[jillybean]

1♠:2♣

---

Playing sayc, 2♣ is only 1rf? - what can I bid?

ty
jb

[Blofeld]

I think that playing SAYC 2♣ is more than a 1-round force -- it promises a rebid. With this style you've got an easy 2♠ rebid.

If you are playing that 2♣ is just a 1-round force, then the rebid is a little more interesting, as if you bid 2♠ you may sometimes be left there and miss a good game. Nonetheless I still think 2♠ is the best choice -- anything else will force us to game and I think if partner was going to pass 2♠ then game is more likely to go down than to make.

[jillybean]

OK, 2♠ is an easy rebid - problem is some seem to play 2♠ as passable.

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean2, on Dec 4 2006, 10:02 AM, said:

OK, 2♠ is an easy rebid - problem is some seem to play 2♠ as passable.

Hi,

yes, thats the way it quite often is played, but you
stated, that you play SAYC, and at least in theory
2S cant be passed.

If you want to reach game, the simplest way to do
so is bid it direct, i.e. 4S.

You know, which game you want to play, you have
a min. opener, and thats it.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: Given the right vulnerability, there may even be case
to open this hand with 4S.

[HeartA]

jillybean2, on Dec 4 2006, 10:02 AM, said:

OK, 2♠ is an easy rebid - problem is some seem to play 2♠ as passable.

Yes, 2C promises another bid. So it is an easy 2S.

[kgr]

4♠ for me. I wonder how bad this is

[pclayton]

4♠ looks pretty normal.

I don't play SAYC, but I'm curious about the difference between 3♠ and 4♠ here.

[Cascade]

I usually play 2♣ is a one-round force.

In SAYC where the two over one response promises a rebid it is not clearly defined in a standard way which hands are worth only 2♠ now and which can jump to 3♠. Some hands are easy but its not well documented where the boundaries are as far as I have been able to find.

In a one-round forcing context I play:

2♠ = most minimums without a good second suit to rebid. I tend to rebid a decent six-card suit in preference to a side four-card suit.

3♠ = extra values and a sixth spade and forcing to game

4♠ = near minimum with extra distribution - typically a seventh spade

In a SAYC context I might adapt this a little taking advantage of the fact that 2♠ is forcing and rebid only 2♠ on some hands that without that agreement I would have to jump to 3♠. These would be hands with the values for 3♠ but with a suit that was relatively poor so that there is more of an issue of strain.

With the hand in question I would rebid 4♠ unless I thought that partner might think that I have 20 points or something similar.

[neilkaz]

jillybean2, on Dec 4 2006, 09:02 AM, said:

OK, 2♠ is an easy rebid - problem is some seem to play 2♠ as passable.

I have to admit that I really don't care for SAYC and much prefer 2/1..but anyhow..so many players play SAYC, including some experts I play with.

Anyhow, the problem is that many state they play SAYC when they really play some version of 5 card majors with a 15-17 NT. I presume that in some countries they play that a 2♠ or 2NT rebid can be passed by a responder who had a minimum 2/1 response (noting some might have 9 HCP and a good 6 card club suit and that's it and other might have 10 scattered HCP or a badish 11).

Anyhow, regardless of whether I fear 2♠ is passed or not, I think game in ♠ is a big favorite to make. A jump to 3♠ shows really good ♠ and is 100% GF so that is what I bid to save room in case PD has a decent hand and wants to explore a bit for slam.

I'm not sure what a jump to 4♠ shows in SAYC. I'd play it as a hand that is just a bit too good to open with a vulnerable 3♠ preempt. ..ie make the Q of ♣ a low spot. But I am unsure whether PD might think that in SAYC 4♠ is stronger than 3♠. ( I should hope not..but who knows).

I'll bid 3♠ but won't argue with 4♠. .. neilkaz ..

[mikeh]

As has been pointed out, in sayc, 2♣ promises a rebid. One of the reasons for this approach is to take the strain off of opener when opener has a complex hand type, and neither wishes to be passed at the 2-level nor is strong enough (or uni-directional enough) to jump, thus consuming that precious resource: bidding space.

In a 2♣ promises a rebid context, it is probably best to preserve 3♠ as a trump-setting bid: typically AKQTxx or better (I like it to promise 0 losers opposite a stiff, so AKQJxx is my minimum). Opener should also have some modest extra values.

This facilitates slam bidding when responder has a nice hand but no fit: if you have no way of showing a solid suit, responder will always be inhibited in slam moves by concern that the singleton 2 is inadequate support at the 6 or 7 level.

4♠ would be a lesser hand, with probably a one-loser but long trump suit and no particular interest in slam. Responder would need extras and a trump filler to think about slam.

On the given hand, 2♠ is enough.

If you are in fact playing a method where 2♠ can be passed (if Frances is reading this, does modern Acol permit a pass of 2♠? If so, is it common amongst the top acol players today?), I'd choose 4♠, which fits the description set out above.

[neilkaz]

I agree with what Mike said, but happily set trump with AQJTxxx.

.. neilkaz ..

[whereagles]

There are a few good things about the hand... like the good spades and club honor.

Still, I'd bid 4♠ because I don't like the alternatives: 3♠ seems a bit optimistic (pard might get carried away with a good hand) and 2♠ has little to do with what I actually have, even if you play it as forcing.

I'd shoot 4♠, though not too happy about it.

[jillybean]

Thanks for the replies, I did bid 4♠ but had probably over valued the hand and wasnt entriely happy shutting partner out so soon.

[neilkaz]

Once again I think 4♠ should be close to cold. How did it do ?

[the hog]

If Kathryn plays 2C as a 1round force only, then the jump to 3S is clearly forcing. That would be my bid. If 2C promises another bid, I would bid 2S.

[jillybean]

neilkaz, on Dec 4 2006, 06:05 PM, said:

Once again I think 4♠ should be close to cold. How did it do ?

This hand was from a partnership bidding table, Im sure it would have made
I cant remember exactly, I think 4♠ wqs ok.

[neilkaz]

Please explain to me how to find a partnership bidding table ! There are so many features on BBO that I don't know how to find.

Thx .. neilkaz ..

[jillybean]

Paertnership bidding tables can be found:

From the classic view main menu select 'Explore Bridge'

From the new improved view select 'Other Bridge Activities'

[neilkaz]

Thx Kathryn..I have a couple new PD's who I want to spend some time there with me. They are what I want at the adv/adv+ level even though they don't play much more than SAYC and a few basic gadgets, because they defend well, see and use signal, play declarer as well as the average expert on BBO, and have common sense in competitive bidding and preemption.

So we'll be spending some time, where I teach them XYZ (something akin to NMF is an absolute must and XYZ is best, IMHO), and INVM and then hopefully RKC Minorwood since I am really sick of missing minor suit slams at IMPs or going set trying for them because we bypass 5m asking for keys/ace with 4NT.

Lebensohl will also be on the menu since I think it reduces the effectiveness of opps' weak 2's and also their "naturalish" overcalls of NT. (Ron Anderson's book is superb)

.. neilkaz ..