[Yzerman]

I played this hand yesterday, and found this "hand type" to be of interest for purpose of discussion. The hand type is a hand with pattern 6421 with long solid/semi-solid major and bad 4 card fragment in minor with controls in your short suits. Here is the exact hand;

A
AKQ10xx
109xx
AQ

I do not wish to make this a double-dummy bidding problem, because I would like to hear what concensus is on how to prepare the subsequent auction opposite ANY hand, not any specific hand.

Personally I think this hand type lends itself to a 2/1 based system nicely, but you need some NICE agreements to bid comfortably.

FYI - I bid this hand like total idiot, my only excuse is that this was casual partnership with no agreements, but that does not minimize my gross action!

MAL

[hrothgar]

Yzerman, on Mar 18 2004, 07:05 PM, said:

I played this hand yesterday, and found this "hand type" to be of interest for purpose of discussion. The hand type is a hand with pattern 6421 with long solid/semi-solid major and bad 4 card fragment in minor with controls in your short suits. Here is the exact hand;

A
AKQ10xx
109xx
AQ

I do not wish to make this a double-dummy bidding problem, because I would like to hear what concensus is on how to prepare the subsequent auction opposite ANY hand, not any specific hand.

Personally I think this hand type lends itself to a 2/1 based system nicely, but you need some NICE agreements to bid comfortably.

FYI - I bid this hand like total idiot, my only excuse is that this was casual partnership with no agreements, but that does not minimize my gross action!

MAL

Opposite a pick-up partner, I'd probably open this 2NT.
I think that this is the most accurate reflection of the playing strength of the hand.

I'f I chose to open 1H, I'd bid 3H over 1NT.
The Diamonds are too weak to introduce at the 3 level, and I am unwilling to make a non-forcing rebid.

[Free]

1♥ opening, what else... After a forcing 1NT, I'll probably rebid 3♥.

[Antoine Fourrière]

Open 1♥, rebid 3NT over 1♠ or 1NT.

[inquiry]

Hi Mike,

I don't have this problem in my 2/1 because I open this hand 2♣, which can include acol 2 bid in either major or true game force. This being the acol 2 bid. If partner bids instant double negative of 2♥'s, then I pass.

But ok, you are not playing this. With this hand, each of your rebids are flawed. I would rebid 3NT with this hand, this has to be a long ♥ suit with stuff in most if not all side suits.

[Cascade]

hrothgar, on Mar 18 2004, 01:13 PM, said:

I'f I chose to open 1H, I'd bid 3H over 1NT.
The Diamonds are too weak to introduce at the 3 level, and I am unwilling to make a non-forcing rebid.

On the auction

1♥ 1NT
3♥

is 3♥ forcing?

[Cascade]

Here are my auctions (not 2/1 GF)

1♥ 1♠
3NT
this shows a hand too good for 3♥

1♥ 1NT
4♥
I couldnt bring myself to bid 3NT when partner is short in spades

1♥ 2♣
3♥
This is forcing after a 2/1

1♥ 2♦
3♥
Still forcing

... 3NT
4♦
but I continue with 4♦ over partner's 3NT

[hrothgar]

Uh, now that you mention it, 3♥ isn't forcing
With this said and done, its much less likely to get passed out then a 2 level rebid. They widespread support for 3NT rebid makes me even more convinced the 2NT has to be the right action.

Players are willing to arbitrary bid game when partner has

1. Announced 0-3 spades
2. Wrong sided the contract

This seems insane when partner's 1N was likely based on a club bust.
Hopefully, the 2NT opening allows a little more ccontrol of the auction.

[inquiry]

hrothgar, on Mar 18 2004, 03:04 PM, said:

Cascade, on Mar 18 2004, 10:44 PM, said:

hrothgar, on Mar 18 2004, 01:13 PM, said:

I'f I chose to open 1H, I'd bid 3H over 1NT.
The Diamonds are too weak to introduce at the 3 level, and I am unwilling to make a non-forcing rebid.

On the auction

1♥ 1NT
3♥

is 3♥ forcing?

