[luke warm]

i agree mike, i don't see any reason not to show that great support in a game force auction... if i support diamonds later i don't know how p knows i'm this good

[mikeh]

On the BBO6 poll, I elected to raise 2♦ to 3 after a 1♠ - 2♦ auction, holding 6=4. Here, however, I would unhesitatingly bid 2♠.

In the poll example I held bad ♠ (KJxxxx) and great ♦ (AQJ10).

It is not, for me, a matter of extras: the 2♦ bid gave me extras. But AKxxxx of a major suit is tough to hide, and bidding 3♦ makes it very difficult to get back to the major if we are 6=2.

And I rate to be able to show my ♦ when it is important. Responder can make a forcing 2N or raise ♠ or bid 3♣.

Over 2N, I bid 4♦ or 3♦ depending on what 'heat' I feel we are in (at mps I would never bid more than 3, to preserve 3N as a possibility).

Over 3♠, I bid 4♣, giving up on ♦ as a suit, but trying for slam because of the double-fit.

Over 3♣ I bid 4♦: this should show the 6-4, since 4♦ shows extras and therefore reveals that the 2♠ bid was not a space-saving minimum noise.

This is a slam-interested hand as North: you have 4 card support for partner and 1st or second round control in all 4 suits. I am planning on ignoring 3N on all hands on which partner shows 5+♦, and probably even when the issue is unclear: 2N by him might be 2=4=4=3 shape.

BTW, I have not read the Lawrence book, but I doubt that it makes any difference beyond knowing how far 2♦ forced: in all versions of 2/1 I have seen, 2N is forcing (one of the great advantages of the method).

[Chamaco]

mikeh, on Oct 14 2005, 11:39 PM, said:

It is not, for me, a matter of extras: the 2♦ bid gave me extras. But AKxxxx of a major suit is tough to hide, and bidding 3♦ makes it very difficult to get back to the major if we are 6=2.

Agree more or less with all this post.

[kenrexford]

I have no idea what version of 2/1 I play, to be honest. But, it seems fairly logical to have this auction:

1S-P-2D (why anything else?)
-P-2S (if 3D, 3S will show 3-card spade support. So, how find 6-2?)
-P-3C (duh)
-P-3D (preference, establishing fit)
-P-3H (either a cue or asking for a heart stop for 3NT)
-P-3NT (I have hearts controlled for 3NT and no serious slam interest)
-P-4C (I have two top club honors and serious slam interest)
-P-4H (1430 RKCB for diamonds)
-P-4S (one)
-P-4NT (sign off suggestion -- 5C would ask for Queen)
-P-5C (conversion to diamonds better; one last try for slam)
-P-5D (nope -- not going there)
-PPP

[Winstonm]

From what I remember of Lawrence's 2/1 book, a spade rebid does not show 6 but rather a hand that does not qualify for any other bid. He also suggested that a raise of a minor as in this auction should either show extra shape or extra hcps.

I would bid in his style:

1S-2D
3D-4C
4H-5D
P

This nice thing about this method is you know you are facing either a distributional hand or one with extras - IMO, either way you would want to make a move past 3N unless playing matchpoints.

Winston

[Kalvan14]

would anyone consider bidding: 1♠-2♦-4♣?
4 ♣ is a splinter bid, with ♦ fit. Since everyone appears to agree that North hand is not strong enough to bid 3♦ (13 HCP, 4 trumps, a singleton, no wasted value is "not strong enough"?), 4♣ appears to be the most descriptive bids (btw, South, hearing the misfit in ♣ and seeing the misfit in ♠ will be quite happy to stop in 5♦).

As an aside, this sequence (1M-2♦) or the other one (1♠-2♥) is perfect to play 2N by opener as lebensohl (or bad/good).

[tysen2k]

Kalvan14, on Oct 20 2005, 06:33 PM, said:

would anyone consider bidding: 1♠-2♦-4♣?

I wouldn't since it gives up on spades. I would probably bid 3♦ at IMPs and 2♠ at MP.

[junyi_zhu]

ArcLight, on Oct 11 2005, 12:46 PM, said:

Please answer this using the 2/1 methods advocated by Mike Lawrence, not Max Hardy. Please don't answer "in my own system ..."

1. Lawrence uses Strong Jump Shifts.

2. 1♦ - 2♣ is not a game force, just forcing to 2NT or 3 of a minor.

3. 1M - 2x is a 95% agme force but may stop in 4 of a minor if no fit is found and 3NT isn't playable

Scoring: IMP

---

1♠ - 2♦ (Would you ever bid 2♣ instead of 2♦?)
???

What should North bid? 2♠ or 3♦?


1♠ - 2♦
3♦ - ???

Do you look for NT or a ♦ game/slam?

If you have a systemic way to show 6th spade, extra value, you should show it first instead of 3D I believe. You may easily belong to 4S. This hand is easy to handle in my 2/1 scheme, but I won't talk about it. In Lawrence's scheme, it is also biddable.
1S 2D
2S 3C
3D 3H(on the way to 3NT)
3N

[jdeegan]

4♣

A splinter bid with a potentially powerful hand. It works here by exposing the duplication in the club suit, and we can stop at 5♦.

[Winstonm]

A disadvantage of Lawrence's methods is that a 2S rebid does not show a 6 card suit, so rebidding 2S is not a good solution unless you also want to bid 3S and wait to show any diamond support.

It gets a little cloudy, but I believe Lawrence's methods look first for the best game so this auction is passable:

1S-2D
3D-4C
4S-

My understanding is that this is an attempt to play 4S and not a diamond cue bid, which could work out well if the hands were:

AKQ9x
xx
Kxxx
Ax

xx
Qx
AQJxx
KQxx

Note that if opener held AKQ9x, Kx, xxxx, Ax, the "proper" rebid according to Lawrence would be 2N to show the unbid stoppers. Lawrence's methods utilize a lot of negative inference along with some strict structure. I am comfortable playing his style, but I don't espouse it as the best or for everyone. I think it's best to pick the 2/1 style that matches your own beliefs about bidding and go from there.

But then I'm neither Canadian nor Danish, so what do I know?

Winston

[Kalvan14]

tysen2k, on Oct 21 2005, 11:50 AM, said:

Kalvan14, on Oct 20 2005, 06:33 PM, said:

would anyone consider bidding: 1♠-2♦-4♣?

I wouldn't since it gives up on spades. I would probably bid 3♦ at IMPs and 2♠ at MP.

I don't think we would loose ♠ for game: 4♠ over 4♣ (splinter) is 99% a choice of contract. We might loose ♠ for slam, but I am almost sure that slam in ♦ would be likely to be better than slam in ♠.
In this particular case, it clarifies the misfit.