A ragged 4=5=2=2

[pescetom]

MP IMPs

[hv=pc=n&s=sk53ha9da8caq9764&n=saqt6hj8754dkjct3&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=1hp2c(GF%20%5Bmay%20be%20art.%5D)p]266|200[/hv]

 

North playing 2/1 opens 1♥ (would you, and how does it depend upon vulnerability?).

South has an automatic 2♣ and now the dance begins.

How would it continue in your usual partnership, opponents silent?

[jillybean]

Now that I've opened, I think 2NT is best

I don't want to encourage in the majors at all

Vulnerability may have influenced my opening but not once I've opened, I'm going to be trying to put on the brakes

[LBengtsson]

Now that I've opened, I think 2NT is best

I don't want to encourage in the majors at all

Vulnerability may have influenced my opening but not once I've opened, I'm going to be trying to put on the brakes

 

Agree. If your partnership opens all 11 counts then you are forced to make as suitable rebid as you can. Rebidding 2♥ here just seems wrong with such a poor suit. 2♠ may be a option if partner realises that this is not a reverse in this sequence, and you have previously agreed this.

 

Personally, I would prefer not to open this hand as you do not have a good rebid imo. A case for Flannery as a convention, defining the hand specifically with 5♥4♠ shape and a limited point range.

[Stephen Tu]

Agree. If your partnership opens all 11 counts then you are forced to make as suitable rebid as you can. Rebidding 2♥ here just seems wrong with such a poor suit. 2♠ may be a option if partner realises that this is not a reverse in this sequence, and you have previously agreed this.

 

I disagree. You want to find the spade fit if you have one. If 2nt denies spades this is going to lead to the wrong contract if partner has them. Don't start breaking partnership principles of how to bid your shape just because you regret opening and are slightly light. 2S is a reverse by definition, but partnerships can agree that it doesn't show extras, then it would be fine (but it's still a reverse, not "not a reverse". It just wouldn't show any extra strength). If you choose to have a reverse promise extras (which has pros and cons, sorting out extra strength even in a 2/1 sequence is still useful and necessary eventually, maybe it can be delayed until round 3 though on spade/heart hands), then I don't see anything wrong with 2H. If you are playing a catch-all 2H, you'd do it routinely with hands like this or stuff like AQJ Jxxxx xxx KJ, not wanting to rebid 2nt with diamonds wide open. Partner should absolutely not presume a good suit for a 2H rebid if playing such a style, it shouldn't "seem wrong" at all, it's routine and frequent. It's possible to play 2H as promising a good suit, but then the lack of definition simply shifts to other rebids; 2nt might now be wide open somewhere, and/or raising to 3c can be very wide ranging in both strength and shape which can be difficult to sort out especially if 2c itself is being played as possibly nebulous (2+ cds, 3+cds) as is frequently done these days.

 

 

Personally, I would prefer not to open this hand as you do not have a good rebid imo. A case for Flannery as a convention, defining the hand specifically with 5♥4♠ shape and a limited point range.

I also wouldn't open, but I don't think the rebid is the problem. It's more that too many points are in a doubleton diamond, not worth as much as a hand with more points in long suits. Rather open with the KH than KD.

 

As for auction, having opened, I would want something like 1h-2c-2s-3c-3nt-4nt-all pass.

[pescetom]

2♠ may be a option if partner realises that this is not a reverse in this sequence, and you have previously agreed this.

That is one issue I was inviting comment about.

Around here it is standard that 2♠ conveys no information about strength, BWS standard is still stuck as not showing extras (but IIRC for some reason did not poll it the last time round and the poll of 1♦-2♣; 2M was in favour of not showing extras).

 

Personally, I would prefer not to open this hand as you do not have a good rebid imo. A case for Flannery as a convention, defining the hand specifically with 5♥4♠ shape and a limited point range.

If this is a disaster due to lack of Flannery, it will be more or less the first :)

Change the ♥J to ♥Q and you would open?

[pescetom]

Now that I've opened, I think 2NT is best

I don't want to encourage in the majors at all

How do things continue over 2NT with these cards?

 

Change the ♣4 to ♠4 (4=2=2=5), how do things continue now?

