[FrancesHinden]

Gerben42, on Jan 11 2006, 01:00 PM, said:

Depends on the methods. Let's see:

Acol: South for not opening 2♣

Looks more like an Acol 2H opening to me.

But playing some form of Acol without Acol 2s, North would respond 2D and there wouldn't be a problem.

The source of the problem here is one of:
- South has no way of making a forcing heart bid over the 1NT response, or
- North has to respond 1NT on this hand rather than 2D natural, 2C Drury or 2H good constructive raise.

[Gerben42]

Sorry wouldn't have thought a balanced 10-count with 3 HCP in ♣QJ doubleton would be enough for a 2/1, even in Acol.

Anyway for opening 2♣ I was assuming NS to be sensible enough to not play 2♥ as Acol 2 bid but perhaps Benji or Ryall 2♣.

That South has no forcing ♥ bid after 1NT is a common problem to many systems. Enter Gazzilli

Not sure what 1NT meant though, it's why I thought Acol: no raise since 4-card majors, and no 2♦ because the hand is too weak.

[FrancesHinden]

The hand is easily worth an Acol 2/1, even nowadays when they've got a bit stronger than they used to be. Many modern players say a 2NT rebid over a 2/1 is forcing to game, so you ask yourself if you want to be in game opposite a balanced 15 count. As the answer is yes, it's worth a 2/1. (I'm not saying game will be cold, just than on average you want to be in it.)

p.s. you don't have to play Gazilli to solve the problem, there are lots of different methods available, but playing one of them seems a good idea.

[Codo]

I allways had understood 1 ♥1 NT 4 ♥as strong and long and had never passed with the north hand. I cannot understand the sense in playing 1♥ 1 NT 4 ♥as a weaker hand, as I still can bid 3 Heart to invite pd....

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

I allways had understood 1 ♥1 NT 4 ♥as strong and long and had never passed with the north hand. I cannot understand the sense in playing 1♥ 1 NT 4 ♥as a weaker hand, as I still can bid 3 Heart to invite pd....

With the hands strong in high cards, preserving bidding space is valuable for slam exploration. If you have a weaker freak, 8 hearts, or 7-4, you often do not want to bid 3H because that can be passed (partner will play you for only 6 hearts, perhaps more in high cards, 1-1.5 tricks less in playing strength). You want to bid game because on average it will still make opposite hands partner would pass 3H with. But you need to distinguish between the hands that are bidding game on extra distribution vs. the ones that are bidding game on extra high cards, particularly if you are playing 2/1 where the 1nt response has a higher upper limit and slam is possible opposite the jump shift hands. With the weaker distributional 4H bid, there is almost never slam opposite a 1nt response so the space isn't needed.

You are bidding 1h ... 4h on hands that you might have opened 4H with, but thought you were a bit too strong & might miss slam if partner had a 2/1 response. You aren't worried about missing slam opposite a 1nt response, but want to gamble on game, don't want to miss it by bidding only 3h.

There are better artificial methods available, but if your only agreement is "standard", you have to jump shift into a fragment (sometimes even a doubleton!) with one suited 18+hcp hands.

[Kalvan14]

1M-1N-4M shows a hand which in 3rd position would have opened 4M. With a strong hand (say, equivalent to an Acol 2) it makes more sense to go more slowly (and re-bid a minor or a fragment at 3-level, creating a GF and leaving open the option of playing 3N).
With the posted hand, a rebid of 3♦ stands out, either in SAYC or in 2/1.

I would not judge too harshly N for bidding 1N: the hand is exactly in between a constructive raise and a limit raise. 1N (to be followed by 3♥ over the expected 2m) is standard practice in 2/1 (now if you tell me they were playing SAYC, things change ).

I'm more and more convinced that S has to shoulder all the blame.