[jillybean]

I am working through agreements with a new partner and finding we have a number of areas where we are miles apart.
How do the experts play these sequences, would you recommend the same for B/I players or if not, what would you suggest?

thanks

1m (p) 2M

1m (p) 3M

edit: my partner plays these as weak, I play it as sjs and splinter but can't remember the last time I had a hand for either bid.

[the hog]

Kathryn these questions are difficult to answer as there are so many different agreements possible. Also, I don't pretend to be an expert.
We played 1m jumpshift as a good 6 card suit and about 15+hcp. This worked well for us. We played 1m 3M as 13-15 balanced with a weak xx in the suit bid; this worked excelllently for us.
Others play 1m jump shift as weak; personally I have played this and found it ok, but we didn't gain much from it. Others may have a different idea.

One thing I would strongly suggest is 1M 3m as a good 6 card suit invitational. We gained quite a lot from that.

[Mbodell]

jillybean2, on Oct 21 2007, 10:51 PM, said:

I am working through agreements with a new partner and finding we have a number of areas where we are miles apart.
How do the experts play these sequences, would you recommend the same for B/I players or if not, what would you suggest?

thanks

1m (p) 2M

1m (p) 3M

Not an expert, but assuming SA I'd play:

1m (p) 2M to be a SJS game forcing/slam curious hand with a GOOD 5 card suit or any 6+ card suit. I'd generally want a good 15+ points or 6 or fewer losers.

1m (p) 3M to be a splinter with support for the minor in question. Opening points, singleton or void (but not singelton A), and support for the minor (5+ for clubs, 4+ for diamonds).

I'd expect the first treatment (or at least something close to it) to be close to 100% standard with B/I players and the second to be standard with I players but an impossible bid with B players since most B players don't know splinters.

[awm]

It is fairly common to play 1m-3M as a splinter agreeing the minor. The only common alternative seems to be natural and weak (esp. if 1m-2M would not be natural and weak).

1m-2M can be assigned many meanings. Ones I've seen include:

(1) Strong, showing slam interest with a good suit.
(2) Weak, something like 3-5 points (less than 1M) with 6+ suit.
(3) Constructive, something like 5-8 with 6+ suit.
(4) Invitational, something like 9-11 with 6+ suit.
(5) Reverse flannery, showing 5♠,4+♥ with constructive values (2♥) or invitational (2♠).
(6) Some kind of artificial raise of opener's minor, allowing 2m/3m to be weak/preemptive raises.

With all of these it's important to consider the effect on the rest of the system. Playing 2M as constructive or invitational lets you stop at the two-level on some invites when you would otherwise get to the three level, and lets you use responder's 3M rebid as forcing (i.e. 1m-1M-1NT-3M forcing because invite would bid 1m-2M). Reverse flannery helps a lot when opener rebids the minor, allowing you to use (for example) 1♦-1♠-2♦-2♥ as an artificial force (since non-GF hands with ♠+♥ are using reverse flannery). The artificial raises avoid the problem of "no strong raise of the minor" while also avoiding playing "inverted minors" (which take away your useful single raise of the minor).

[Gerben42]

I have a distinct preference for one of:

Quote

(3) Constructive, something like 5-8 with 6+ suit.
(4) Invitational, something like 9-11 with 6+ suit.

because they help the rest of the auction a lot.

For 1m - 3M I prefer this to show a hand that wants to play 3NT but lacks a stopper in the other major, for example:

Kxx
xx
AJxx
AJxx