[gurgistan]

Hello All,

I have just started playing 2/1.

I am conversant with Standard American.

Say Partner opens 1♥ and I hold the following point counts: 6-9 and 10-12. In Standard American, as long as I have 3 card support I am raising to 2♥ with the lower point count and 3♥ with the higher.

In 2/1, I would need 4 card support to make those raises would I not?

If I only had 3 card support with those point counts then I would have to reach 2♥ and 3♥ via the Forcing 1NT, would I not?

Could someone confirm if my understanding of 2/1 is right?

Many thanks.

[mcphee]

The simple raise shows 3 card support, some play it as constructive some don't. The 10-12 range with 3 trumps is defined as a 3 card limit raise which you show going through the forcing or semi forcing NT response and then raise the major to the 3 level.

[Fluffy]

it goes like this:

1♥-1NT
2x-2♥

4-7 with 3 card support or any hand with doubleton and 6-10 HCP

1♥-2♥

8-10 HCP and 3 card support at least, with 4 card support you obviously upgrade 7 counts and some 6 counts.


1♥-1NT
2x-3♥

11-12 with 3 card support


1♥-3♥

10-11 with 4 card suport.

[gwnn]

don't do it.

just support with your 6 counts normally.

1M-2M=3 or 4 cards, 6-9
1M-3M=4 cards, 10-12
1M-1N
...-3M=3 cards 10-12
1M-1N
..-2M=2 cards with 6-9 or 3 cards with some exceptionally weak 3-5 point hand. opener should not think about the latter option much.
with 12 you'd do better to force to game though.

You can add Bergen raises as well. I think they are fine.

[peachy]

Fluffy, on Jul 7 2010, 06:48 AM, said:

it goes like this:

1♥-1NT
2x-2♥

4-7 with 3 card support or any hand with doubleton and 6-10 HCP

1♥-2♥

8-10 HCP and 3 card support at least, with 4 card support you obviously upgrade 7 counts and some 6 counts.


1♥-1NT
2x-3♥

11-12 with 3 card support


1♥-3♥

10-11 with 4 card suport.

It goes like that for you, but not for others who play 2/1.
Constructive raises are not part of 2/1 unless you have specifically agreed on Constructive Raises of major. Both ways are playable but I prefer to raise when I have a raise.

[Siegmund]

@gurgistan: 1♥-3♥ shows 4-card support in SA too. The only real difference between SA and 2/1 practice here is that the 3-card limit raise in 2/1 goes via 1NTF while in SA it goes some other way (2m then a minimum heart rebid for instance).

Various conventional raises are available in either system.

[gszeszycki]

It is completely wrong to state there is a standard 2/1 set of instructions anymore.
I offer the following options knowing most players might object to me not differentiating between 3 and 4+ card support for major suits (though most do not
have such objections when raising an overcall).

1M p 2M 3+ card support and a hand that falls short of invitational (6-10)
1M p 3M 3+ card support and a hand too strong for 2H not strong enough to be
----------game forcing and not distributional enough for a 1M p 4M bid. (10+ to 12-)
1M p 2N 3+ card support game forcing raise.

Save your 1N forcing bids for hands that deny having trump support it frees up an enormous amount of other bids for better purposes than differentiating between 3 or 4 card support.

The mantra of support with support is readily apparent using the methods shown above. Your p will almost always appreciate knowing immediately if their major suit
has support. Remember that MP is a bit different than IMPS and raise your bidding standards by around 3/4 of a point for invitational and game forcing hands when playing MP.

[junyi_zhu]

gurgistan, on Jul 7 2010, 08:34 AM, said:

Hello All,

I have just started playing 2/1.

I am conversant with Standard American.

Say Partner opens 1♥ and I hold the following point counts: 6-9 and 10-12. In Standard American, as long as I have 3 card support I am raising to 2♥ with the lower point count and 3♥ with the higher.

In 2/1, I would need 4 card support to make those raises would I not?

If I only had 3 card support with those point counts then I would have to reach 2♥ and 3♥ via the Forcing 1NT, would I not?

Could someone confirm if my understanding of 2/1 is right?

Many thanks.

It really depends.
First, you don't have to play a forcing NT in 2/1. If you play a forcing 1NT response, you can bid 1NT then jump to 3M.
Second, if you want to keep low, you can play 2C as a two way bid to show either true clubs gf or 3 card limit raise. You can devise some step response.
Third, if you want to play a straightforward 2/1 without forcing 1NT, you can design jumpshifts to show the difference, for example, you can use 1S 3C as a limit raise then 3D to ask how many trumps.
My system uses the third approach, mostly because it's rather straightforward.

[peachy]

junyi_zhu, on Jul 9 2010, 10:28 AM, said:

First, you don't have to play a forcing NT in 2/1.

I think 1NT (Forcing for 1 round by unpassed hand) is a necessity in 2/1 and that the system would be badly flawed without it.

[CarlRitner]

I think Bergen-Cohen played a semi-forcing 1NT in their 2/1 system years ago and did fairly well. There was a specific "window" of hands for passing so for the most part, it played out as a forcing 1NT.

♠ J7643 ♥ KJ2 ♦ 432 ♣ AK

1♠ - 1NT - ??

On page 38 of "Understanding 1NT Forcing", Bergen recommends Pass.

[gurgistan]

Siegmund, on Jul 7 2010, 06:56 PM, said:

@gurgistan: 1♥-3♥ shows 4-card support in SA too. The only real difference between SA and 2/1 practice here is that the 3-card limit raise in 2/1 goes via 1NTF while in SA it goes some other way (2m then a minimum heart rebid for instance).

Various conventional raises are available in either system.

You play a more sophisticated SA than I ever did. None of my SA notes allow for making distinctions between 3 and 4 card support.

[awm]

In SAYC the raises show:

2M = about 6-9, three or more card support
3M = about 10-12, three or more card support

In 2/1, the raise to the two-level is the same as in SAYC. However, the raise to the three level promises four trumps. This is possible because you have an additional way to raise in 2/1, by starting with 1NT forcing and then jumping in the major. This is used to show three-card support with 10-12 points.

There are many other things which you may be told by various people in this thread. The fact is that there are many additional conventions or treatments which some people play as part of their pet 2/1 (or SA) system which differ from the above. The two most popular alternative methods include:

Constructive Raises, where the direct 1M-2M sequence shows something like 8-10. The weaker hand bids 1NT (forcing) followed by 2M, which is now ambiguous (could be three-card support with 5-7 or two-card support with 6-9 or so). This has substantial advantages when you have the constructive raise (easier to find marginal games or double opponents). When you have the weaker hand I believe it's a net loss (might miss your fit in competition, there are some hands where partner is backed into a corner by the sequence) but it does occasionally have advantages by concealing from the opponents whether you have a real fit.

Bergen Raises, where jumps in the minors over 1M openings show a raise. Playing this method, 1M-2M shows exactly three trumps and with a four-card raise you jump to the appropriate 3m. This has advantages in preempting the auction and can occasionally help you find certain kinds of light fitting games. However, it also forces you to play 3M in some auctions where you could've played 2M, and means you can't use the minor suit jumps for something else.