[Trinidad]

Gerben42, on Nov 9 2005, 07:12 AM, said:

About auction 2:

If you are playing a 2/1 style where 1♥ 2♥ shows a good raise you need a bid for a bad raise with ♠ length, something like:

QJxxx
Qxx
xx
xxx

In this case you have to bid auction 2 on these kinds of hands, so 2♥ now shows a bad raise.

Not really necessary.

I happily bid a bad raise with and without spades through the same sequence:

1♥-1NT;
2x-2♥

Obviously, you will have to alert that 1NT doesn't deny spades.
(I play 1♠ and 1NT inverted, so I would bid 1♠, but that's not relevant for the discussion.)

Responder now has shown
1) A healthy preference for hearts
2) A bad three card raise, with any other distribution.

Rik

[mike777]

Chamaco, on Nov 9 2005, 10:55 AM, said:

Could be, although there is no certainty.
Also, let's keep in mind that modern style is to rebid 1NT by opener even with a singleton in pard's suit, so that 2-level rebids tend to show more suit-oriented shape in terms of strength/texture.
In this style, the 2S rebid would be awkward

But make it
Jxxx, Kx, x, Axxxxx

and the rebid is troublesome regadless of the above issue.
Such hand type over a 1H opener does not want to pass, but cannot introduce the long minor, nor rebid spades, and I would guess that the play in 1NT is likely to be more awkward than in 2H.

Rebidding 2C here (if natural) would show 5+ spades, so it does not feel right.

[]

I would use it as a weak preference, typically doubleton support, with a 2-suited hand and shortness in a minor, such as the hand I mentioned above (Jxxx, Kx, x, Axxxxx).

I would guess that rebiding 1nt with a stiff spade is still a rare though possible event even in the modern style. As such I have no qualms about trying to play in a 5-2 spade fit on this auction. Would be interested in hearing just how frequent this is at the expert level.

[Kalvan14]

1m-1♥-1♠ is mostly a matter of partnership agreement. In Sta♥ndard, it is not forcing, that for sure. funnily, though, playing with a pick-up partner i would not pass.

The second sequence is more interesting. In my method, 1N forcing can include just 2 ♥ raises: a bad raise to 2♥, be it for strength range or flat distribution, and a limit raise with 3 trumps and a balanced hand. therefore, 1♥-1N-2m-2♥ is certainly a weak raise; but also 1♥-1♠-any-2♥ is a weak preference, because with a limit raise i would bid 3♥. I know that this means I may have to play marginal 3♥ contracts, but this treatment fits very well with my bidding structure, and i am ready to accept the lil drawback. Truth is that for me 1♥-2♥ is slightly more forward going than usual if i hold a balanced hand.
I also think that kaplan inversion might be a good idea: not so much for clarifying the auction under consideration, but to sort out the possible ♠ fit, and to eliminate the theoretical monster of having to rebid 2♣ with 2 cards only and a 4-5-2-2

[Fluffy]

Chamaco, on Nov 9 2005, 03:55 PM, said:

Also, let's keep in mind that modern style is to rebid 1NT by opener even with a singleton in pard's suit, so that 2-level rebids tend to show more suit-oriented shape in terms of strength/texture.
In this style, the 2S rebid would be awkward

Sorry Mauro but I didn't get in contact with this modern style. It didn't reach Spain thankfully. With someluck it won't reach here ever.