[aguahombre]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-April-29, 10:16, said:

I feel the worst crime is not playing an immediate GF 4 card raise response .

You might feel differently if you wanted a partnership auction and opener could value her KX of Diamonds with a dog like AXX AXXXXX KX XX.

[the hog]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-April-29, 10:16, said:

I feel the worst crime is not playing an immediate GF 4 card raise response .

Do you? I would refuse to play with anyone who felt this should show a 4 card raise as opposed to bidding Ds.

[Zelandakh]

the hog, on 2013-April-30, 04:15, said:

Do you? I would refuse to play with anyone who felt this should show a 4 card raise as opposed to bidding Ds.

Sometimes system constraints force this approach but there are ways of catching back up. For example

1♥ - 2NT = GF raise
3♣ = min with shortage
... - 4♦ = good diamonds
4♥ = not impressed

or

1♥ - 2NT = GF raise
3♣ = min with shortage
... - 3♦ = relay
3♥ = void
... - 3♠ = relay
4♦ = diamond void
... - 4♥ = bleurgh

Rather than saying "never" or "always" I would prefer to see it that showing the side suit is consulting partner and putting them in a position to judge, while making a forcing raise is asking partner because we think we can get the information necessary directly. Some hands are better suited to one approach or the other while on others it does not matter. There have been enough threads on this subject to show that both approaches have merits.

[Winstonm]

Zelandakh, on 2013-April-30, 08:02, said:

Sometimes system constraints force this approach but there are ways of catching back up. For example

1♥ - 2NT = GF raise
3♣ = min with shortage
... - 4♦ = good diamonds
4♥ = not impressed

or

1♥ - 2NT = GF raise
3♣ = min with shortage
... - 3♦ = relay
3♥ = void
... - 3♠ = relay
4♦ = diamond void
... - 4♥ = bleurgh

Rather than saying "never" or "always" I would prefer to see it that showing the side suit is consulting partner and putting them in a position to judge, while making a forcing raise is asking partner because we think we can get the information necessary directly. Some hands are better suited to one approach or the other while on others it does not matter. There have been enough threads on this subject to show that both approaches have merits.

I agree. There is no such thing as the perfect system or perfect approach - all have gives and takes. The important thing IMO is to find a style that matches how you visualize the world and is internally consistent. When I was switching back from Precision to 2/1, for example, I found Mike Lawrence's treatments to be quite a comfortable fit for the way I think about bridge so I used his basic structure - which happens to include a major 2-level rebid by opener as nebulous.

[the hog]

Zelandakh, on 2013-April-30, 08:02, said:

Sometimes system constraints force this approach but there are ways of catching back up. For example

1♥ - 2NT = GF raise
3♣ = min with shortage
... - 4♦ = good diamonds
4♥ = not impressed

or

1♥ - 2NT = GF raise
3♣ = min with shortage
... - 3♦ = relay
3♥ = void
... - 3♠ = relay
4♦ = diamond void
... - 4♥ = bleurgh

Rather than saying "never" or "always" I would prefer to see it that showing the side suit is consulting partner and putting them in a position to judge, while making a forcing raise is asking partner because we think we can get the information necessary directly. Some hands are better suited to one approach or the other while on others it does not matter. There have been enough threads on this subject to show that both approaches have merits.

Regardless, for me denying the existence of a good source of tricks is horrible. I strongly believe that j2nt or similar should be reserved for flat hands.

[Winstonm]

the hog, on 2013-April-30, 18:50, said:

Regardless, for me denying the existence of a good source of tricks is horrible. I strongly believe that j2nt or similar should be reserved for flat hands.

I'm with you, hog. There is a huge difference between Kx,Qxxx, AQJxx, xx and AK,Qxxx, xxxxx, QJ.

[phoenix214]

In the system i play the bidding would go
1♥-2♦
2♥(nothing extra, only 5♥)-4♥(Most points in diamonds and hearts)
P
As you can see this bid helps to find out that responder has lots of diamond points but opener has a void, so he clearly passes

[aguahombre]

phoenix214, on 2013-May-01, 07:42, said:

In the system i play the bidding would go
1♥-2♦
2♥(nothing extra, only 5♥)-4♥(Most points in diamonds and hearts)
P
As you can see this bid helps to find out that responder has lots of diamond points but opener has a void, so he clearly passes

I would object to a "picture bid" which has a 1st or 2nd round control in one of the other suits.

[campboy]

I don't see the point of bidding 2♦ if you're not going to make a picture bid. If the auction goes 1♥ - 2♦ - 2♠ - 3♥ - 4♥ then you haven't shown great diamonds and you haven't shown 4-card support. After Zel's suggestion of

Quote

1♥ - 2NT = GF raise
3♣ = min with shortage
... - 4♦ = good diamonds
4♥ = not impressed

you've shown both.

