[mikeh]

I very much doubt that g/b is even theoretically playable here (playable in the sense that the gains from using it outweigh the costs).

What on earth is opener to bid over 2♠ with xx AQJxx KQx Jxx? Or do the g/b 2N bidders never hold such (for the rest of us) normal hands?

We frequently (constantly?) read posts advocating non-standard treatments, often replete with examples of why the treatment is so useful. But anyone can devise a treatment that works on a given hand.

Before deciding that a toy, such as g/b, can be used in sequences not contemplated by the designer, ask yourself whether there are hands on which its use would be detrimental. A modicum of thought ought to convince you that opener will often hold a non-gf hand (opposite 2♠), with no rebiddable suit, no fit, and a stopper or two. Just what the heck are the g/b bidders doing on that hand?

Getting back to the original post: I appreciate that many play that the 2♠ bid does not promise a rebid. For me, and for just about every good player I have played with, it does. Now, that is not a problem free solution: west really has a tough bid over 3♥, but the flip side is that there will be many hands on which the one-round force nature of W's 2♠ makes constructive bidding easier.

At least in the Pacific Northwest of NA, 2♠ one round force is pretty standard... one consequence is that we tend to negative double with hands on which others would bid 2♠...but the west hand is a full opener, so I'd bid 2♠ comfortably.

Having said all that, I would rebid 4♥ as east, because the hand is one-dimensional, and has no extras such that we want to go-slow in case of slam.

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

Getting back to the original post: I appreciate that many play that the 2♠ bid does not promise a rebid. For me, and for just about every good player I have played with, it does. Now, that is not a problem free solution: west really has a tough bid over 3♥, but the flip side is that there will be many hands on which the one-round force nature of W's 2♠ makes constructive bidding easier.

Maybe you want to clarify this a bit Mike? 2♠ being 1RF is common & assumed, otherwise it would be described as negative free bid. 2♠ being forcing & promising a rebid is another thing entirely, I don't think it's nearly as common as you claim. Your flip side claim should be related to the "promises rebid" claim, making *opener's calls* forcing, not to the "one-round force nature".

Quote

At least in the Pacific Northwest of NA, 2♠ one round force is pretty standard

I agree 1RF is pretty standard, but 1RF & promising rebid? That wasn't common when I was playing there 10 years ago.

[the hog]

Mike, if you play that 2S promises another bid, then you have another situation entirely. Your views are actually not that different to mine - "At least in the Pacific Northwest of NA, 2♠ one round force is pretty standard... one consequence is that we tend to negative double with hands on which others would bid 2♠...but the west hand is a full opener, so I'd bid 2♠ comfortably."

The fact that he has a full opener and yet passed 3H and then ridiculed his partner for a comment re hand evaluation is what gets me.

For what its worth I do happen to play G/B in these situations, but I do know its not as Bergen intended. We also play wider ranging Xs followed by n/f suit bids than most.

Re the 4H bid over 2S - As I stated, I would have opened 4H, but not having done that there is NOTHING wrong with a 3H bid if 2S is forcing. Bidding 4H in this auction is unilateral; you may well have by-passed the best contract. (Yes Yes, I know that opening 4H is just as unilateral, but the ituation is different.

[1eyedjack]

The_Hog, on Jan 7 2007, 11:55 AM, said:

for me 4H would show that the 2S bid had in some way improved my hand

BTW is this comment not inconsistent with your suggestion that 3H shows extras?

[Winstonm]

1eyedjack, on Jan 6 2007, 04:36 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

E....S...W...N
1♥..2♦..2♠..P
3♥..All P
Lead ♣6
Result +1

---

I was West, and perhaps could have raised.  But I just Luuuved East's comment at hand end.

(Tip: If you decide to self rate yourself as advanced and put "POLITE" in your profile, don't do what my partner did:)

"P you had 13 p your singleton is 2"

ROARRING! Still wiping the tears from eyes.

Poor creature still miscounted - it's 14, 2 for the singleton and 1 for the 5th spade.

[neilkaz]

In what has become a very interesting thread, I think The Hog has hit the nail on the head with the comment pertaining to using 2NT as a catch all for minimum bids here and not worrying about a ♦ stop. If responder wants to play 3NT he can ask for a stop with 3♦.

