Tough 2/1 decision

[ArcLight]

(I use the 2/1 system that Mike Lawrences describes in his CD.)

 

Pard opens in 1st seat: 1♠

 

You pick up:

 

♠ x

♥ x

♦ A 9 8 7 6 5

♣ A K T x x

 

 

1) Do you consider this hand strong enough for a game force?

 

I did, and bid 2D.

 

Pard responded 2♥

 

I bid: 3♣

 

Pard bid: 3♥

 

1♠ - 2♦

2♥ - 3♣

3♥ - ???

 

 

Hmmm, we have a terrible misfit. In 3NT I can contribute 3 winners, but I dont consider my hand a good one opposite pards 5-5.

I bid 4♦ rather than 3NT, showing my extra length, and possibly allowing for pard to pass.

 

2) How would you handle the aution? Bid what?

 

 

(Pard unfortunately interpreted 4♦ as a slam try, we ended up in 6NT, down 2, turns out she had 3 Diamonds KJx. 4♦ makes, and maybe 5.)

[mike777]

I bid one semi-forcing NT. Yes that means partner may pass 1nt, on a hand where you are in slam :).

 

In this case:

1s=1nt semi force

2h=2nt (invite) yes I am still not forcing to game :).

3h=3nt

 

 

So on a hand you are in 6nt, I barely get to 3nt :).

[PMetsch]

turns out she had 3 Diamonds  KJx.

I think a 2/1 is not unreasonable with your hand. It is a pitty partner didn't bid 3♦ instead of 3♥. I guess after a 3♦ bid by partner you will end up in 5♦.

[Winstonm]

The key bid in this auction is your second call:

 

1S-2D

2H-?

 

This isn't going well - you had hoped for just about anything other than a 2H call, in which case your hand would be fine; however, now with the misfit looming large it is time to back off. I'd recommend a 3D rebid at this point, downgrading the hand for lack of fit and expressing a 10-11 count with a good, long suit. Although this suit isn't what it should be, the shape and controls compensate somewhat and it won't be a disaster to play 3 diamonds opposite a small singletion diamond.

 

The way I play, 3D here is constructive but non-forcing so it expresses the values of the hand and allows partner to move forward with a suitable hand, such as

 

AJxxx

Axxx

Qx

Kx

 

Now over 3D partner can freely raise to 4D, after which you can bid 5C as a slam try. With this hand, partner should know what to do over 5C.

 

Winston

[luis]

2♦ is fine, if pd only sees his cards and not what you bid you may need to change your pd not your system.

[ArcLight]

>2♦ is fine, if pd only sees his cards and not what you bid you may need to change your pd not your system.

 

It was the first time we played together, and made plenty of mistakes, so I wont blame my pard for anything.

 

 

The question is whether to bid 3♦ or 3♣.

If pard had 5-4-0-4 with Qxxx in clubs then 5♣ would be ok.

Maybe even with Qxx, as I could ruff a couple of Diamonds, and set up the suit.

[mikeh]

One of the weak points of 2/1 (which is my favourite method) is the need to make a game-force/non-force decision on borderline hands before you know enough to allow for accurate evaluation.

 

Nevertheless, in my view you must 2/1 here. If you bid 1N, you will never be able to come close to describing this hand: certainly there appears to be little chance of finding a ♣ fit unless partner can bid the suit first.

 

So 2♦, which fetches 2♥ (partner should show a 4+ ♥ suit rather than raise ♦ on KJx, since your 2♦ bid did not deny a 4 card ♥ suit).

 

Now 3♣: hate to, but have to. At this stage, you are beginning to regret 2♦.

 

Now is the time for partner to own up to the ♦ support. Bidding 3♥ while holding KJx of ♦ is almost inexcusable: was she 5=5=3=0? Even so, 3♦ seems right, since you could show delayed ♥ support with 3♥.

