[Fluffy]

In your most used 2/1 based system (one with real agreements I hope), what does this sequence show?

1♠-1NT* Forcing
2♦-3♣


Bonus question: How do you use 1♠-3♣?

[P_Marlowe]

Neither nor.

We play 2/1 Lawrence style, i.e. rebidding the minor
is passable, ... hopefully this is also a 2/1 system for
you.

We play 3C direct after 1S as weak, 4-7, and the
delayed variant as 7-10.

It may have been sensible to add a monkey option ...

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Fluffy]

Thanks Uwe, I should had added the other option actually.

But I was looking for pure 2/1, when 2/1 is GF, don't you have any regular partner with whoom suit rebid is forcing?, if you do then answer with how you would take this auction with him.

[han]

Sign off, I play a jump to 3C is natural and invitational with pretty much all my partners.

[Elianna]

han, on Dec 11 2008, 03:51 PM, said:

Sign off, I play a jump to 3C is natural and invitational with pretty much all my partners.

Me too. Although I like the idea of a sing off.

[foo]

Fluffy, on Dec 11 2008, 04:18 PM, said:

In your most used 2/1 based system (one with real agreements I hope), what does this sequence show?

1♠-1NT*;2♦-3♣

Bonus question: How do you use 1♠-3♣?

In SA, this sequence shows a minimum (~6-9) with long ♣'s and neither tolerance for Opener's 1st bid suit nor support for Opener's 2nd bid suit.

This is a hand type that some would argue you still need to be able to show when playing 2/1 GF.

But that leaves the 2/1 GF pair with a problem describing Invitational hands of this shape.

Some fix this by playing "2/1 GF except when Responder rebids their suit" to allow Responder to show this hand type. However, many would prefer their 2/1's to be absolutely forcing to at least 3N or 4ofasuit.

The solution many have adopted is to use 1M-3m! as a Invitational Jump Shift showing such a hand. This alows all 2/1's to be absolutely GF while still allowing an important hand type to be shown.
Some pairs put suit quality requirements in place and differentiate between Invitational hands containing a good suit or values concentrated in the suit (1M-3m!), and those of the same playing strength but containing more scattered values (1M-1N.;2foo-2N)

IMHO, the method which use both sequences is better than any of the options in the survey

The price for using 1M-3m! in this fashion is that you give up the chance to use these JS for anything else: SJS, WJS, Bergen Raises, FJS, etc.