[the hog]

campboy, on 2013-May-01, 16:01, said:

I don't see the point of bidding 2♦ if you're not going to make a picture bid. If the auction goes 1♥ - 2♦ - 2♠ - 3♥ - 4♥ then you haven't shown great diamonds and you haven't shown 4-card support. After Zel's suggestion of

you've shown both.

A picture bid is somethig like

AJxx
xx
AQJTx
xx

or similar.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

#1 2S may or may not be ok, this is partnership agreement.
You either require add. strength for the reverse or you dont.
The partnership should discuss this, indepent of the specific hand,
there are hand, where either agreement works beautiful, and hands,
where is does work terrible.
You may also discuss, if the hand is an opening bid, it satifies the
rule of 20, all points are working, but you have a rebid problem.
#2 3H should show SI, which is ok, you have a GF hand, facing an
unlimited partner.
But of course, you dont have more, hence with no interest from
partner, there is no point in moving beyond 4H.
Add to this the fact, that 4H sould deny the King of clubs and
diamonds, than you will quite often have a slam, that will be at
best 50%, since they will lead clubs.

Playing a style, where 2S does not show add. strength, responder should
be wary do go beyond the 4 level, and opener should be wary to kill to
much space by jumping to game, "partner, I had a submin opening" -
"why did you open in the first place?" - "But I had to open"
For that matter, opener should show the spade control and not bid 4H,but
besides showing the spade control, he should also deny SI => Serious / Non
Serious 3NT, take your pick, you can also switch the meaning of 3S and 3NT,
if you want to go scientific.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[campboy]

the hog, on 2013-May-02, 01:08, said:

A picture bid is somethig like

AJxx
xx
AQJTx
xx

or similar.

Sure. But if you think the original hand is unsuitable for a picture bid (I agree) then you aren't going to be able to describe it very well after starting with 2♦, so you might as well make a GF raise.

[rmnka447]

I'd like to add a little historical perspective to the discussion herein.

Back in the 1960 book "How to Play Winning Bridge", Edgar Kaplan and Alfred Sheinwold provided one of the earliest expositions of 2/1 as part of their Kaplan-Sheinwold bidding system. One of the basic concepts they espoused was that opener's simple rebid of his suit said nothing about suit length, but simply indicated that opener's was a minimum. Any other bid by opener, then would show "extras". The only exception was a 2 H rebid over a 1 S opener which didn't necessarily show extras to avert suppressing a major.

Back then "extras" was treated as 16+ points. But as experience was gained, openers learned they could shade the point count if they had the right distributional hands. So, a hand like S x H AKJxx D xx C AQ10xx is worth a 3 C rebid over 1 H - 2 D while S Ax H AKJxx D x C Q10xxx is only worth a 2H rebid.

This "stone age" treatment incorporates a solid principle of good bidding that with a minimum hand a player should limit his hand as quickly as possible. Responder then has a pretty good idea where the hand is going.

Mike Lawrence in his last 2 columns for newer players in the ACBL bulletin (April 2013, May 2013) has discussed how important it is in 2/1 for opener to be able to rebid his 5 card suit. He refers to it as a de facto default when you are not happy with other bids. He points out that when opener doesn't simply rebid his suit that he has "a classical hand for those choices". (Interestingly one of the hands used for an example from an international competition was the following: S K974 H AK742 D 75 C J2. After 1 H - 2 D, he pointed that three players chose to rebid 2 H with this hand. They were Alfredo Versace of Italy, Tom Townsend of England, and Ming Sun of China.)[Note similarity in value to opener's actual hand here.]

Based on the above (since I still play stone age 2/1 with most of my 2/1 partners), our auction on this hand would be:

1 H - 2 D
2 H* - 4 H

* - minimum

Now I understand that, as a choice, some players may want to bid out there hand pattern. If that's your choice, fine. But it's still important to figure out and agree how to limits one's hand when holding a minimum. Someone has to do so at some point in the auction. Otherwise, you'll be overbidding on too many hands.

Some comments on the actual auction --

I'd ask this question about the auction -- is it really necessary for opener to show 4 spades in this auction? Since it's a game forcing auction, responder could with 5+ D and 4 S rebid 2 S to show that hand:

1 H - 2 D
2 H - 2 S

So chances that a 4-4 spade fit will be missed seem rather slim.

I think what happened to the actual responder here was he took the 2 S rebid as showing a much better hand. A 15-16 hand opposite a 14 point hand may produce slam if the right cards are held. So the responder temporized with a 3 H rebid. After opener bid 4 H, responder probably pictured opener with a big 4 S 6+ H hand. (Think about how opener should bid something like S AKxx H AQJxxx D xx C x. How does opener bid that hand versus the hand actually held?)