[mw64ahw]

I'm slaming on this one and I would open 1♥

1♥ - 2♣

2♥ is the oM - 2♠ GF Shape?

2NT 4522 - 4♠ 6+ ♣ w. 2+/3 honours, odd KCs, K♠, controls in ♥ & ♦

6♣

Let's see if I make it

[DavidKok]

This is a common problem to have in a 2/1 system. Some solutions include:

 

• Don't open the hand. Popular if you know the South hand, drastically less popular if South holds a fourth spade. I'm opening this hand always.
  
• Play Flannery. Great on this particular hand.
  
• Agree to play a shape first approach to 2/1 auctions, so that 1♥-2♣; 2♠ does not promise extras. I think this is very playable, especially in a strong club(/diamond) context. It is also easy to learn. It is not, however, what a random experienced player will expect.
  
• Rebid 2♥ (expert standard) and hope it's not an issue. This style does struggle to locate 6-2 fits, or to find slams opposite long and strong hearts.
  
• Lie about your shape and rebid 2NT, and hope it's not a problem.
  
• Play a Schuler Shift - 1M-2♣; 2NT shows 6(+)M, while 1M-2♣; 2M shows a (semi)balanced hand with at most five and no good rebid. This solves all the issues.
  
• Play something artificial over 1M-2♣ (my personal favourite) - in particular, use 2♦ as diamonds or any weak (semi)balanced hand. Similar to the option above.
  

[mikeh]

I’ve recently started playing a gadget. 1M 2C 2D is artificial, denying a 6 card major or type ability to make a more descriptive bid. Personally my preference is for 1H 2C 2S to show at least a full opener, not a bad 11-13, but my partners disagree, so for me I reluctantly bid 2S over 2C (in my partnerships we open virtually all 11 counts, so 1H is fine).

 

With the exception of this gadget (which makes finding diamonds problematic but not, usually, impossible) I’d pretty much echo Stephen’s post.

[the hog]

Our philosophy is a little different. If we were vul we would open this hand with an Ekrens 2D. NV it is too good for that, so we open 1H.2C is either Cs or artificial for us, (2+ Cards).After 2C we bid 2H, yes even on that motheaten suit. The 2H bid does not promise 6H nor does it show a good suit. It just says we have a minimum and not 4D.Now 3C to show genuine Clubs, 3S which shows S values, 3NT and there you are.Having played this style for a while I feel VERY strongly that reverses show extras. We have had very few problems.

 

We are toying with a similar "waiting bid" to Mike's 2D, but have not yet fine tuned it.

[Stephen Tu]

I've recently started playing a gadget. 1M 2C 2D is artificial, denying a 6 card major or type ability to make a more descriptive bid. Personally my preference is for 1H 2C 2S to show at least a full opener, not a bad 11-13, but my partners disagree, so for me I reluctantly bid 2S over 2C (in my partnerships we open virtually all 11 counts, so 1H is fine).

 

If going the artificial route, in a non-strong club system, especially if 2c is often 3+/2+ balanced, I really prefer the Ambra structure derived by Garozzo, and used by some of the top Dutch pairs AFAIK. It allows clarification of range, length of club support, and has no problems showing diamonds. And sometimes concealment if responder isn't interested in slam opposite min and can blast game.

 

2D = 11-15 w/o other major

2H = other major (any strength)

2S = diamonds 16+

2nt = strong bal or 6+ major not 6-4 (3c asks)

3c = 5M4c 16+

3d = 6M 4c 16+

3H/S = 5M5c 16+ high/low shortness

3nt = 5044 void other major

 

Elegantly, after 1M-2c!-2d!-2h!- ?? All rebids show same shape as above except using lower range. And after 1M-2c!-2s!-2nt!-? All 3 level rebids show same shape as the club rebids except with diamonds.

[nullve]

If going the artificial route, in a non-strong club system, especially if 2c is often 3+/2+ balanced, I really prefer the Ambra structure derived by Garozzo, and used by some of the top Dutch pairs AFAIK.

And by Bocchi and partners for 20+ years. For example, see Note 18 in the notes to the convention card Bocchi-Duboin used in the 2001 Bermuda Bowl.

[jillybean]

How do things continue over 2NT with these cards?

