[MickyB]

Seems to me that there is a lot to be gained here, does anyone do this already?

Cheers

[jjbrr]

My first impression is that 1NT has clubs so frequently that not being able to play 2♣ is sort of scary.

[bluecalm]

Who bid 1NT partner or opponents ?
If opponents I think playing is as majors is both very good and standard.
If it's partner then probably it's useful as playing opener's 2♣ rebid as artificial in any other sequence in "standard" so you don't need to jumpr around just because you are dealt 17hcp.

[hanp]

Inquiry does I think.

[andy_h]

Prefer 2♣ to be natural as you'd like to bid it even with (14)53 hands. Haven't thought about using 2♣ artificial but I can see myself trying to use 2♥ as something artificial.

[awm]

If this is an uncontested auction, it makes a lot more sense to play 2♥/2♠ as artificial (and showing extras).

It's useful to be able to bid 2♣ natural. It's true that you don't often get to play in 2m on this auction when opener is minimum with both minors (opps must have a big major suit fit). But what happens a lot is that opener has mild extras (like say 15-17 high) and you want to have a sort of non-forcing inquiry (i.e. you have game opposite a max 1NT response, but still can play 2m opposite a min).

On the other hand, you rarely end up playing in a major after this start, so it's basically "for free" to use 2M as an artificial one-round force.

[helene_t]

We had a thread long time ago where I suggested 2♣ being forcing here, and I think Inquiry said he preferred to play that.

I can't find the thread unfortunately.

[MickyB]

awm, on Jun 25 2010, 04:04 PM, said:

But what happens a lot is that opener has mild extras (like say 15-17 high) and you want to have a sort of non-forcing inquiry (i.e. you have game opposite a max 1NT response, but still can play 2m opposite a min).

Obviously I've taken your post out of context, but...how about 2♣ as 14-16 without four clubs?

[MickyB]

jjbrr, on Jun 25 2010, 02:32 PM, said:

My first impression is that 1NT has clubs so frequently that not being able to play 2♣ is sort of scary.

Both sides have either two eight-card fits or one nine-card fit, and you've told the oppo that this is the case - no good oppo will ever let you play 2♣, and how bad can it be to commit to the three-level?

[kgr]

Opps silent.
After 1D/1H/1S-1NT-??
We play that 2C is a limit+ inquiry
(2NT and 3C are respectively invite and weak with Clubs)

[FrancesHinden]

I play 2♣ as natural and forcing. Weak hands with both minors bid 3C, natural and weak (you are guaranteed a fit, don't forget).

Responder bids (sort of) naturally: 2D is all minimum hands without long clubs (so must have 3 diamonds), 2M shows extras (so game forcing) with a stop in the suit bid, 2NT is minimum with 5 clubs, 3C is max with clubs, 3D is max with 4D (and hence by definition usually 3343 or similar, because we usually raise diamonds).

This is very effective when it comes up. We've successfully played in 5m a couple of times with a strong balanced hand as opener.

[hanp]

How often do you get to 3NT anyway when opener has a strong balanced hand?

[FrancesHinden]

hanp, on Jun 26 2010, 09:33 AM, said:

How often do you get to 3NT anyway when opener has a strong balanced hand?

About half the times it has come up (which aren't many), we've ended in five of a minor. But opener doesn't use it unless his/her hand looks very suitable for suit play.

[guido]

People as old as me will remember that 1D-1N;2C is forcing in Kaplan-Shwinwold (Background: with a minimum 5-5 you jump to 3C; with a minimum 5-4 you rebid 2D; a 3D rebid would how a real monster.)

While not completely artificial, the 2C rebid was often a 3 card suit (occasionally 2).

The rational was simply that if you belonged in 2C, the opponents would never let you play there, so you might as well make use of the extra bidding room by defining 2C as forcing.

[DinDIP]

guido, on Jul 10 2010, 10:25 PM, said:

People as old as me will remember that 1D-1N;2C is forcing in Kaplan-Shwinwold (Background: with a minimum 5-5 you jump to 3C; with a minimum 5-4 you rebid 2D; a 3D rebid would how a real monster.)

While not completely artificial, the 2C rebid was often a 3 card suit (occasionally 2).

The rational was simply that if you belonged in 2C, the opponents would never let you play there, so you might as well make use of the extra bidding room by defining 2C as forcing.

That treatment -- 2C as forcing, like a reverse -- was played after a response of 1H or 1S but not after a 1N respoonse, even though there is a good theoretical argument (as enunciated by Frances) for doing so.

In a weak notrump context, I've played a 1N response to 1C as promising C, with O rebidding 3C with weak hands and 2C (forcing) with strong ones. The rationale is the same.

David