[jillybean]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 Pass  1♥    Pass  2♦
 Pass  2NT   Pass  3♥
 Pass  Pass  Pass  

Not playing 2/1 GF here, trying to apply Mike’s system some logic to 2/1 auctions.

How did we do?

[han]

What's Mike's system to 2/1 auctions in a non-gameforcing setting?

[awm]

The way I learned SAYC:

(1) When you have a fit for partner and less than GF strength you raise. So I would bid 3♥ directly with the south hand. This does not promise four trumps in SAYC or in most versions of standard, that is a 2/1 GF thing. Admittedly some teachers who play mostly 2/1 GF in their own partnerships later go back and try to teach SAYC and insert their "limit raise is always four cards" bias into it.

(2) After a 2/1 bid, you are supposed to rebid two of your major on any hand where no cheaper bid is properly descriptive and you don't have enough values for game. Bidding above two of your major shows extras; something like 15+ and enough for game opposite partner's 2/1 call. So on the north hand, I would rebid 2♥ since I have only 13 hcp and this is not enough for game opposite a minimum 2/1.

(3) In the auction given, 2NT should establish a game force (since it is past two of opener's major and thus shows extras). So 3♥ should be forcing. Actually in general raising opener's first suit to the three level after a 2/1 bid should be forcing to game, since limit raise hands make limit raises and the only hands that temporize with a 2/1 bid when they have a 3+ card fit for opener are the game forcing hands.

Anyways I am sure I do not know what MikeH's system of 2/1 bids is, since as far as I know MikeH is a very devoted 2/1 GF player and is not that interested in systems where 2/1 auctions are not forcing to game...

[jtfanclub]

My auction would go something like...

1♥ 1NT (forcing)
2♣ 3♥
P

I think that's the generally accepted three card limit raise method in SAYC.

Nothing wrong with what you did. I do disagree that

1♥ 2♦
2NT

is a GF, as
1♥ 2♦
2♥

is still forcing.

[jdonn]

jtfanclub, on Apr 1 2008, 11:52 AM, said:

My auction would go something like...

1♥ 1NT (forcing)
2♣ 3♥
P

I think that's the generally accepted three card limit raise method in SAYC.

1NT forcing is part of SAYC? Wow where have I been?

[whereagles]

I think this is the right bidding:

1♥ 2♦
2♥ 3♥ (NF, I believe)
4♥

though I'm not sure I'd like to be in it

[mikeh]

jillybean2, on Apr 1 2008, 09:29 AM, said:

Dealer: West Vul: None Scoring: IMP

♠ K432 ♥ K9862 ♦ QJ ♣ A9 ♠ AQ8 ♥ T43 ♦ A8632 ♣ 43

West  North East  South

 Pass  1♥    Pass  2♦
 Pass  2NT   Pass  3♥
 Pass  Pass  Pass  

Not playing 2/1 GF here, trying to apply Mike’s system to 2/1 auctions.

How did we do?

Sorry, jilly, but I'm not sure I understand the reference to 'my' system. I don't play standard... and I have never read the SAYC notes.. I play 2/1 in all my partnerships, altho with lots of variations.


Incorporation of the forcing 1N into a method changes it radically from SAYC, as I understand that method. While you need not play 2/1 gf to use a forcing 1N, you cannot play 2/1 without a forcing 1N, since you have to use 1N for hands from 5-12 hcp (not all 12 counts can force to game opposite a modern opener). But SAYC requires only 10 hcp for a 2/1.

Just as importantly, you have to have an agreement about the meaning of 2N by opener over a 2/1 response in SAYC. In 2/1, 2N is forcing... not in and of itself.. it need not systemically show extras, because the 2/1 response forced beyond 2N.

But in SAYC, and other standard methods, the 2/1 did not so force.

Therefore it is important to agree whether 2N shows extras (ie is forcing to game) or is just a minimum descriptive bid. Traditionally, in standard, it showed extras, but I don't know what the SAYC notes say, if anything.

If it shows extras, then you have to rebid 2♥. Indeed, in my preferred methods, I would rebid 2♥ anyway.

That would fetch a 3♥ raise, and you'd end up in the same spot.

I may have merely added to the confusion, but I don't think that I deserve either credit or blame for a mikeh method that isn't 2/1 absolute gf

[jtfanclub]

jdonn, on Apr 1 2008, 12:05 PM, said:

jtfanclub, on Apr 1 2008, 11:52 AM, said:

My auction would go something like...

1♥  1NT (forcing)
2♣  3♥
P

I think that's the generally accepted three card limit raise method in SAYC.

1NT forcing is part of SAYC? Wow where have I been?

You're absolutely right, where have *I* been?

In actual SAYC, the auction goes:

1♥ 3♥
P

as a limit raise only shows three or more hearts.

Edit: After a major suit opening and a 2/1....

Rebids with a minimum hand (13-15 points):
Rebidding notrump at the lowest available level;
Raising responder's suit at the lowest available level (may have good three-card support);
Rebidding a new suit at the one level or rebidding a new suit that is lower ranking than the opening suit (not reversing);
Rebidding opener's suit at the lowest level.

http://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/play/...gle%20pages.pdf

[jillybean]

My apologies Mike, I should have said we don’t play a forcing 1nt, we don’t agree on 2nt rebid setting gf or 2♥ rebid showing “only” 5. Heck, we don’t know what we are playing but I like what I’ve heard of your auctions after a 2/1.

A limit raise would have been perfect; we learned limit raise as 4+ and forgot that it can be a good 3+

[firmit]

In a beginner-context, this is what is preached to new players around my parts(agree with OP). So if you are putting together a simple system, this might be a starting point.

In regards to logic, there might be more to gain by rebidding 2♥. A 2 over 1 response should ALWAYS promise a rebid by responder. Therefor, you could bid a FORCING 2♥, whereas 2NT could be considered any GF hand opposite responders minimum 2 over 1.

Also, I don't like a limit raise with 3c support. I personally like a drury/toronto-any-seat-gadget for this. This is something that should be figured out early.

But, I gather you know this and there are definetly many strong opinions in many directions. I don't know...

[neilkaz]

jillybean2, on Apr 1 2008, 01:38 PM, said:

My apologies Mike, I should have said we don’t play a forcing 1nt, we don’t agree on 2nt rebid setting gf or 2♥ rebid showing “only” 5. Heck, we don’t know what we are playing but I like what I’ve heard of your auctions after a 2/1.

A limit raise would have been perfect; we learned limit raise as 4+ and forgot that it can be a good 3+

While I much prefer 2/1 to SAYCish, didn't you show a 3 card limit raise in ♥ and better ♦ than ♣ here and lacking 4♠ (or u would have bid 1♠) ?

With that in mind, perhaps PD could've felt his ♦ useful and carried on to 4♥, although I think it takes some decent luck to make.

.. neilkaz ..