 

Once she bids 3♥, 4♦ is wrong. Admittedly, you have three horrendous choices, but you chose the worst one: 4♦ suggests at least a 2 card length discrepancy in the minors.

 

3N is second-worst: no source of tricks, and enormous communication problems loom. It wins over 4♦ only because it will likely end the auction at a level where you may get lucky.

 

4♣ would be my choice: and pass 4 of a major. If partner prefers to 4♦, you have to bid 5♦, even though you hate it... you cannot unilaterally decide to pass, since partner can still have a big hand over there.

 

If partner bids 5♣, again, pass and expect to go down :)

[luis]

>2♦ is fine, if pd only sees his cards and not what you bid you may need to change your pd not your system.

 

It was the first time we played together, and made plenty of mistakes, so I wont blame my pard for anything.

 

 

The question is whether to bid 3♦ or 3♣.

If pard had 5-4-0-4 with Qxxx in clubs then 5♣ would be ok.

Maybe even with Qxx, as I could ruff a couple of Diamonds, and set up the suit.

3♣ of course showing 9 cards is better than showing 6.

[pbleighton]

2D was fine - I would bid this every time.

 

3D or 3C are equally unattractive - 3D hides a suit and 3C tends to promise more.

 

Don't worry too much about hands like this. If you open light and respond light with lots of shape, you are going to get too high sometimes.

 

If you don't, you'll miss games and slams.

 

I know which I prefer.

 

Next hand!

 

Peter

[mike777]

hhmm to all you game force bidders

Does your partner never open on

ajxxx

ajxxx

x

xx

 

or worse in first seat?

 

If you must take away a jack and put in a queen

aqxxx

ajxxx

x

xx

 

Good grief I open in first seat with

ajtxx

at9xx

x

xx

[luis]

hhmm to all you game force bidders

Does your partner never open on

ajxxx

ajxxx

x

xx

 

or worse in first seat?

 

If you must take away a jack and put in a queen

aqxxx

ajxxx

x

xx

 

Good grief I open in first seat with

ajtxx

at9xx

x

xx

Yes pd opens with that and even less than that.

I have no problem playing a game and go down.

[Winstonm]

hhmm to all you game force bidders

Does your partner never open on

ajxxx

ajxxx

x

xx

 

or worse in first seat?

 

If you must take away a jack and put in a queen

aqxxx

ajxxx

x

xx

 

Good grief I open in first seat with

ajtxx

at9xx

x

xx

Another thing: partner has shown a minimum of 9 major suit cards and we've had 3 shots at finding a fit. What makes us believe that of the 3 or 4 cards left in partner's hand that this will include 3 or 4 clubs?

 

The trouble is that 3C commits our side to game with no known fit and without adequate values to do so....can we miss a game opposite the perfect minimum....sure, but the likelyhood seems much higher that we will get overboard on substandard values.

 

IMO, it is more important to express your values than your shape at this point in the auction....What strain and How high are the two questions you are trying to find out in the bidding. With a misfit possible, how high has to take precedence over what strain. It doesn't do much good to find a club fit if the maximum on the hand is 9 tricks in a club partial but we have committed to catching 11. If partner can find a bid, knowing our combined assets, then we have a chance at game; if I force us into game and partner has his mifitting 11 or 12 count, not only are we down but may be down doubled.

[Walddk]

2♦ is what I would bid at the table. The question I ask myself is: would you open the hand? The answer is a clear "yes". Now, partner opened the bidding in fornt of me. I am not going to pretend that I don't have an opener any more; that would be a contradiction.

 

If I respond 1NT (forcing for one round), there is no way I can show my hand later. I am fully aware of the looming misfit when I bid 2♦, and I must live with that risk. I have gone down before, and I will go down again.

 

Roland

[Winstonm]

2♦ is what I would bid at the table. The question I ask myself is: would you open the hand? The answer is a clear "yes". Now, partner opened the bidding in fornt of me. I am not going to pretend that I don't have an opener any more; that would be a contradiction.

