[kwic]

Hello,

what is the most used system to describe the 5 card major hands after 1NT rebid from opener ?

1♣ - 1♠
1NT - ?

You have 5 cards in spades and a strong hand. I guess that in any system, weak hands are treated by 2♠

Is there any convention (2♣ or something) to find out if opener has 3 spades, or you just have to bid the other minor suit at the 3 level when you have a strong hand?

Than you

[awm]

In SAYC you bid the other minor at the three level for this. SAYC is designed to be a simple system without a lot of conventions...

Certainly many players using a standard-ish system will play one or both two-minor bids as creating a force here (see "new minor forcing" or "checkback stayman" or "two-way new minor forcing").

[RunemPard]

Hey...

There are a few ways to go about this...

http://www.bridgehan...nor_Forcing.htm

There are some others, but these are probably the most popular.


One other thing..The experts forum is mean't to be a place for experts to post and discuss bridge. If you posted here hoping to get experts to reply, this is pointless as they will just as easily reply to this in the Nov/Int or Int/Adv forums.

[kwic]

RunemPard, on 2013-May-30, 09:09, said:

One other thing..The experts forum is mean't to be a place for experts to post and discuss bridge. If you posted here hoping to get experts to reply, this is pointless as they will just as easily reply to this in the Nov/Int or Int/Adv forums.

OK. I posted here because I didn't want people "not-knowing-what-they-are-talking-about" answering.

I will post in an other forum next time.
Thank you very much

[Vampyr]

kwic, on 2013-May-30, 08:54, said:

Hello,

what is the most used system to describe the 5 card major hands after 1NT rebid from opener ?

1♣ - 1♠
1NT - ?

You have 5 cards in spades and a strong hand. I guess that in any system, weak hands are treated by 2♠

Is there any convention (2♣ or something) to find out if opener has 3 spades, or you just have to bid the other minor suit at the 3 level when you have a strong hand?

Than you

If you would like to keep it super simple:

Use 2♣ as your checkback bid. Over 2♣ you show three of responder's major or three of the other major (else 2♦). If you have both, bid the hearts first.

If opener hits responder's major, 3 of that major is invitational. Otherwise 2-level rebids are invitational and 3-level are forcing.

You keep a natural 2♦ rebid by responder.

I'm sure the above is not optimal, particularly since it is probably better to use both minors to check back, but this scheme avoids ambiguous auctions and you will rarely find a hand that would have benefited from a more sophisticated treatment.

[jallerton]

Vampyr, on 2013-May-30, 11:06, said:

If you would like to keep it super simple:

Use 2♣ as your checkback bid. Over 2♣ you show three of responder's major or three of the other major (else 2♦). If you have both, bid the hearts first.

If opener hits responder's major, 3 of that major is invitational. Otherwise 2-level rebids are invitational and 3-level are forcing.

You keep a natural 2♦ rebid by responder.

I'm sure the above is not optimal, particularly since it is probably better to use both minors to check back, but this scheme avoids ambiguous auctions and you will rarely find a hand that would have benefited from a more sophisticated treatment.

I agree that your suggested system in not optimal, but not about the "super simple" part. Responder will often want to find out about Opener holding 3-card support for Responder's major, but I can't see why it's a good idea for Opener to show three cards in the other major.

[lamford]

jallerton, on 2013-May-30, 14:26, said:

I agree that your suggested system in not optimal, but not about the "super simple" part. Responder will often want to find out about Opener holding 3-card support for Responder's major, but I can't see why it's a good idea for Opener to show three cards in the other major.

I presume that was a typo for four of the other major. I see lots of people playing a puppet of 2C to 2D to introduce all invitational hands (with 2D as game-forcing checkback), but I don't know if this is theoretically better.

[Vampyr]

lamford, on 2013-May-30, 16:26, said:

I presume that was a typo for four of the other major. I see lots of people playing a puppet of 2C to 2D to introduce all invitational hands (with 2D as game-forcing checkback), but I don't know if this is theoretically better.

Sorry, yes I meant four of the other major. I think that 2-way checkback is theoretically better, but 1-way as I have described is simpler and is OK.

[JonnyQuest]

kwic, on 2013-May-30, 08:54, said:

Hello,

what is the most used system to describe the 5 card major hands after 1NT rebid from opener ?

1♣ - 1♠
1NT - ?

You have 5 cards in spades and a strong hand. I guess that in any system, weak hands are treated by 2♠

Is there any convention (2♣ or something) to find out if opener has 3 spades, or you just have to bid the other minor suit at the 3 level when you have a strong hand?

Than you

Lots of gadgets available to be sure, but, not in SAYC.
As AWM stated above, 2 level bids are not forcing.
Nothing wrong with adding a 2 level forcing bid, just be sure to discuss with a partner who thinks you are playing strict SAYC.

Unfortunately you must jump to the 3 level to force. (Yes it's silly)

[Vampyr]

JonnyQuest, on 2013-May-30, 21:28, said:

Lots of gadgets available to be sure, but, not in SAYC.
As AWM stated above, 2 level bids are not forcing.
Nothing wrong with adding a 2 level forcing bid, just be sure to discuss with a partner who thinks you are playing strict SAYC.

Unfortunately you must jump to the 3 level to force. (Yes it's silly)

Didn't see OP specify SAYC. Anyway if playing any kind of checkback system, these 3-level jumps are invitational with (usually) 6+ cards.

[Bende]

I prefer two-way checkback with the following structure

1♣ - 1♠; 1NT -
2♣ = Asking partner to bid 2♦, to play, any INV or choice of games with 5♠
...2♦
......pass = Weak with diamonds
......2♥ = 5♠-4♥, INV
......2♠ = 5♠, INV
......2NT = 4♠, INV
......3m = 4♠-5+m, INV
......3♥ = 5♠-5♥, INV
......3♠ = 6♠, INV
......3NT = Choice of games with 5♠
2♦ = Any GF without a more descriptive bid to make
2♥ = 5♠-4♥, non-forcing
2♠ = To play
2NT = Asking partner to bid 3♣, either to play or choice of games with support for opener's minor and (5431)
...3♣
......pass = Weak with clubs
......3♦ = 5♠-4m, short in other minor (so in this case 5314)
......3♥ = 5♠-4m, short in other major
......3♠ = 4♠-5m, short in other minor
......3NT = 4♠-5m, short in other major
3♣ = GF with good support for clubs
3♦♥ = GF with two good suits
3♠ = GF with very good spades

[FrancesHinden]

Vampyr, on 2013-May-30, 21:54, said:

Didn't see OP specify SAYC. Anyway if playing any kind of checkback system, these 3-level jumps are invitational with (usually) 6+ cards.

Read the title of the thread

[Vampyr]

FrancesHinden, on 2013-June-02, 16:20, said:

Read the title of the thread

Right.

[billw55]

Obviously there is more than one way to handle this ordinary situation.

Playing with a pickup partner, and assuming knowledge of common north american methods, I would think that 2♦ (new minor forcing) is the bid most likely to be understood without prior agreement.

With a regular partner, there is no right answer, only what you both agree.