[MickyB]

Scoring: IMP

1♥:2♦
3♥:?

2♦ was 10+, F1; 3♥ is a GF single suiter. 4♣ now would be a cue, 4♦ nat forcing. What's your call?

---

[whereagles]

6♣ seems the best way to finish the hand description. You may be 2 aces off, or 7 can be cold, but there's no way to investigate, so just bid what you think you can make on average.

[mikeh]

For me, 3♥ would show a no-loser suit: AKQJxx or AKQxxxx. But I do not know what suit quality you specify for your 3♥ 'gf, single suiter'. If 3♥ could be a broken suit, then your bidding strategy has to be radically different than if it were a solid suit... which is why many partnerships reserve the jump rebid, after a 2/1 response, for such hands. Even playing SAYC or its equivalent, the 2♦ bid promised a rebid so there is little need to jump on broken suits.

I assume you use the solid suit approach, otherwise using any change of suit as a cuebid seems foolish: you have not yet set trumps yet you have to cue rather than describe?

On that assumption, 3♠, hoping to hear 4♣, and we are off to the races. I am not committing to grand, but I am certainly going looking for one.

If 3♥ could be broken, then the methods in use require a 4♦ bid: which makes for a very, very uncertain continuation. Keycard is only going to help us reach 7 if I can find out all the keycards are present and then bid 5N. Otherwise, even if he has AKQxxx of ♥, I am never finding out about that critical J.

[mike777]

rkc for H, looking for grand, partner should, repeat should ignore a void in D suit.

btw no way can partner have a broken H suit for this 3H bid or this really will be our last event together.

[MickyB]

In our methods a 2♥ rebid would be NF MikeH, sorry

It is fairly standard over here to play a new suit as a cue there, although it obviously creates difficulties on this hand.

[mike777]

MickyB, on Nov 30 2005, 11:40 AM, said:

In our methods a 2♥ rebid would be NF MikeH, sorry

It is fairly standard over here to play a new suit as a cue there, although it obviously creates difficulties on this hand.

In no way can 2h be non forcing, 2D must promise a rebid 100% which means 2h is F1.

[FrancesHinden]

mike777, on Nov 30 2005, 11:41 AM, said:

MickyB, on Nov 30 2005, 11:40 AM, said:

In our methods a 2♥ rebid would be NF MikeH, sorry 

It is fairly standard over here to play a new suit as a cue there, although it obviously creates difficulties on this hand.

In no way can 2h be non forcing, 2D must promise a rebid 100% which means 2h is F1.

The problem is the choice of forum, again, because this is another Acol question. I also play 2H as non-forcing here.

In these methods 3H can just be a good hand with a 6+ card suit, it doesn't have to promise a solid suit.

By the way, I get round this problem by playing 3S as agreeing hearts and 4C/4D as both natural and forcing so I would bid 4C here. Without that, I bid 4D.

[mikeh]

MickyB, on Nov 30 2005, 11:40 AM, said:

In our methods a 2♥ rebid would be NF MikeH, sorry 

It is fairly standard over here to play a new suit as a cue there, although it obviously creates difficulties on this hand.

Playing that 2♥ is nonforcing seems extraordinarily unplayable. Consider: you are in a constructive auction, where game is a strong probability and slam possible, yet you have not found a fit at this point: the 1♥  2♦  ? point, that is.

Bidding space is a precious resource. One of the reasons why so many players have adopted either a 2/1 gf or a big club method is that these methods conserve bidding space on constructive hands. One reason preempts these days are so loose compared to 30 years ago is that players have learned the value of destroying bidding space.

Your methods REQUIRE opener to destroy that resource, without the opponents doing anything but pass. I assure you that this approach will leave you significantly handicapped against pairs with more flexible methods. Try using a 2/1 as promising a rebid, and then you will find that you can reserve space-destroying bids for specific, narrowly-defined holdings, where the loss of bidding space is outweighed by the precision of the information conveyed.

My apologies to the Acolites: my comments are parochial I appreciate that I do not know enough about acol to criticize its basic premises (and did not know that this was an Acol question)... and I fully accept that in the hands of experts Acol seems extremely playable. I remain convinced, however, that playing 2♥ as non forcing is a questionable approach for most bridge players.

[MickyB]

We were actually playing 5 card majors, hence my error in putting it in here.

Playing 1H:2D, 2H is detrimental to your part-score bidding and decisions between part-score and game. Obviously we lose out heavily in the slam zone. Currently we play 1H:2D, 2N as 17-20 bal, maybe I should look at it including some of the hands that we currently rebid 3H on.

[Winstonm]

The only troubling hand for partner, assuming a 16-count, would be something like:

KQJ
AKQxxxx
x
xx.

Trying to isolate the club problem doesn't help much here because we will get too high anyway. As this is about the only bothersome holding, I think it is best to assume a club control in partner's hand and just Keycard now.

If partner responds 5D (1430)
I will follow with 5S (Specific king ask)
If he shows the Club king, I bid 7C and let him correct to Diamonds if he holds xxx and AK.

If over keycard he bids 5H/5S, I raise to 6H. My hand surely has more entries to be of use to him than his to mine, and the singleton 10 rates to be enough support for a single suited strongish hand. And if he holds Ax in clubs and something like AKJ9xx, we will need the lead coming to his hand.

Winston

[Winstonm]

On the subject of suit jump rebids in 2/1: the frequency issue becomes a problem if you use the jump rebid as only solid, and for many the simple rebid does not show 6. The way I use this jump rebid is a suit good enough to play for 1-loser opposite xx, therefore any singleton honor becomes golden. I have found that even solid suits aren't always as solid as they seem opposite a void.