 

If I respond 1NT (forcing for one round), there is no way I can show my hand later. I am fully aware of the looming misfit when I bid 2♦, and I must live with that risk. I have gone down before, and I will go down again.

 

Roland

I agree, Roland, but even with an opening hand don't we sometimes "soft-pedal" it with our rebids? Playing the old-fashioned way, after a 2/1 don't we sometimes stop in 3 in this auction?

 

1D-2C

2D-2N

3D-P

 

Opener has judged that opposite a minimum balanced 2/1 that game is not likely.

 

Cannot this same agreement be made after:

 

1S-2D

2H-3D

 

Isn't this simply stating that without extra values game does not appear to be on the horizion?

 

Call me old fashioned, but I prefer to go plus as often as possible or lose the minimum if I must, even at the risk of missing a game now and again. On marginal values, I don't get excited until after a fit is found.

 

Winston

[ArcLight]

>Cannot this same agreement be made after:

 

1S-2D

2H-3D

 

 

 

I don't think so.

We play a 2/1 as a game force with one exception:

 

If we have a misfit, and cant bid 3NT, we can stop in 4 of a minor.

[Winstonm]

>Cannot this same agreement be made after:

 

1S-2D

2H-3D

 

 

 

I don't think so.

We play a 2/1 as a game force with one exception:

 

If we have a misfit, and cant bid 3NT, we can stop in 4 of a minor.

IMHO, a better agreement is to play the immediate rebid as constructive but non-forcing in some auctions.

 

1S-2D

2N-3D Implied 6/2 fit so game force.

 

1S-2D

3C-3D Extra values by opener so game force.

 

1S-2D

2H-3D Possible misfit so encouraging but can be passed with a misfit and a minimum.

 

Obviously, the disadvantage is that 3C must be used as an artificial force with does make bidding more difficult with 1-suited minor slam hands.

 

Winston

 

(Think I got this originally from Lawrence's book on 2/1)

[Walddk]

I know that some play that a rebid of own suit by responder is non-forcing. I don't subscribe to that theory. I might be able to stop in 4mi, but not in 3.

 

If 3♦ is non-forcing after

 

1♠ - 2♦

2♥ - 3♦

 

I don't know how to bid this hand:

 

Q4

A

AQJ10843

K84

 

If you don't think you are strong enough to force to game, do not bid 2/1, bid 1NT. Quite simple.

 

Roland

[Winstonm]

I know that some play that a rebid of own suit by responder is non-forcing. I don't subscribe to that theory. I might be able to stop in 4mi, but not in 3.

 

If 3♦ is non-forcing after

 

1♠ - 2♦

2♥ - 3♦

 

I don't know how to bid this hand:

 

Q4

A

AQJ10843

K84

 

If you don't think you are strong enough to force to game, do not bid 2/1, bid 1NT. Quite simple.

 

Roland

Fortunately, I never pick up that hand. :angry:

[whereagles]

It was going ok up to

 

1S 2D

2H 3C

3H

 

Now it's the last chance to bid 3NT, and you must sieze it.

[awm]

Well, maybe I'm showing my lack of understanding for 2/1 here (which I don't play in ANY of my established partnerships). But what would you rebid on a hand like:

 

Kx

QJx

AQJxx

xxx

 

Suppose the auction starts 1♠-2♦-2♥. What am I expected to do now? If I bid 2NT partner will surely try 3NT on a 5422 minimum and the opponents will find the obvious club lead. But 3♥ or any spade bid will be taken as the start of a slam investigation and guaranteeing a real fit.