Just a thought for opener -- a 2/1 response usually connotes a pretty good suit. So with a void opposite partner's 2/1 response, your hand's aren't fitting well and you should normally devalue it.

[cherdano]

I disagree with a lot that has been said in this thread.
But the main point is that South has no business bidding 4NT - if North has three keycards (out of ♠A ♥AQ ♦K) and a spade control, he would not be bidding 4♥.

[the hog]

campboy, on 2013-May-02, 03:10, said:

Sure. But if you think the original hand is unsuitable for a picture bid (I agree) then you aren't going to be able to describe it very well after starting with 2♦, so you might as well make a GF raise.

♠AQJx
♥ATxxx
♦
♣9xxx

♠Tx
♥K97x
♦AQJT9
♣Ax

1H 2D
2H 3H
4H

Sounds like an excellent description to me.

[cherdano]

Yeah I can't believe anyone would play 2/1 and not use it to bid 2♦ on AQJT9!!!!

[campboy]

the hog, on 2013-May-03, 04:21, said:

1H 2D
2H 3H
4H

Sounds like an excellent description to me.

So you've shown a hand with at least 5 diamonds of unspecified quality, at least 3 hearts of unspecified quality, and enough to game force. That's all true, but not very decriptive compared to Zel's suggested auction where he has showed at least 4 hearts, at least 5 very good diamonds and slam interest.

[P_Marlowe]

campboy, on 2013-May-03, 05:10, said:

So you've shown a hand with at least 5 diamonds of unspecified quality, at least 3 hearts of unspecified quality, and enough to game force. That's all true, but not very decriptive compared to Zel's suggested auction where he has showed at least 4 hearts, at least 5 very good diamonds and slam interest.

#1 The auction given by the Hog is suitable for the forum, the discussion is taking place, it is quite a basic auction, Zels auction involves some artificial stuff.
#2 The raise to 3H showes SI, every GF raise showes SI, as long as it is not a limited GF raise, it also showes a (semi) balanced shape, otherwise a splinter raise would
replace the single raise to 3H.

So all in all: The auctions given by the Hog / given by Zel differ only insofar, that one auction showed 3+ support together with a (semi) bal. shape, i.e. 11 (*) cards and
the other 4+ support, unbalanced shape possible, i.e. 9 cards.
Which information is more useful is depend on the specific hands that have been dealt.

(*) My guess is, that the Hog would also bid similar with 4333 shape, i.e. 5 diamonds are not a sure thing, I also did not look to deeply into Zels auction.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[the hog]

P_Marlowe, on 2013-May-03, 07:06, said:

#1 The auction given by the Hog is suitable for the forum, the discussion is taking place, it is quite a basic auction, Zels auction involves some artificial stuff.
#2 The raise to 3H showes SI, every GF raise showes SI, as long as it is not a limited GF raise, it also showes a (semi) balanced shape, otherwise a splinter raise would
replace the single raise to 3H.

So all in all: The auctions given by the Hog / given by Zel differ only insofar, that one auction showed 3+ support together with a (semi) bal. shape, i.e. 11 (*) cards and
the other 4+ support, unbalanced shape possible, i.e. 9 cards.
Which information is more useful is depend on the specific hands that have been dealt.

(*) My guess is, that the Hog would also bid similar with 4333 shape, i.e. 5 diamonds are not a sure thing, I also did not look to deeply into Zels auction.

With kind regards
Marlowe

No Uwe, in the Hog's regular 2/1 partnerships, the Hog would bid some form of J2NT on this hand. In fact the Hog would bid J2NT on

♠Ax
♥K97x
♦Jxxxx
♣Ax

The Hog believes that 2/1 bids should show a good suit, in other words a source of tricks. Opener would overvalue Hx opposite 5 to the J. However as this is the N/B forum I did not bother to mention this.

[Free]

My auction in 2/1:
1♥-2♦
2♥-3♥
4♥-pass

Imo South has slam interest with a good ♦ suit and ♥ support, so he should bid 2♦ followed by 3♥. However, North doesn't have a good hand opposite ♦ so he should signoff. South has shown what he has and should respect partner's signoff.

A few remarks:
- 2m followed by support shows a source of tricks rather than extra strength. If North would have ♠A, ♥A and ♦K slam already has play.
- I agree with Hog that a poor ♦ suit should bid differently. With a poor suit you don't have a source of tricks, so you shouldn't show one. With a singleton or void you can splinter, without you can use Jacoby 2NT or something similar to show a balanced raise. In that case either player will need extras for slam.
- For beginners I think it's better to treat 1♥-2m-2♠ as showing extras.
- When not playing 2/1 South should probably bid 2♦ followed by 4♥.