifts, 3♣ as transfer to diamonds and other 3-level responses to 1NT as splinter were concessions to the hoi polloi rather than a deliberate choice to torture future generations? B-)

That's just a side benefit.

[thepossum]

I don't like it much either, although 2♣ does seem to mean forcing for at least one round in most situations.

What do you suggest as an alternative? There seems to be an entrenched dislike for Benjamin two's. What does one open with hands that look like these?:

• K&R (AK983 AJT43 A2 A) = 24.45 DK 22- or
• K&R (AK983 A9843 A2 A) = 23.20 DK = 20 or worse
• K&R (AK983 A9843 A2 2) = 19.80 DK = 16

These hands give newbies like me nightmares. Too big, wrong shape, very annoying.

 

I stopped using KR. I cant do it quickly in my head so its useless to me :)

 

I spent a while trying to compare my assessment of hands using simpler methods with KR. I even tried learning it to see if I could work it out in my head etc :) When I say simpler sometimes I don't even care about how many points :)

 

But as an aside, revisiting this thread after a while, it never ceases to amaze me how much of the discussion involves other meanings of 3NT other than one your partner bid :)

[pilowsky]

I stopped using KR. I cant do it quickly in my head so its useless to me :)

 

I spent a while trying to compare my assessment of hands using simpler methods with KR. I even tried learning it to see if I could work it out in my head etc :) When I say simpler sometimes I don't even care about how many points :)

 

But as an aside, revisiting this thread after a while, it never ceases to amaze me how much of the discussion involves other meanings of 3NT other than one your partner bid :)

 

I'm with you there.

Between counting winners, quick tricks, losers etc I'd never make an opening bid.

It at the moment I'm staring at <19% in today's daylong - I might have to start playing Snap. No doubt there's a Snap Forum where I can get my ideas corrected as well .

Amazing!! There actually is!

[thepossum]

I'm with you there.

Between counting winners, quick tricks, losers etc I'd never make an opening bid.

It at the moment I'm staring at <19% in today's daylong - I might have to start playing Snap. No doubt there's a Snap Forum where I can get my ideas corrected as well .

Amazing!! There actually is!

 

Snap :)

[wuudturner]

As others have said, the answer was to not open 2♣ in the first place. (That was not one of the poll options.) A big reason for that is to foresee the bidding once you do that. Partner almost always bids 2♢. And then you need to rebid 3♢. This is possibly the most problematic bidding sequence that starts with 2♣, because it will often endplay partner into bidding 3NT, regardless of what they have.

 

Is it a good idea? No. If you open 2♣ on 19 point hands because you like your hand without thinking about how the bidding will go, then you get what you should deserve - a random result.

 

If partner has enough to respond to 1♢, then you will be happy. And you will have one heck of a better chance to get to a reasonable contract.

 

Others have said the same thing as I have. But I did not see the point made to about ALWAYS consider what will be your most probable rebid in any auction, before you start bidding. And if you don't like what you see, then consider if another bid may be a better choice.