 

The point here is, I'm not convinced that after 1♠-2♦-2♥, that 3♣ should be a natural call. Holding clubs, you can always bid 2NT and let partner pattern out. Partner is likely to bid 3♣ on three in such an auction, or 3♦ on three. The only time you really need to introduce a natural club suit would seem to be when you're 6-6 or the like, which is sufficiently rare that it's not that big a deal (and you can always bid 3♣ and then 4♣, or 2NT and then clubs). It seems more useful to use 3♣ as a generic force, tending to deny club cards or a good fit for one of partner's majors. Typically a hand like the one above, or if you play "game force except suit rebid" a hand with good diamonds and too much strength to be passed.

[Walddk]

I know that some play that a rebid of own suit by responder is non-forcing. I don't subscribe to that theory. I might be able to stop in 4mi, but not in 3.

 

If 3♦ is non-forcing after

 

1♠ - 2♦

2♥ - 3♦

 

I don't know how to bid this hand:

 

Q4

A

AQJ10843

K84

 

If you don't think you are strong enough to force to game, do not bid 2/1, bid 1NT. Quite simple.

 

Roland

Fortunately, I never pick up that hand. :angry:

Maybe not, Winston, but maybe you should consider bidding 1NT followed by 3♦ on

 

6

J4

AJ108764

Q72

 

Then you have 2♦ followed by 3♦ available as game forcing. The whole idea of 2/1: you don't have to jump around all the time and ruin it for your side when you finally get the good cards. 2♦ is game forcing!

 

Roland

[Al_U_Card]

An old trick is to use the raise to 3NT (a sort of a fast arrival fudge) after his 2H bid, to show your kind of a hand. No fit with the majors (nor even a tolerance) and the C suit locked tight. (2NT whb balanced and stronger than a minimum opener looking for the best contract.) Pard can pass if he feels it right, or with someing like Jxxx(x) in a major he can bid 4 of a minor invitational.

[mikeh]

Well, maybe I'm showing my lack of understanding for 2/1 here (which I don't play in ANY of my established partnerships). But what would you rebid on a hand like:

 

Kx

QJx

AQJxx

xxx

 

Suppose the auction starts 1♠-2♦-2♥. What am I expected to do now?

On this hand, you bid a forcing 2♠. Partner, if a 2/1 player, will know that 2♠ may be a waiting or 'mark time' bid, and will not go nuts. He can bid 2N, to right side the contract, 3♥ to get back to the 5-3 fit if it exists, etc. This is NOT an problem for 2/1....

[P_Marlowe]

1) No, I dont think this hand qualifies as a game force,

but I am not saying, that 2D is wrong.

The alternative is to use the forcing 1 NT to find out more

about partners hand

Sometimes 1 NT will work out better, sometimes not, you have

to make a choice: 2D is an overbid, 1NT a (slight) underbid,

 

A further remark:

 

1S - 2D

2H - 3C (*)

 

(*) I dont believe that Lawrence teaches 3C as natural, this is 4th suit forcing,

and says nothing about clubs, so anybody claiming 3C shows 9 cards

should cite the book and the page

The main trouble is, that if you bid 3NT over 3H in this sequence you are

overstating your power, ... and of course you give the wrong impression

about your shape => Over 2H you are probably forced to bid 3D

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[ArcLight]

1S 2D

2H 3C

3H

 

>Now it's the last chance to bid 3NT, and you must sieze it.

 

 

I don't think thats a good Bid, 3NT from my side with x -x - A98765 - AKxxx

 

Better to bail out in 4♦ (I hoped)

 

 

------------------------------

1S - 2D

2H - 3C (*)

 

>(*) I dont believe that Lawrence teaches 3C as natural, this is 4th suit forcing,

and says nothing about clubs, so anybody claiming 3C shows 9 cards

should cite the book and the page

The main trouble is, that if you bid 3NT over 3H in this sequence you are

overstating your power, ... and of course you give the wrong impression

about your shape => Over 2H you are probably forced to bid 3D

 

 

I disagree. You have already made a game force with your 2D bid. So you dont need 4SF. 3C does show a club suit. I base my knowledge of 2/1 on Mike Lawrences 2/1 CD.