 

Change the ♣4 to ♠4 (4=2=2=5), how do things continue now?

I assume it would be 1H 2C 2N 3C 3N

 

Change the hand and you get a different auction 1H 1S 2S

[mycroft]

So, as you are seeing, this is impossible to answer without context, and your answer will be in your context.

 

In D18, it's an auto-2♠ call - you show shape over a 2/1, extras be hanged. Which is great for finding the right game, less great for finding if both have extras.

 

In D2, at least when I learned to play 2/1, it's an auto-2♥ (and hate it) - if I go past 2♥, I'm showing extras, and I just don't have them. I might just fake a 2♦ call (natural!), because 2♥ is such an awful bid.

 

But it also depends on how big your hand has to be with 4=5+ in the blacks before you bid 2♣ instead of 1♠ (2NT, if that doesn't show extras, might be in the picture).

 

Of course, that's all with a GF *NAT* 2♣ call. Yours is "could be ART". And before I answer that one, I need to know when it "could be ART" (and how that's resolved, especially with 4=5 and 3=6 in the blacks). Because if it's the "only" GF call (barring 4+card support GF hands, say), then almost certainly you should be playing something like Mike's "okay, you tell me" 2♦ response with any hand that doesn't really have anything specific to show. But then again, I'd need to know what the responses to 2♦ are...

[jillybean]

 

In D2, at least when I learned to play 2/1, it's an auto-2♥ (and hate it) - if I go past 2♥, I'm showing extras, and I just don't have them. I might just fake a 2♦ call (natural!), because 2♥ is such an awful bid.

 

I can't agree with 2♦, this could easily lead to partner playing NT when you need the ♦ holding protected.

 

I do want to open this hand but I think I'm more comfortable ignoring the ratty 5 card hearts, no rebid and opening 1NT (12-14)

[Stephen Tu]

I don't understand these "2H is such an awful bid" or "no rebid" comments.

 

If 2H is catchall, then 2h rebid is absolutely not awful, because partner isn't supposed to assume any particular suit quality for 2h!. It can be 65432, just a waiting bid, you just understand that 2H doesn't show anything extra in terms of suit quality, you've sacrificed any implication of that to improve the definition of your 2nt rebid and 3c raise, and maybe also to let your 2s show extras. Just don't have partner do daft things like jump to 4H over 2H on 2 cd support when they can probe with any of like 4 other bids to get 3nt out of you if this is your agreement.

 

If 2S is no extras, and if this hand meets your partnership floor for opening, then 2S is perfectly systemic and also shouldn't lead to difficulties.

 

 

If you start burying majors by opening 1nt or rebidding 2nt, then you just start missing a lot of 5-3 (or 5-4) heart fits and 4-4 spade fits. I don't see how this helps our cause in the long run. I don't see how bidding 2s on 11 is bad if we've agreed we can have 11, nor do I see how rebidding 2H on Jxxxx is bad if partner isn't supposed to assume more than Jxxxx. You're still supposed to get to 3nt eventually, it's not like responder has to place the contract on their 2nd bid. Whereas the "solution" of opening 1nt or rebidding 2nt is going to permanently bury some of the major fits on some auctions.

[DavidKok]

The problem is the next round after 1♥-2♣; 2♥-<something>. Most pairs have absolutely lousy agreements for locating 6-2 heart fits, and since 2♣ is also ambiguous regarding club length it can be really difficult to separate "I have 6 hearts and a 4-card side suit and I am bidding them one at a time" from "I have 5 hearts and a minimum and am making waiting bids/showing stoppers so you can bid 3NT". For example, which shapes can opener have on 1♥-2♣; 2♥-3♣; 3♦? With a good spade stopper and a doubleton in support of hearts, what is responder's best rebid (and how does this vary with strength of the hand)? Does 1♥-2♣; 2♥-3♦; 3♥ promise 7, set trumps, can be bid on 6, is it a waiting bid with 5 and no spade stopper, does 3♠ instead promise half a stopper? Solutions exist but most partnerships won't have discussed this.

Arguably that makes the lack of rebids a lousy (lack of an) agreement, rather than making 2♥ an awful bid. But the result is the same.