Uh, now that you mention it, 3♥ isn't forcing
With this said and done, its much less likely to get passed out then a 2 level rebid.

They widespread support for 3NT rebid makes me even more convinced the 2NT has to be the right action.

Players are willing to arbitrary bid game when partner has

1. Announced 0-3 spades
2. Wrong sided the contract

This seems insane when partner's 1N was likely based on a club bust.

Hopefully, the 2NT opening allows a little more ccontrol of the auction.

Assuming this is imps, I have no desire to play less than game. So 3♥ is immediately elliminated, as is 2♥. 2NT shows a different hand, and is passable, so that is out. On the plus side, I would be very disappointed if my partner passed 2♦ so not vul, I might bid that at imps. Of course 3♦ is forcing, but this hand with Ten high ♦ is not the hand for it (you will get false preference back to 3♥ with most weak hands and you can decide on 3NT or 4♥, but it will not help you find the magic 6♦ enough... you will never be sure your ♦'s are good enough. So that leaves 3NT as the only viable option under these conditions.

Like I said (And posted in many other threads), I roll ACOL 2bids in major into my 2[C]] opening bid. Partner responds 2♦ is semipositive or better (promising at least one trick), with 2♥ response suggesting he has ZERO TRICKS for a ♥contract. This is the perfect hand for that opening if you play this agreement.... The bidding would go....

2♣-2♥ pass... no problem, low and safe, or

1♣-2♦...> your 8 tricks (hopeful) and partners minimum of one makes game reasonable. You can bid a forcing 2♥ and then decide what to do from there.

Ben

[Yzerman]

Okay, having heard all the responses thus far, I have not heard anyone express an interest in finding side diamond fit. Is it not too much to ask for AKxx diamonds or AQxxx (even AQxx on good day). Is there any partnership, by agreement, that accounts for finding the side fit minor fit?

Personally, I think opening 2N, opening 1H and rebidding 3H or 4H do not accomodate this possibility. Any feedback?

[Yzerman]

Sorry, I was typing mine out as Ben typed his, he is 1st person to mention the magic 6D.

[hrothgar]

Yzerman, on Mar 18 2004, 11:33 PM, said:

Okay, having heard all the responses thus far, I have not heard anyone express an interest in finding side diamond fit. Is it not too much to ask for AKxx diamonds or AQxxx (even AQxx on good day). Is there any partnership, by agreement, that accounts for finding the side fit minor fit?

As a system, 2/1 has its strengths.
Finding minor suit slams based on a 4-4 minor suit fit isn't one of them.

I'm sure that well oiled / experienced partnerships will have mechanisms for finding 6m when its right. However, my own experience suggests that looking for 6m in a new partnership is asking for trouble.

[inquiry]

hrothgar, on Mar 18 2004, 04:03 PM, said:

Yzerman, on Mar 18 2004, 11:33 PM, said:

Okay, having heard all the responses thus far, I have not heard anyone express an interest in finding side diamond fit.  Is it not too much to ask for AKxx diamonds or AQxxx (even AQxx on good day).  Is there any partnership, by agreement, that accounts for finding the side fit minor fit?

As a system, 2/1 has its strengths.
Finding minor suit slams based on a 4-4 minor suit fit isn't one of them. Believe it or not, some people bid effectively without moscito.

I'm sure that well oiled / experienced partnerships will have mechanisms for finding 6m when its right. However, my own experience suggests that looking for 6m in a new partnership is asking for trouble.

Well... playing 2♣ my way, finding a slam with a ♦ fit is not hard at all, other than maybe wrong siding it...