Winston

[Chamaco]

mikeh, on Nov 30 2005, 04:37 PM, said:

For me, 3♥ would show a no-loser suit: AKQJxx or AKQxxxx. But I do not know what suit quality you specify for your 3♥ 'gf, single suiter'. If 3♥ could be a broken suit, then your bidding strategy has to be radically different than if it were a solid suit... which is why many partnerships reserve the jump rebid, after a 2/1 response, for such hands.

Mike, in a 2/1 GF context (sorry Acol-players for this deviation from the topic ), would you discourage rebidding 3H with suits such as:

AQJT8xx
KQJT9xx
AKJ98xx

[david_c]

MickyB, on Nov 30 2005, 06:10 PM, said:

Currently we play 1H:2D, 2N as 17-20 bal, maybe I should look at it including some of the hands that we currently rebid 3H on.

Yes! I love this convention - a 2NT rebid showing a good hand with a 6-card suit. Even if you play a 2M rebid as forcing, the ability to show this sort of hand at once is extremely useful.

Now all you need is a forcing diamond raise ...

[Walddk]

Playing Acol where a rebid of own suit is NF opposite a 2/1 response, you do not need responder to promise a rebid. What you do need, however, is to let the 2/1 response create a force to at least 2NT.

Hence, opener does not have to jump with a bad 6-card suit, because responder can't pass a rebid of own suit at the 2-level. The weakest possible bids available now are 2NT and rebid of own suit which opener can pass. Look at this hand:

♠ A8
♥ K109743
♦ K42
♣ AQ

1♥ - 2♦
??

It's nonsense really if opener must jump to 3♥ now in order to show his 6-card suit and to create a force, because 2♥ can be passed. If you agree that 2♥ can't be passed because there is a force to at least 2NT after a 2/1 response, opener can take it easy with this hand and just rebid 2♥.

3♥ would obviously be misdiscriptive with the hand above.

If you have this agreement, you have 3♥ available as showing at least a semi-solid suit, e.g. a suit with no more than one loser opposite a singleton.

For this to playable, you must have sound 2/1 responses of course, not dubious 8 or 9 counts. It's much better to respond 1NT with those.

Roland

[mike777]

Seems ok in 2/1 game force to have jump rebids stay as solid suits. You can rebid twice with less.

1s=2x
2s=xx
3s =etc.

Partner should get the idea you have a bunch of spades but not 100% solid.

[cherdano]

In 2/1, I would cue-bid 3♠. Playing Acol, I suppose there is a case for keeping 4♣ as natural? Given the agreements, 4♦ looks best. I feel a little unconfident as for what to do over 4♠, however. Cue-bid 4♠ and go down at the 5-level? Pass and miss a lay-down small slam?

Arend

[cherdano]

Walddk, on Nov 30 2005, 07:34 PM, said:

Playing Acol where a rebid of own suit is NF opposite a 2/1 response, you do not need responder to promise a rebid. What you do need, however, is to let the 2/1 response create a force to at least 2NT.

Hence, opener does not have to jump with a bad 6-card suit, because responder can't pass a rebid of own suit at the 2-level. The weakest possible bid available now is 2NT which opener can pass. Look at this hand:

♠ A8
♥ K109743
♦ K42
♣ AQ

1♥ - 2♦
??

It's nonsense really if opener must jump to 3♥ now in order to show his 6-card suit and to create a force, because 2♥ can be passed. If you agree that 2♥ can't be passed because there is a force to at least 2NT after a 2/1 response, opener can take it easy with this hand and just rebid 2♥.

3♥ would obviously be misdiscriptive with the hand above.

I suppose for ACOL players this would be an easy 2NT rebid, showing a strong NT?

Arend

[mikeh]

Chamaco, on Nov 30 2005, 12:26 PM, said:

mikeh, on Nov 30 2005, 04:37 PM, said:

For me, 3♥ would show a no-loser suit: AKQJxx or AKQxxxx. But I do not know what suit quality you specify for your 3♥ 'gf, single suiter'. If 3♥ could be a broken suit, then your bidding strategy has to be radically different than if it were a solid suit... which is why many partnerships reserve the jump rebid, after a 2/1 response, for such hands.

Mike, in a 2/1 GF context (sorry Acol-players for this deviation from the topic ), would you discourage rebidding 3H with suits such as:

AQJT8xx
KQJT9xx
AKJ98xx

yes, I would. I appreciate that using the jump rebid for solid suits reduces the frequency of occurence. That is not, for me, a negative, however, since bidding space, and the efficient utilization of it, is a pet theme of mine, and one of the reasons I love relays... but that is another topic altogether.

If we are going to consume an entire level of our own bidding space in a gf auction, it should convey a specific message: to me that message is 'I have set trump... are you interested in slam, and, if so, let's go'

I do not require any significant extras for the jump rebid outside of the suit, which does help increase its frequency to a modest degree: it would be more than Jx AKQJxx xx Qxx: I would expect at least one control outside the suit, but it does not promise 16+ hcp, as an example.

The point is similar to the sequence 2♣  2♦  3Major, altho I am aware both of the significant differences in the auction and the fact that some use this sequence for other purposes, such as 4Major and longer ♦.

I am not saying that my approach is clearly superior to jumo rebidding on lesser suits: different approaches will fare differently on different hands. However, on the posted hand, you can see the advantage of my approach if we can assume (as I could) that we have a trump suit that willl usually play for no losers.