[mycroft]

Somewhere the bids have to bend.

 

If 2♥ is the catchall, then that's where it is - but one of the joys of 2/1 is to be able to find and agree those major fits early enough to work on "game vs slam". And this agreement makes that so much harder. And means you need to have a bunch of system to recover. Which nobody actually has.

 

If 2♦ is the catchall, it's artificial and now you have to look at how to get to/stay out of NT. Again, fine, and requires some system. But...

 

If you "first show shape" in 2/1 auctions, you get to 4♦ not knowing if either have shown extras, or if the 5 level is safe (unless you've put in a bunch of system. But...) Which again, takes away from "2/1 makes the game vs slam decisions easier". But you do find the right game, almost always, right away.

 

If "don't open these because there's no useful rebid", then fine. I mean, you'll have the same problem with the ♦KQ and a 12-count, or the ♦KQ and the ♣Jx and a 13-count, but at least there's more support there. But of course, you are now passing hands others are opening, with all that implies. On the other other hand, it might go p-p-1M and you have a perfect Drury hand...

 

That's the joy of bridge. There's not enough options (legally) to have everything work without issues or complexity (or both), and sometimes you have to "best lie". If it was easy, we wouldn't play it.

[pescetom]

If 2S is no extras, and if this hand meets your partnership floor for opening, then 2S is perfectly systemic and also shouldn't lead to difficulties.

 

As for auction, having opened, I would want something like 1h-2c-2s-3c-3nt-4nt-all pass.

 

Two sound posts, although I find them ironic in the circumstances.

We were actually playing 2S is no extras, and the actual auction was exactly 1h-2c-2s-3c-3nt-4nt-all pass.

And my soreness about the result was what inspired the OP in the first place :)

I could give no strength signal, which is usually no big deal or at least an acceptable price, but was a problem here for once.

And partner bid 4NT which I felt was less flexible than reopening clubs.

 

Having said that, I was looking for discussion of the various methods and got it, so thanks to all.

Off to play a tournament and will follow up during the weekend.

[jillybean]

We will be looking forward to some of your tournament hands :) good luck

[mw64ahw]

And by Bocchi and partners for 20+ years. For example, see Note 18 in the notes to the convention card Bocchi-Duboin used in the 2001 Bermuda Bowl.

I've always liked this variation

https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/advancing-a-nebulous-2c-response/

[pescetom]

Here's the full hand, just in case anyone was curious how 4NT could go down.

 

IMP

[hv=pc=n&s=sk53ha9da8caq9764&n=saqt6hj8754dkjct3&w=sj8hqt62d976ckj82&e=s9742hk3dqt5432c5&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=1hp2c(GF%20%5Bmay%20be%20art.%5D)p2sp3cp3np4nppp]400|300[/hv]

 

This was in a team tournament and South made 3NT at the other table when team-mates failed to find a diamond lead.

[Cyberyeti]

Here's the full hand, just in case anyone was curious how 4NT could go down.

 

IMP

[hv=pc=n&s=sk53ha9da8caq9764&n=saqt6hj8754dkjct3&w=sj8hqt62d976ckj82&e=s9742hk3dqt5432c5&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=1hp2c(GF%20%5Bmay%20be%20art.%5D)p2sp3cp3np4nppp]400|300[/hv]

 

This was in a team tournament and South made 3NT at the other table.

 

In practice a wrongsiding problem, you make 8 or 10 depending on who plays it presuming you don't telegraph a diamond lead from W.

[pescetom]

In practice a wrongsiding problem, you make 8 or 10 depending on who plays it presuming you don't telegraph a diamond lead from W.

 

W does have some reason to lead diamonds on an auction similar to this such as 1H-2C-2S-3C-3D-3N-P.

But I imagine the other table went P-1C-1H-2N-3N-P or P-1N-2C-2D-3N-P or something.

[pescetom]

I've always liked this variation

https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/advancing-a-nebulous-2c-response/

 

Thanks to you, nullve and Davidkok who pointed out various similar improvements.

That do make a lot of sense, but unfortunately with current partners will have to go on ice.

This was just one bad hand that I thought worth discussing, I have had good mileage from playing 2♠ as no strength signal so far and it solves an important problem very simply.