[flytoox]

Playing 2 OVER 1 in a local tournament, I had a few problems.

Bd1. Both vul, sitting south, you are dealt with
S: T92
H: AQJ54
D: KJT98
C: ---

W N E S
- - - 1H
P 2S* - ?
2S shows a game forcing raise. What do you bid now? Should we emphasize our side suit by 3D or show our shortage by 4C?

[Codo]

side suit- the bid is cheaper and you can show your shortage later.

[pooltuna]

Codo, on Oct 13 2009, 03:56 AM, said:

side suit- the bid is cheaper and you can show your shortage later.

oops too slow and Roland beat me to it

[Jlall]

If you play this method it seems like you should have well structured followups, even if they're simple. For instance even jacoby 2N has well structured followups. I guess I'd just bid 3D.

[andy_h]

I'd 3♦ it. Shows my side suit and allows more space for investigation.

[skjaeran]

3♦ to show my source of tricks for a possible slam.
I can show short clubs later if partner invites slam.

[Phil]

The side suit is more important, and if you are going to bother to play 2S (good idea) as a forcing raise, I'd some up with some definitions of what the follow-ups are. Also, its important to discuss what different bids mean if they interfere.

[neilkaz]

Phil, on Oct 13 2009, 01:00 PM, said:

The side suit is more important, and if you are going to bother to play 2S (good idea) as a forcing raise, I'd some up with some definitions of what the follow-ups are. Also, its important to discuss what different bids mean if they interfere.

Too those that play this method, I ask how much is gained by using 2♠ rather than 2NT as the forcing raise over 1♥?

To me, all that is saved is that now opener can rebid 2NT to show something.

Is that worth the risk of the opp doubling 2♠ either for lead or to steer partner into a cheap 4♠ sac that might not be found since you wouldn't bid over 2NT?
( I do realize that some of the hands that sac 4♠ might have been overcalled 1♠)

Is it worth the loss of 2♠ as a WJS or SJS?

My personal opinion is that all this is way too much to give up and I just play J2NT, but I am asking so I can learn.

.. neilkaz ..who doesn't want to make it easier for opps to interfere in ♠ when his side has ♥

[flytoox]

neilkaz, on Oct 13 2009, 10:18 PM, said:

Phil, on Oct 13 2009, 01:00 PM, said:

The side suit is more important, and if you are going to bother to play 2S (good idea) as a forcing raise, I'd some up with some definitions of what the follow-ups are. Also, its important to discuss what different bids mean if they interfere.

Too those that play this method, I ask how much is gained by using 2♠ rather than 2NT as the forcing raise over 1♥?

To me, all that is saved is that now opener can rebid 2NT to show something.

Is that worth the risk of the opp doubling 2♠ either for lead or to steer partner into a cheap 4♠ sac that might not be found since you wouldn't bid over 2NT?
( I do realize that some of the hands that sac 4♠ might have been overcalled 1♠)

Is it worth the loss of 2♠ as a WJS or SJS?

My personal opinion is that all this is way too much to give up and I just play J2NT, but I am asking so I can learn.

.. neilkaz ..who doesn't want to make it easier for opps to interfere in ♠ when his side has ♥

To me, having 2N as natural balanced game forcing is good enough. As for giving up 2S showing a strong hand, it is relatively a small loss.

[Phil]

neilkaz, on Oct 13 2009, 05:18 PM, said:

Is that worth the risk of the opp doubling 2♠ either for lead or to steer partner into a cheap 4♠ sac that might not be found since you wouldn't bid over 2NT?
( I do realize that some of the hands that sac 4♠ might have been overcalled 1♠)

Its not a small deal, mostly because on paper, 4th chair can double 2♠. In practice, if RHO has spades they are usually bid which is a better weapon against an artificial raise since it usually takes the opener out of singleton showing situation and into natural bidding.

1♠ - 3♣ is less of a problem.

If you play some sort of 1 minor 2 major as artificial, this becomes a bigger issue, since frequently you are talking about a dangerous lead against 3N.

The loss of a WJS 2♠ is not a loss.

[gnasher]

If you don't play 2♠ as spades of some strength, how do you cope with all of your spade one-suiters after, say, 1♥-1♠;2♦?

[jdonn]

gnasher, on Oct 14 2009, 03:19 AM, said:

If you don't play 2♠ as spades of some strength, how do you cope with all of your spade one-suiters after, say, 1♥-1♠;2♦?

2♠ weak, 3♠ invitational, 3♣ then 3♠ game forcing? Of course it's not perfect but there isn't an inherent problem since all hand types are covered. While it's not what I would play with myself necessarily, it's what I have played on over 99% of the bridge hands of my life.

[Jlall]

Ive started playing 1H 2S invitational and really like it fwiw.

On the other hand I think that playing 1M 2N as natural and forcing is completely awful since starting with 2C is way better (opener gets 3 bids in below 3N always) and more logical. I mean you lose in that 2C no longer shows a 5 card suit, whatever.

[kenrexford]

Agree with everything Justin has said:

1. I also play 1♥-P-2♠ as invitational and like it.

2. I also hate 2NT as a balanced force because 2♣ works better for the reasons he stated.

3. I also find it silly to play that 2♠ is a forcing heart raise without a structure as to what happens next.