[MrAce]

AJxxxx
QTxx
x
Ax

We open 1♠
Pd responds 2♦ (2/1 GF)

We had a disagreement. Me and another regular forum member ( a good player )

I think bidding 2♥ is mandatory and i don't think this is a matter of style either. Imo this is ABC of bridge. While my friend disagrees with me and thinks this hand should rebid 2♠ due to lack of extras. If it was someone else than him i wouldnt care much, but now i am a bit curious what other people think, since i usually like this guy's opinions.

What is you opinion on the subject ?

[jillybean]

I am not ashamed of my opening but don't believe that this is warrants a 2♥ bid. I hear that we are in
gf and would be content with 2♠. But, I wouldn't be upset if partner chose 2♥ with this hand.
Interesting, I look forward to the expert replies.

[rmnka447]

2 H is right with this hand so long as partner undertstands that a 2 H bid can be made on a minimum.

There are several reasons why this should be done.

First, it allows the partnership to identify that a 4-4 heart fit exists when a 5-3 spade fit also exists. In that case, playing in the 4-4 fit allows you to potentially use the long spades for discarding losers. So, it is normally preferable to do so. It also prevents you from losing the heart suit altogether. Give partner a fairly flat 13 with 3 Spades and 4 Hearts -- the likely rebid after a 2 S minimum rebid is 4 S.

Second, it makes responder's rebids and subsequent bids cleaner, clearer. If you are forced to bid 2 S with the hand you gave, then what would the following sequence (opponents passing throughout) show -- 1 S - 2 D - 2 S - 3 H - 3 S - 4 S? Could partner just be checking for a 4-4 H fit? Or, is partner showing a hand with extras, a spade fit, and C shortness? Allowing opener to rebid 2 H with your example hand limits this sequence to the latter. It also allows responder to adhere to a basic tenet of 2/1 bidding that responder adds value to his hand anytime he bids a new suit after opener's rebid.

Third, it may make opener's subsequent rebids easier. After the following sequence -- 1 S - 2 D - 2 S - 2 NT - ? -- what do you bid with your example hand? Either 3 H or 3 S might be right depending on what responder holds. But after 1 S - 2 D - 2 H - 2 NT, you have an easy 3 S bid and have fully described your hand.

[the hog]

This is an obvious 2H bid. What does extras or the lack of them have to do with the price of fish in Nepal? I cannot understand anyone not bidding 2H on this and was very surprised by Aguahombre's comment in the other thread.

[petterb]

2♠ instead of 2♥ with this hand is just silly. With AQJxxx/Txxx/x/Ax 2♠ is fine.

[Phil]

Why is this even be discussed?

I mean if you have a 6♠ and 4 of a minor and partner bids 1N it's fine if you want to rebid the major instead of showing the minor. I wouldn't call that style 'expert standard' but it's an acceptable style in my view.

After a 2/1 skipping a lower ranking suit denies it. There's no 'style' issues here. It's as if someone says its ok to bid 1♠ over 1♣ with 4-4 in the majors and saying, "well that's the way I do it and if you want to play different, go ahead'.

[bluecalm]

I think it's matter of style.
I think mandatory 2H is better style though

I also think that if you don't have good structure after such 2H (ie. 2N relay and one answer showing min) then you are better off bidding 2S and 3H after 2N. Finding info about your range is very important in those 2/1 auctions. Anyway, what is:

1S - 2C
2S - 2N
3H for most people ?

Probably some non existent or very rare hand, it would be better for them to bid in such way with 6-4 and min while bidding 2H first and showing 6th spade later shows extras.

Quote

After a 2/1 skipping a lower ranking suit denies it. There's no 'style' issues here. It's as if someone says its ok to bid 1♠ over 1♣ with 4-4 in the majors and saying, "well that's the way I do it and if you want to play different, go ahead'.

I find this argument silly.
I mean, if we skip hearts in 1/1 auction then we are stuck in 1NT missing 4-4 hearts fit, it's obviously worse.
Here we can skip hearts and have partner bid 2N/3H with hands with 4H so we won't miss anything while we can find info about range.
Again I prefer always showing 5+-4+ majors but it requires good, detailed system to be playable imo.

[Statto]

I prefer to show 9 cards rather than 6. There was another thread about 664 vs 646 suggesting the latter should be extras, but in an entirely different context.

[aguahombre]

My position in the disagreement with MrAce on this topic was posted in a reply to Phil....another respected poster who also disagrees with me (Most respected posters often disagree with me; my frequently minority views are based on a lot of other systemic issues and inferences which they do not have). I repeat it, here:

When something is part of a pair's style and preference, that doesn't mean it is correct or incorrect. If I gave the impression that rebidding a six card spade suit in preference to a 4-card heart suit was incorrect, my wording was sloppy. I thought I expressed that there is no particular reason to do so(as a general rule); and that if we did so and later showed the sixth spade, we would have a stronger hand. There might also be hands where the six card spade suit is so bad, and the 4 hearts are so good that we don't really intend to ever show the sixth spade.

[jjbrr]

agree with everyone calling this silly

[shevek]

While 2♥ is clear enough when 2♦ is GF,
not so clear in SAYC or Acol.
The traditional guideline is to show hearts with a decent hand, bid 2♠ with a bare minimum.
Of course texture is a factor.

