[Cyberyeti]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-July-06, 09:12, said:

I agree with Tramticket - I believe that expert standard has this 3S bid showing better spades, i.e. you would be willing to play 6S opposite a singleton with sufficient strength, and th 1S-2C-2S is forcing even not playing 2/1 GF.

System dependent, in Acol the 2♠ rebid is definitely NF with normal agreements and I suspect that would be true of most people playing a non GF 2/1 over here

[Tramticket]

Cyberyeti, on 2017-July-06, 09:55, said:

System dependent, in Acol the 2♠ rebid is definitely NF with normal agreements and I suspect that would be true of most people playing a non GF 2/1 over here

Timo has already mentioned that these hand type are problematic for 2/1. They are very problematic for Acol.

A 2S rebid is definitely non-forcing in Acol. A jump rebid of opener's suit traditionally showed 7 playing tricks (in the same way that an Acol 2 showed 8 playing tricks). There is large group of hands that fit in between these! Whilst I would not stick rigidly to the 7 playing trick requirement after a two-level response, this hand is still a bit short of playing strength for 3S. I would rebid 2S and only expect partner to pass with a mis-fitting 10 count.

[Cyberyeti]

Tramticket, on 2017-July-06, 10:40, said:

Timo has already mentioned that these hand type are problematic for 2/1. They are very problematic for Acol.

A 2S rebid is definitely non-forcing in Acol. A jump rebid of opener's suit traditionally showed 7 playing tricks (in the same way that an Acol 2 showed 8 playing tricks). There is large group of hands that fit in between these! Whilst I would not stick rigidly to the 7 playing trick requirement after a two-level response, this hand is still a bit short of playing strength for 3S. I would rebid 2S and only expect partner to pass with a mis-fitting 10 count.

We solve this (as you can playing weak NT) by playing 3♠ as say a 13 count with 6 very decent spades, and 2N GF not necessarily balanced, here the suit is substandard for 3♠.

[miamijd]

fourdad, on 2017-July-06, 04:07, said:

1♠-2♣-3♠-4NT---etc.....

6♠

How is this hard?
If you think 3S is an over bid, please consider adjusting the manor in which you count the stength of a hand to include length as well as distribution and HCP.

In standard 2/1, 3S is not only slammish, but also sets trump and shows a suit that will play for at most one loser opposite a stiff. Neither your hand nor your suit is good enough.

Cheers,
mike

[Tramticket]

Cyberyeti, on 2017-July-06, 11:13, said:

We solve this (as you can playing weak NT) by playing 3♠ as say a 13 count with 6 very decent spades, and 2N GF not necessarily balanced, here the suit is substandard for 3♠.

Interesting idea. Presumably you use 3C over 2NT as some kind of enquiry?

[Cyberyeti]

Tramticket, on 2017-July-06, 11:29, said:

Interesting idea. Presumably you use 3C over 2NT as some kind of enquiry?

Actually not, we make the cheapest vaguely sensible rebid, so 1♠-2♣-2N-3♣ says nothing more than "I have a 5th club" so 3♦ would be 4-4 minors.

[Tramticket]

Cyberyeti, on 2017-July-06, 11:32, said:

Actually not, we make the cheapest vaguely sensible rebid, so 1♠-2♣-2N-3♣ says nothing more than "I have a 5th club" so 3♦ would be 4-4 minors.

How do you determine whether opener has a four-card, five-card or six-card suit? Is there enough space to find out?

[miamijd]

ggwhiz, on 2017-July-06, 07:50, said:

Not that I know of or ever played. With the entire 2 level plus a club raise available the 2♠ bid absolutely guarantees a 6 card suit unlike an auction of 1♠ - 2♥ - 2♠.

gg, as winston pointed out, it depends on your agreements. You have to have a "default" bid when you can't make any other bid. 30 years ago, most folks would bid 2NT on hands like:

AKxxx Kxx xxx Kx

after 1S - 2C. That didn't work so well when partner raised to 3NT on

xx Axx Qx AQJTxx

and the opponents took the first five tricks in diamonds. Nowadays, it's more common to guarantee at least Jxx or Qx (if not more) in each of the two unbid suits for a 2NT call. If you aren't going to bid 2NT on the hand shown above, you have to temporize with 2S.