After 2♦ (semi-positive or better), and 2♥, responder has three choices. To rebid 2NT as a warning of having only one possible trick, to rebid 4♥ to show a fit and two tricks, or to rebid something else, game force (2 tricks+). So partner with AKxxx or AQxxx or even some AJxx AQxx or AKxx in ♦ and not a particularily yummy ♥ fit will rebid 3♦. Now we are 1) game forced, and 2) opener knows about the ♦ fit. Here a raise to 4♦ is "roman keycard", and you are off to the races on most fairly good slam hands. So this is hardly a fair slam against 2/1 GF as it relates to this hand. It is a matter of personal agreement. Also, I don't think a jump to 3NT ends the bidding if partner is looking at AKxxx of ♦, clearly partner probably has 1) long strong ♥, 2) black quick tricks, and 3) four ♦ or at least three to the queen. So a natural 4♦ bid slam try would be called for. After all, partner was suggesting he could take nine tricks in his hand opposite potentially none in yours and you hold a five card suit to AK or AQ, you might be giving him 5 more tricks than he expected... (with AQ fifth, maybe only 4 more), those still total 12 and 13 tricks.... so to pass with such a holding would be unexpected.

Ben

[hrothgar]

inquiry, on Mar 19 2004, 12:18 AM, said:

hrothgar, on Mar 18 2004, 04:03 PM, said:

Yzerman, on Mar 18 2004, 11:33 PM, said:

Okay, having heard all the responses thus far, I have not heard anyone express an interest in finding side diamond fit.  Is it not too much to ask for AKxx diamonds or AQxxx (even AQxx on good day).  Is there any partnership, by agreement, that accounts for finding the side fit minor fit?

As a system, 2/1 has its strengths.
Finding minor suit slams based on a 4-4 minor suit fit isn't one of them. Believe it or not, some people bid effectively without moscito.

I'm sure that well oiled / experienced partnerships will have mechanisms for finding 6m when its right. However, my own experience suggests that looking for 6m in a new partnership is asking for trouble.

Well... playing 2♣ my way, finding a slam with a ♦ fit is not hard at all, other than maybe wrong siding it...

After 2♦ (semi-positive or better), and 2♥, responder has three choices. To rebid 2NT as a warning of having only one possible trick, to rebid 4♥ to show a fit and two tricks, or to rebid something else, game force (2 tricks+). So partner with AKxxx or AQxxx or even some AJxx AQxx or AKxx in ♦ and not a particularily yummy ♥ fit will rebid 3♦. Now we are 1) game forced, and 2) opener knows about the ♦ fit. Here a raise to 4♦ is "roman keycard", and you are off to the races on most fairly good slam hands. So this is hardly a fair slam against 2/1 GF as it relates to this hand. It is a matter of personal agreement. Also, I don't think a jump to 3NT ends the bidding if partner is looking at AKxxx of ♦, clearly partner probably has 1) long strong ♥, 2) black quick tricks, and 3) four ♦ or at least three to the queen. So a natural 4♦ bid slam try would be called for. After all, partner was suggesting he could take nine tricks in his hand opposite potentially none in yours and you hold a five card suit to AK or AQ, you might be giving him 5 more tricks than he expected... (with AQ fifth, maybe only 4 more), those still total 12 and 13 tricks.... so to pass with such a holding would be unexpected.

Ben

Ben

I'm guessing that I can easily relay to slam when approriate and that keylime has sequences based on his precision variant. However, neither of those are 2/1 sequences.

In a simialr fashion, I don't think that its fair to describe the system that you play as 2/1.

You are using light openings in the majors
fit showing jumps and a drury like 2♣ raise
a 2♣ opening that included Acol 2's in a major
...

For the moment, we are constrained to a simple 2/1 system playing in a green partnership. I for one think that should have some effect on the bidding.

[the hog]

We open 1H and rebid 3D GF. Another possibility is to rebid 2N which we play as a balanced or unbalanced GF, with 3C now a relay for hand type. However that excludes the possession of another 4 card suit, so I will be loth to do that here. I could always rebid 4H in the sequence
1H 1N 3D 3N to show the given hand type.

[Trpltrbl]

In my eyes a typical 1♥ followed by a 3♥ rebid. My ♦ are just not good enough to bid at 3 Level. Possibly opening 2♣, but it seems if pd has a ♦ hand he will bid them anyway after 3♥, and opps with 10 card ♠ fit might help us out too.

Mike