[paulg]

1NT = 12-14
2C = majors (in a hand unsuitable for double)

---

Your call?

[gwnn]

Can we change to ripstra?

2♦ for me, partner will tell us what his better major is and we'll play there. if they double and pass it to me I'll bid 2N.

[Fluffy]

pass now and avoid bigger damage.

[pooltuna]

Fluffy, on 2010-October-20, 13:53, said:

pass now and avoid bigger damage.

yep unless you can get away with a 2♦ call.

[bucky]

Why would I feel sick? Assuming 2♦ is conventional (asking partner's better major), this is an easy pass. I should actually feel better since we might beat all pairs that use DONT.

[Cascade]

I am not passing. We might make something. Of course that something might be 2♣.

[Fluffy]

bucky, on 2010-October-20, 15:13, said:

Why would I feel sick? Assuming 2♦ is conventional (asking partner's better major), this is an easy pass. I should actually feel better since we might beat all pairs that use DONT.

weak NT so maybe they are playing 2♦

[bucky]

Fluffy, on 2010-October-20, 15:39, said:

weak NT so maybe they are playing 2♦

Hmm other tables may have opened 1♣ instead of 1NT then, and partner might have overcalled 2♣...

[nige1]

paulg, on 2010-October-20, 04:16, said:

1NT = 12-14
2C = majors (in a hand unsuitable for double)

---

Your call?

IMO _P = 10, 2♦ = 8
At pairs there is a case for 2♦ because two of partner's better major is likely to score better than 2♣ when both make.

[Phil]

I'm assuming 2♦ is (initially) pick a major.

I've never come across this sequence, but it seems to me that 2♦followed by 3♣ should ask pard to 'pick a minor'. If I had clubs, I'd just pass 2♣, or bid 3♣ with a good hand.

[Cascade]

Phil, on 2010-October-20, 17:11, said:

I'm assuming 2♦ is (initially) pick a major.

I've never come across this sequence, but it seems to me that 2♦followed by 3♣ should ask pard to 'pick a minor'. If I had clubs, I'd just pass 2♣, or bid 3♣ with a good hand.

Cute idea.

[paulg]

Phil, on 2010-October-20, 17:11, said:

I'm assuming 2♦ is (initially) pick a major.

I've never come across this sequence, but it seems to me that 2♦followed by 3♣ should ask pard to 'pick a minor'. If I had clubs, I'd just pass 2♣, or bid 3♣ with a good hand.

It is surprising how little discussion any of us have had for this simple sequence, but I agree that this seems sensible. Presumably it should show some values and might let partner bid 3NT occasionally.

On the actual hand it would have worked too, as partner was 5=4=1=3 and four of either minor the par score.

[mfa1010]

I think it's very clear to pass (or bid as Phil suggests, of course, if partner is on the same wavelength).

[mikeh]

It seems that evereyone assumes that 2♦ asks partner to pick his best major, and while I see the attraction of that approach, it isn't the approach that I and my partners use, precisely because it endplays advancer whenever advancer has a hand with long diamonds....and in our view this happens more often than hands on which the 2♣ bidder actually has a preference (he is often equal in the majors) AND it is important to find the longer major. After all, if advancer is, say 2-1 or 1-2, the 4-2 may be as good (or bad) as the 5-1 and so on.

Thus to me, this is a routine 2♦ natural, and non-forcing.

If I were saddled (and I know there are hands on which I would be happy to be saddled) with 2♦ artificial, then I'd pass. I would be concerned that Phil's approach of 2♦ then 3♣ might be seen as a gametry agreeing overcaller's major. I know that if I were overcaller, I would be more inclined to treat this sequence as a gt than as an offer to get out in 3♣ when partner could have passed 2♣

[gwnn]

mikeh if you play that 2♣ can be 5-4 it will very often (most often) be 5-4. Responder will often be 2-2 or 3-3 in the majors. Also with 3-2 usually the 5-2 is preferable to 4-3. It's interesting that you think asking for the best major is not so useful, given the % of top players who play it that way (I have literally never seen anyone play 2♦ as natural in this sequence - I would estimate that over 99% of top partnerships play 2♦ artificial). Of course this is not a logical argument for or against it...

[mfa1010]

mikeh, on 2010-October-21, 12:26, said:

It seems that evereyone assumes that 2♦ asks partner to pick his best major, and while I see the attraction of that approach, it isn't the approach that I and my partners use, precisely because it endplays advancer whenever advancer has a hand with long diamonds....and in our view this happens more often than hands on which the 2♣ bidder actually has a preference (he is often equal in the majors) AND it is important to find the longer major. After all, if advancer is, say 2-1 or 1-2, the 4-2 may be as good (or bad) as the 5-1 and so on.

I'm surprised you see it like that. I think 2♦ 'your choice p' is a very strong part of using 2♣ for the majors and not 2♦ or 2♥. Responder being 2-2, 3-3 or 2-3 comes up all the time imo.

Also there are the constructive sequences like 2♣-2♦-2M-2NT, or 2♣-2♦-2♥-2♠ etc. although that is just really a minor detail.

[kenrexford]

If 2♦ asks for the major, what's the problem? I bid 2♦ to ask for the major and then play 2NT. What? I'm not allowed to play 2NT after partner shows both majors? Or just because LHO opened 1NT, weak? I'd bid the same way after a strong 1NT.

[mfa1010]

kenrexford, on 2010-October-21, 13:43, said:

If 2♦ asks for the major, what's the problem? I bid 2♦ to ask for the major and then play 2NT. What? I'm not allowed to play 2NT after partner shows both majors? Or just because LHO opened 1NT, weak? I'd bid the same way after a strong 1NT.

2♦ then 2NT is natural, but invitational. So you'll have to live with getting raised to 3NT sometimes. Or if he has extra length, his rebidding one of the majors. Of course, other times partner will pattern out in 3m, and that would be sweet.

[kenrexford]

mfa1010, on 2010-October-21, 14:10, said:

2♦ then 2NT is natural, but invitational. So you'll have to live with getting raised to 3NT sometimes. Or if he has extra length, his rebidding one of the majors. Of course, other times partner will pattern out in 3m, and that would be sweet.

Sure. And, I think I'm invitational, too.

[Cyberyeti]

Easy pass, and I'll live with it when partner has Axxxx, Axxxx, A, QJ and I make 7, or a 5530 and I'm somewhere silly. I passed a both majors 2♦ with A, K, 10xxxx, 10xxxxx for a huge result relatively recently.