Try rebidding with xx,AQxxx,xxx,AQx after 2♠ as an example.

Patterning out with minimum NT bids is quite useful, IMHO, and a stopper can still be found later.

The sequences where opener is forced to rebid at the 3 level or 2NT but responders isn't GF can be difficult.

.. neilkaz ..

[Winstonm]

Isn't the concept of a 1-round that promises a rebid not quite accurate - a more accurate description would be "promises another bid unless partner shows a minimum?"

Take for example this auction:
1H-2C-2D-P
2H- P- ?

Why should responder have to bid again with Jxx, xx, AKQxx, xxx if partner's 2H shows no extra values and what else is partner to do with Kxx, AKJxx, xx, Jxx?

My definition of a 1-round force is it is forcing on partner, he can't pass, but it does not guarantee a rebid if partner shows minimum values.

2N can certainly be used in some auctions to separate, and there is some merit to the idea of patterning out with stopper ask at the 3 level, but that does not allow 2N as a final contract, which may be the best spot.

My solution is inelegant, but playable, and that is any direct suit bid by opener, including a raise of partner, as well as 2N, shows minimum values and is non-forcing, leaving cue bid as an all-purpose game force with a solid opening hand, around a good 14 up.

In the hand shown, though, I am with the majority and would have simply bid 4H over 2S - because of space constraints, I'm not necessarily looking for the very best game but a reasonable game and 4H seems a decent spot.

For those who believe 3H should be forcing and that the 2S bidder should bid again, I curse you to hold every time this hand in this auction: x, AK109xx, KJxx, xx.

[Echognome]

Winstonm, on Jan 7 2007, 09:15 PM, said:

Take for example this auction:
1H-2C-2D-P
2H- P- ?

Why should responder have to bid again with Jxx, xx, AKQxx, xxx if partner's 2H shows no extra values and what else is partner to do with Kxx, AKJxx, xx, Jxx?

I think this is just a matter of agreement. How would the hand be bid in SAYC if there were no 2♣ bid? If responder bids 2♦ he promises a rebid (seemingly 2NT). In ACOL, 2♦ does not promise a rebid, so the hand would pass 2♥. It's just about being consistent with your own agreements as they will affect your overall bidding plan. Some play 2X as constructive but non-forcing, others as forcing, but not promising a rebid, others as forcing but promising a rebid, etc. etc. Good point for partnership discussion.

[Codo]

neilkaz, on Jan 8 2007, 01:28 PM, said:

In what has become a very interesting thread, I think The Hog has hit the nail on the head with the comment pertaining to using 2NT as a catch all for minimum bids here and not worrying about a ♦ stop. If responder wants to play 3NT he can ask for a stop with 3♦.

Try rebidding with xx,AQxxx,xxx,AQx after 2♠ as an example.

Patterning out with minimum NT bids is quite useful, IMHO, and a stopper can still be found later.

The sequences where opener is forced to rebid at the 3 level or 2NT but responders isn't GF can be difficult.

.. neilkaz ..

Your example hand is ugly for the natural 2 NT bidders, for sure. But like any other hand, this proofes nothing. Mikeh showed a hand, where 2 NT was the given call and where your approach had problems in reaching the right contract.

You have no fit, so NT is your most likely game. I doubt, that giving up the benefits of 2 NT as a natural bid here is outweighted by the small win to show now, that you have minimum or not.

I am quite sure, that the problem occurs one bid earlier: IF you bid 2 Spade as natural and forcing, you should be aware, that you will search a fit at a quite high level, so I believe, that you should use 2 Spade as either game forcing or as NFB but as nothing inbetween. I prefer NFB and had bid Easts hand with 2 Spade as a NFB or with X followed by 2 Spade otherwise.

[Wackojack]

Storm in a teacup. You partner wasn't rude, just stupid (or if you like, lacking an in-depth knowledge of bridge) Apparently, you said nothing at the table, so no harm done. Some of the posters have put the boot in to you (imo unjustifyably for bridge reasons). Thats happens in the forum.

fwiiw, the discussion taught me a little, but not much, about the benefits of g/b and neg free bids.