Cheers,
Mike

[ggwhiz]

miamijd, on 2017-July-06, 11:45, said:

gg, as winston pointed out, it depends on your agreements. You have to have a "default" bid when you can't make any other bid. 30 years ago, most folks would bid 2NT on hands like:

AKxxx Kxx xxx Kx

after 1S - 2C. That didn't work so well when partner raised to 3NT on

xx Axx Qx AQJTxx

and the opponents took the first five tricks in diamonds. Nowadays, it's more common to guarantee at least Jxx or Qx (if not more) in each of the two unbid suits for a 2NT call. If you aren't going to bid 2NT on the hand shown above, you have to temporize with 2S.

Cheers,
Mike

So with opener holding a 6-3-2-2 responder can't support with a doubleton? Six of one etc. but what I posted is by far the consensus locally.

[Winstonm]

ggwhiz, on 2017-July-06, 12:24, said:

So with opener holding a 6-3-2-2 responder can't support with a doubleton? Six of one etc. but what I posted is by far the consensus locally.

Perhaps you misunderstood? The issue is that for some (Mike Lawrence used to suggest this) a major suit rebid does not guarantee a 6-card suit so the idea of raising on Jx is moot for them.

[rmnka447]

I also agree with Winstonm's comments.

2/1 does not have any agreed standard approach that everyone uses and agrees about. The ACBL convention card even shows this by having two boxes to check off -- Game Forcing or Game Forcing except when Suit Rebid.

As for a rebid of 2 ♠ showing 6, Max Hardy in his books asserted so but even he had to hedge in his examples. The problem set of hand are unbalanced minimums with 2nd suits unbiddable at the 2 level. After 1 ♠ - 2 ♦ you hold ♠ AKxxx ♥ Qxx ♦ x ♣ Kxxx and the only sensible rebid is 2 ♠. So for Hardy, 2 ♠ guarantees 6 except when it doesn't.

Even a 2 NT rebid has no common definition. I believe Hardy and Mike Lawrence had differences about that bid. One insisted it showed stoppers in unbid suit, the other didn't.

Then there's the question of what bids show extras and what bids don't. Some play 2 ♠ (and sometimes 2 NT) show minimums while any other bid shows "extras". Others just pattern out their hands without regard to strength.

So 2/1 is an approach built around the concept that a 2 level response is at least nominally game forcing with myriad variations based upon individual agreements. It's OK to specify how you'd take a bid but need to understand there are no absolutes.


In the versions I play with my fairly regular partners, 2 ♠ and sometimes 2 NT are catchall minimums, other bids normally show "extras". So our auctions would start out

1 ♠ - 2 ♣
2 ♠ - ?

Here the auctions would vary because some play 2 ♣ as an absolute game force while others play a ♣ rebid could be passed.

For the game forcers, the auction would be

1 ♠ - 2 ♣
2 ♠ - 3 ♣
3 ♠ - 4 ♠ ( 3 ♠ now shows 6)
?

and for the Suit Rebid can be passed bidders, the auction would be

1 ♠ - 2 ♣
2 ♠ - 3 ♦ (3 ♦ because responder has to force with something)
3 ♠ - 4 ♠
?

The question then is whether opener continues on beyond 4 ♠. In the 1st auction, it's more difficult to do so than in the 2nd. But with red suit controls and partner likely showing good ♣, 4 NT is not out of the question. After 5 ♥ (2 without the Q), does opener go on? Not sure, but more likely playing 5 ♠.

[Winstonm]

rmnka447, on 2017-July-06, 13:12, said:

I also agree with Winstonm's comments.

2/1 does not have any agreed standard approach that everyone uses and agrees about. The ACBL convention card even shows this by having two boxes to check off -- Game Forcing or Game Forcing except when Suit Rebid.

As for a rebid of 2 ♠ showing 6, Max Hardy in his books asserted so but even he had to hedge in his examples. The problem set of hand are unbalanced minimums with 2nd suits unbiddable at the 2 level. After 1 ♠ - 2 ♦ you hold ♠ AKxxx ♥ Qxx ♦ x ♣ Kxxx and the only sensible rebid is 2 ♠. So for Hardy, 2 ♠ guarantees 6 except when it doesn't.

Even a 2 NT rebid has no common definition. I believe Hardy and Mike Lawrence had differences about that bid. One insisted it showed stoppers in unbid suit, the other didn't.

Then there's the question of what bids show extras and what bids don't. Some play 2 ♠ (and sometimes 2 NT) show minimums while any other bid shows "extras". Others just pattern out their hands without regard to strength.

