BBO Discussion Forums: J2N or a 2/1? - BBO Discussion Forums

jillybean, on 2012-April-16, 14:47, said:

Often it develops through the auction. If, for example, you show unbalanced, then clubs are natural.

Consider 1♠-P-2♣-P-2♠-P-4♦ as a simple example. If 4♦ is a splinter (caveat for Mike), you cannot have started with a balanced hand. Therefore, the club call must be natural.

If the auction takes longer, like 1♠-2♣, 2♦-2♠, 3♣-4♦(splinter assumed -- for Mike), you might still get the message sent.

There can be auctions where it gets difficult to handle, but then that also is a reason to consider alternatives. Here, none of the majority of rebids from Opener will cause a problem, so 2♣ seems easy. With different structures, or different patterns, the hand might foretell a problem and argue for an alternative like a Splinter or Jac2NT (if OK with Mike).



BTW -- since you now established that 2♠ rebids promise 5+, the same principles apply that I mentioned earlier. Opener still is very likely to respond 2♦ or 2♥. But, I would recommend in this specific auction adding in 2♦ by Opener as "diamonds or balanced," both because a lot of good players are doing this now (apparently) and because it just makes life easier in the long run. But, that's just a proposal.

daveharty, on 2012-April-16, 14:35, said:

Think std is about 10-14, at least in this part of the world. Appreciate the reasons for a smaller range, but if you make them to narrow you never use them

kenrexford, on 2012-April-16, 14:42, said:

Ken, let's not get involved in another tedious, boring flame war.

kenrexford, on 2012-April-16, 14:42, said:

I am shocked, truly shocked, that Mike would assume that the OP has standard agreements until the OP indicated otherwise.

I dont mind either 2♣ or 2 NT, but i think direct splinter with that hand is a joke.

MrAce, on 2012-April-16, 15:47, said:

ditto

Just to throw some more hydrogen on the fire , I would bid 3NT with that hand, playing the admittedly non-standard Hardy Raise structure. The bid shows a good 12 to a bad 15 HCP, 4(+) spades, and a singleton or void in some side suit.

Yuk
all that room wasted...

broze, on 2012-April-16, 14:34, said:

Ah thanks, another bad habit identified and understood. This does seem about 2 points weaker then what I remembered when I last played bridge a lot 20 years ago but it certainty makes sense.

cherdano, on 2012-April-16, 15:31, said:

I am not sure, but I would actually be surprised to find out that repeating a major with a 5-card suit is deemed "standard" in a 2/1 context. I understand that there is a lot of popularity to that approach, but "standard" seems to imply either majority or majority in the context of mainstream or at least expected in the context of "no discussion." In running a Google search on this, I ran into Larry Cohen claiming that a rebid promises 6 and Eric Rodwell saying that it promises six. If I recall correctly, the basic difference is between Hardy and Lawrence, with lawrence thinking being along the "nopt necessarily GF" strain and hence not 2/1. Something similar, but not true 2/1GF, as the lack of the GF makes it not GF.

My point, though, was not that Mike made an assumption (apparently a Lawrence assumption) but that my assumption (Hardy/Cohen/Rodwell?) was attacked as some sort of trolling or something.

That said, I remain questioning as to whether 5+ is in fact "standard" for 2/1. I would expect 6+ to be "standard."

jillybean, on 2012-April-16, 12:30, said:

There have been a number of similar theads on this subject..... at least 2 or 3 this year.
I always used to be of the opinion to show a GF Support Raise ( such as Jacoby, but modified ) but
I'm leaning toward a 2/1 with a good 5 card suit ( perhaps as little as a good 4 cards ).
I'm not sure if it is mikeh or Ken's arguments in these threads that has "moved me " .

The thing is, you can find a double-fit with the following bidding:
1M - 2m!
3m - 3M ( eventho this only promises 3 cards, Responder may very well become Captain )

But you can't the other way around:
1M - modified Jac2NT
3D! ( artificial showing NO shortness, but extras ) - 4C or 4D now are cuebids , NOT a natural 4+ minor suit

With the double-fit auction, I would use 6 Ace-RKC .