In SAYC
1♠ - 2♦
2♠ - 2NT

is an invite. Opener bids 3♥ to show a weak 6-4.
With a good hand opener bids 2♥ then 3♠ to offer choice of games.

[Quantumcat]

Bid 2♥, because most of the time partner is going to give preference anyway (after which you can bid some number of spades confirming a fit), and it has the extra bonus of finding a 4-4 heart fit.

Also partner might be about to bid 3♠ over 2♥, showing whatever it shows (maybe 16+ HCP with three card support?) and by bidding 2♠, the 3♠ now has to absorb other hands (like hands with two card support that would have given simple preference over 2♥) and the auction loses definition.

In any situation where one action serves a purpose, and another serves the same purpose but caters to alternate situations as well, you would choose the second action. For example. You have AKJxx opposite xx. Assuming infinite entries, would you take the finesse right away, or cash the ace to see if the queen drops, then take the finesse? Of course you would take the second action. Same thing here!

[MrAce]

shevek, on 2012-March-18, 21:15, said:

While 2♥ is clear enough when 2♦ is GF,
not so clear in SAYC or Acol.
The traditional guideline is to show hearts with a decent hand, bid 2♠ with a bare minimum.
Of course texture is a factor.

In SAYC
1♠ - 2♦
2♠ - 2NT

is an invite. Opener bids 3♥ to show a weak 6-4.
With a good hand opener bids 2♥ then 3♠ to offer choice of games.

Yes that was a 2/1 auction. I dont think it is any different in SAYC either. I dont know the Acol though so i take your word for it.

[Codo]

shevek, on 2012-March-18, 21:15, said:

While 2♥ is clear enough when 2♦ is GF,
not so clear in SAYC or Acol.
The traditional guideline is to show hearts with a decent hand, bid 2♠ with a bare minimum.

Do you have any references to back up this statement about the traditional guideline?

I would bet, that here where I life (Germany) all 2/1 pairs and all FD(+) pairs would rebid 2 ♥ with the given hand, no matter whether they have minimu or more. Okay, "all" is in bridge always wrong, so just everybody who can count his four hearts.

[gnasher]

I think it should be a matter of judgement what to do with this shape. With the hand in the OP, I'd like to be able to bid bid 2♥, because I'd prefer a 4-4 heart fit to a 6-2 spade fit. With KQJxxx Q10xx x Ax, however, I'd like to be able to bid 2♠, because the spade fit is likely to play better opposite 2=4 in the majors.

[wyman]

Statto, on 2012-March-18, 20:47, said:

I prefer to show 9 cards rather than 6. There was another thread about 664 vs 646 suggesting the latter should be extras, but in an entirely different context.

In many (most?) 2/1 systems, 2S doesn't even show 6. So I'll prefer to show 9 cards rather than showing 5.

[Hanoi5]

I've always thought that a minimum re-bid at the 2-level on a lower-ranking suit (than your opening suit) doesn't show extras, just shape. I've always preferred to show 9 cards than 6 (or 5 as someone said) and I respect tha fact that the suit quality may sway you in a 6-card suit rebid but in a 2/1 situation (whether SAYC or 2/1 system being played) I don't think that's even neccessary.

[aguahombre]

wyman, on 2012-March-19, 08:13, said:

In many (most?) 2/1 systems, 2S doesn't even show 6. So I'll prefer to show 9 cards rather than showing 5.

It doesn't show 6 at that particular moment. If partner later finds that you have 4 hearts, then the 2S rebid will have shown 6 in retrospect. Conversely, (for us) if we rebid 2H and then later can show a 6th spade, we have implied extra strength.

I am content to stay in disagreement with those fine, respected posters who choose otherwise. They are undoubtedly content as well.

What is very interesting, however is that this discussion eminated from a hand where rebidding 2H instead of 2S actually would have made it more difficult to explore for the right level in spades because at the top of the 3-level, still only one player (responder) finally knows what trump should be.

There well could be other hands where exactly the reverse is true, (heart-fit hands). However, the partnership would still be better placed because the implication of 6-4 would still be there ---in addition to the knowledge that opener does not have extra values.

[MrAce]

aguahombre, on 2012-March-19, 12:03, said:

It doesn't show 6 at that particular moment. If partner later finds that you have 4 hearts, then the 2S rebid will have shown 6 in retrospect. Conversely, (for us) if we rebid 2H and then later can show a 6th spade, we have implied extra strength.

He can not find out.

Sorry but it is as absurd as trying to find 4-4 ♠ fit after 1♥-1NT auction where 1 NT denies 4 card ♠

1♠--2♦
2♠-- What is responder supposed to bid ? 2 NT ? What happened to trying to right side the NT ? What if his hand is not suitable for 2NT. Then maybe 3♦ when he has 6♦+4♥ ? How will u know 3♥ by opener now shows 4♥ ? What was he supposed to bid with a hand that doesnt have ♣ stopper ? Such as AJTxxx AQx Jx xx ?

[bluecalm]

Those are or valid points but on the other hand:
1S - 2D
2H - 2N
3S - ?

It's very difficult to have sensible auction here if opener could be anywhere in 11-21 range. You only have a cuebid and 4S available here if you want to play in 6-2 spades and this is too little to be able to judge slams reasonably and not to end up at 5 level too often.