[Lurpoa]

Playing "default" 2/1 ,as defined in the BridgeWorld_Standard, with Kokish relais:

How would you differentiate between the following sequences ?

2♣ 2♦
2♥ 2♠
3♥

and:
2♣ 2♦
3♥

what clues are there for that in the BWS2001-document ?

[Zelandakh]

The first sequence just shows a heart 1-suiter. The second sequence appears to be undefined. Where a bid is undefined it should be interpreted as natural. Natural in this context would mean a self-supporting suit and set hearts as trumps.

[mcphee]

First part shows game force with H. Part 2 shows 4H and 6D.

[blackshoe]

Quote

Slow arrival: Except where there is a specific agreement to the contrary, when there is a choice between two game-forcing bids in a particular strain, BWS uses “slow arrival” (a jump is either stronger than a simple bid or it is a “picture bid” with a specific descriptive meaning).

I suppose you could agree either of the two previously mentioned meanings and still fall within this paragraph. I prefer Zel's, but that's just my opinion.

[Lurpoa]

blackshoe, on 2010-November-13, 07:15, said:

I suppose you could agree either of the two previously mentioned meanings and still fall within this paragraph. I prefer Zel's, but that's just my opinion.

Agreed, provided that "slow arrival" is applicable. But, are both sequences necessary GF ? ( a condition needed to have that principle applied ).

Besides I have difficulties understanding that principle, the way it is written down in BWS2001: a jump, is quicker, not slower; and would be more strong ? Can somebody enlighten me ?

Using the other default: "when a bid could be natural, it is", I incline for:

2♣ 2♦
3♥ as natural and an invite, to partner, if he is not completely minimum (1 trick), to bid game.

As a corolarry
2♣ 2♦
2♥ 2♠
3♥ would be GF, with a superhand.

Would that be an acceptable interpretation, or am I stretching too much ?

[Zelandakh]

The 2C opening is GF except for the sequence 2C - 2D - 2NT. It is possible to bundle major suit Acol 2s into 2C but that is not part of BWS. It is better to play 2H as an immediate double negative (non-forcing) when using this method.

[Lurpoa]

Zelandakh, on 2010-November-13, 14:08, said:

The 2C opening is GF except for the sequence 2C - 2D - 2NT. It is possible to bundle major suit Acol 2s into 2C but that is not part of BWS. It is better to play 2H as an immediate double negative (non-forcing) when using this method.

Is 2♣ really always GF ? Or can it hide "Acol2 hands" (8 or 9 playing tricks) ?

BWS2001 doucument, para IV D said:

After a two-diamond response and a natural simple new-suit rebid by opener, responder's cheapest minor-suit bid through three diamonds is a double negative (after which opener's same-suit rebid of three of a major may be passed), new-suit single jump is a splinter raise, and double raise is a picture bid (strong trumps and little else).

According this:

2♣ 2♦
2♠ 3♣=double negative
3♠ may now be passed.

But what if the opener's color is ♥. That is were I think the two earlier discussed sequences could be usefull.

Please comment. Thank you.

[pooltuna]

Zelandakh, on 2010-November-13, 05:42, said:

The first sequence just shows a heart 1-suiter. The second sequence appears to be undefined. Where a bid is undefined it should be interpreted as natural. Natural in this context would mean a self-supporting suit and set hearts as trumps.

and demand qbidding start.

[Lurpoa]

Putting it all together, I agree with Zelandakh:

2♣ 2♦
2♥ 2♠
3♥ may be passed (the 2club opene has the direct 3♥ and 4♥ availble to show other hands.

and:
2♣ 2♦
3♥ Is GF, setting H as trumps, and asking to start a cue-bid sequence.

[Zelandakh]

The 2C - 2D - 2H - 2S - 3H and 2C - 2D - 2S - 3C - 3S sequences should not be passable in BWS. Opener can still hold a rock-crusher here and is exploring for the best fit. The "2D wait, 2H natural positive" method does not work well with the scheme where 2C can contain a major suit Acol 2. The 3m double negative option is more of a warning to Opener not to expect any help in a future slam probe.

[Lurpoa]

YES, sorry, made a mistake.... it should read:

Putting it all together, I agree with Zelandakh:

2♣ 2♦
2♥ 3♣ =double Negative
3♥ may be passed (the 2club opener has the direct 3♥ and 4♥ available to show other hands.) (the BWS2001 is very explicit)

and:
2♣ 2♦
3♥ Is GF, setting H as trumps, and asking to start a cue-bid sequence.

[blackshoe]

If you're playing Kokish Relay, responder cannot bid 3♣ after opener's 2♥, he must bid 2♠. So there is no "second negative".

[Lurpoa]

Oh yes, got it wrong again:

use of double negative:

2♣ 2♦
2♠ 3♣
3♠ .... can now be passed

and similar


2♣ 2♦
2♥ 2♠
3♥ may be passed

and as a consequence
2♣ 2♦
3♥ Is GF, setting H as trumps, and asking to start a cue-bid sequence.

Does all this make sence ?

[blackshoe]

As I understand Kokish Relay, the 3♥ bid in your sequence is still forcing.

Frankly, I think if you have a suit-oriented hand with which you are not willing to force to game, you should probably not open it 2♣.

[Lurpoa]

blackshoe, on 2010-November-15, 04:36, said:

As I understand Kokish Relay, the 3♥ bid in your sequence is still forcing.

Frankly, I think if you have a suit-oriented hand with which you are not willing to force to game, you should probably not open it 2♣.

There is probably a lot of truth in what you are saying. But comming back to the initial question: what difference is there between the two sequences ?

[blackshoe]

I would say that 3♥ in 2♣-2♦-2♥-2♠-3♥ shows a GF with at least 5 hearts, much like 2♣-2♦-2♠ shows a GF with 5+ spades. 2♣-2♦-3♥/3♠ shows an independent major suit and demands control-bids if responder has any.

[FrancesHinden]

You are asking people to explain inferences in a system (BWS) that no-one actually plays.
I can tell you the difference in my methods, but I play a 2C opening as forcing to game (or 2NT).

[karlson]

It seems normal to me if the first sequence shows 6+ hearts but does not rule out other strains. The second sequence does rule out other strains. Both should be GF.