So 2/1 is an approach built around the concept that a 2 level response is at least nominally game forcing with myriad variations based upon individual agreements. It's OK to specify how you'd take a bid but need to understand there are no absolutes.


In the versions I play with my fairly regular partners, 2 ♠ and sometimes 2 NT are catchall minimums, other bids normally show "extras". So our auctions would start out

1 ♠ - 2 ♣
2 ♠ - ?

Here the auctions would vary because some play 2 ♣ as an absolute game force while others play a ♣ rebid could be passed.

For the game forcers, the auction would be

1 ♠ - 2 ♣
2 ♠ - 3 ♣
3 ♠ - 4 ♠ ( 3 ♠ now shows 6)
?

and for the Suit Rebid can be passed bidders, the auction would be

1 ♠ - 2 ♣
2 ♠ - 3 ♦ (3 ♦ because responder has to force with something)
3 ♠ - 4 ♠
?

The question then is whether opener continues on beyond 4 ♠. In the 1st auction, it's more difficult to do so than in the 2nd. But with red suit controls and partner likely showing good ♣, 4 NT is not out of the question. After 5 ♥ (2 without the Q), does opener go on? Not sure, but more likely playing 5 ♠.

This is a really good recap. Well done.

[msjennifer]

Tramticket, on 2017-July-06, 04:38, said:

I agree that a heart lead will not always an automatic choice. But I find that good defenders do often find the right lead. Even on your example hand, west might reason that East did not make a lead directing double of 4♦.

Sir,you said all that I did not say as I expected the same reasoning from all others Thanks a lot.

[akwoo]

Agreed, except that I think that opener should bid 5♠ or 5♥ over 4♠ if he or she wants to try for slam. I think it's best to never bid RKCB unless the response tells you 100% what to do. (For one thing, this gives you useful inferences when someone makes a slam try skipping 4N.) Responder will accept either. (It's not automatic over 5♠, but I can't picture a hand for opener that has extras, not solid spades, and no heart control.)

On second thought, 5♥ might be too unliateral; partner is likely to accept with ♠Kx ♥xx ♦Axx ♣KQxxxx which isn't so great.

rmnka447, on 2017-July-06, 13:12, said:

I also agree with Winstonm's comments.

2/1 does not have any agreed standard approach that everyone uses and agrees about. The ACBL convention card even shows this by having two boxes to check off -- Game Forcing or Game Forcing except when Suit Rebid.

As for a rebid of 2 ♠ showing 6, Max Hardy in his books asserted so but even he had to hedge in his examples. The problem set of hand are unbalanced minimums with 2nd suits unbiddable at the 2 level. After 1 ♠ - 2 ♦ you hold ♠ AKxxx ♥ Qxx ♦ x ♣ Kxxx and the only sensible rebid is 2 ♠. So for Hardy, 2 ♠ guarantees 6 except when it doesn't.

Even a 2 NT rebid has no common definition. I believe Hardy and Mike Lawrence had differences about that bid. One insisted it showed stoppers in unbid suit, the other didn't.

Then there's the question of what bids show extras and what bids don't. Some play 2 ♠ (and sometimes 2 NT) show minimums while any other bid shows "extras". Others just pattern out their hands without regard to strength.

So 2/1 is an approach built around the concept that a 2 level response is at least nominally game forcing with myriad variations based upon individual agreements. It's OK to specify how you'd take a bid but need to understand there are no absolutes.


In the versions I play with my fairly regular partners, 2 ♠ and sometimes 2 NT are catchall minimums, other bids normally show "extras". So our auctions would start out

1 ♠ - 2 ♣
2 ♠ - ?

Here the auctions would vary because some play 2 ♣ as an absolute game force while others play a ♣ rebid could be passed.

For the game forcers, the auction would be

1 ♠ - 2 ♣
2 ♠ - 3 ♣
3 ♠ - 4 ♠ ( 3 ♠ now shows 6)
?

and for the Suit Rebid can be passed bidders, the auction would be

1 ♠ - 2 ♣
2 ♠ - 3 ♦ (3 ♦ because responder has to force with something)
3 ♠ - 4 ♠
?

The question then is whether opener continues on beyond 4 ♠. In the 1st auction, it's more difficult to do so than in the 2nd. But with red suit controls and partner likely showing good ♣, 4 NT is not out of the question. After 5 ♥ (2 without the Q), does opener go on? Not sure, but more likely playing 5 ♠.