If Opener cannot support your 2/1 suit, no matter... agree the Major and commence with the "Serious/Non-serious" and cuebids and LTTC ( Last Train... ) if needed.

broze, on 2012-April-16, 12:38, said:

How do you get 2C to always show 5 after 1S? I play the others as 5, but 2C is clubs or balanced because otherwise I am doomed with hands like:

S: Ax
H: Axxx
D: Axxx
C: AKx

Or is it (4)5+?

jillybean, on 2012-April-16, 12:30, said:

I very much doubt you'll get a convincing answer to your basic question. I wonder how one would go about "proving" their respective point of view.

FWIW I never 2/1 with 4 or more trumps and I never Jacoby with a stiff or void. This is clearly a splinter for me.
I've been playing that system for a long time. I think it works ok.

One think for sure. With 9+ card fit and the 3 top honors it would be unlikely to drop a trump trick, the same cannot be said if the trump length may only be 8.
Splinters show 4 or more trumps and are unlimited for me. I don't understand why folks apply a top limit "to make the bid effective". Perhaps, they will respond.

phil_20686, on 2012-April-16, 15:05, said:

I prefer to define them by number of controls; you are not going to get to the thin slams holding four queens. Well, you might get to them, but you won't make them!

With a 6th♣, I would certaily bid 2♣+3♠. I dont feel this hand is good enough for it (The jump to 3S would show a 4card support and a pretty good side suit as a source of tricks). For me it is a 50-50 choice between a splinter and 2NT. If I have 3♦ available as splinter I would probably bid that, otherwise 2N

jillybean, on 2012-April-16, 16:55, said:

Is it really? Do you know the whole system?

kenrexford, on 2012-April-16, 14:52, said:

This is interesting and I will mention it to my partner.

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2012-April-16, 17:58, said:

I don't get around to reading all of the threads so I have missed the other discussions, or forgotten. If anyone can post links to them it would be appreciated, I'm not great at finding old threads.
I understand the reasoning for the 2/1 rather than the Jac2NT and I like it. We do play a modifed Jacoby and have discussed S3N but it has never come up, or we have missed it. I don't know 6 Ace-RKC and don't know the details of LTTC. They do sound interesting, whether I need them or not or if there is room on my CC is another thing.

jmcw, on 2012-April-16, 18:38, said:

When I picked up splinters I would splinter on any hand that had a stiff or void. I think now my system is much better defined and effective since limiting splinters to specific, weaker hands. However what ever works for you is best, there are a multitude of ways to approach this game.

blackshoe, on 2012-April-16, 19:16, said:

I don't know a thing about the system, you may have missed the
I do know that it seems preferable to agree to a fit as early as perhaps the 2 level and preserve one entire level as opposed to forcing partner to the 4 level.

jillybean, on 2012-April-16, 20:13, said:

Fair enough, but a splinter, particularly one with that much high card strength, is a slam try. I don't think it's out of line to use up a little space, particularly if lower level bids are allocated meanings looking for game or part score more than slam. Hardy Raises are perhaps not the theoretical best approach to major suit raises (frankly, I don't know what is), but they're better than some — including, IMO, Bergen.

How would you structure responses such that agreeing partner's major at the two level is game forcing or more? A natural 2/1 may be forcing to game, but it doesn't establish the major suit fit. And if you start with that, are you going to be able to show both the fit and the shortage later?

P_Marlowe, on 2012-April-16, 12:46, said:

True, however your partner will know that you have a decent 5 card suit and will be able to value the Qx of ♣
2C is a far superior bid, (as is a splinter for that matter.) Mike commented that the hand was too strong for a splinter, however you can of course, play 2 ranges of splinter. (eg over 1S 3NT = 13-14 any, and 4? = 10-12). I still prefer 2C and think jacoby is a joke on this hand.

blackshoe, on 2012-April-16, 22:36, said:

The method I play 1♠ 2♣* 2♦/♥ 2♠ shows a gf ♠ hand. Once the major fit is identified we start a cue bid sequence, allowing repsonder to show shortage. Admittedly, the usual sequence is 1S 2m 2S so we don't often find the fit at the 2level but when we do, we have exchanged a lot of information below the 2M level.