[Chamaco]

Hi all !

I have a problem in the following sequences and I would like opinions.

The only constraint you have to accept is that you use 2/1 ABSOLUTELY GF, so with an invitational hand and a long suit you have to go via 1NT forcing.

This I cannot absolutely give up for many reasons, so any discussion on the fact that it would be better to change it will not contribute to the thread.

Opps silent

1♠:1NT*
2♥: ?

How do you bid the following hands ?

Hand 1
void-x-Qxx-KQTxxxx


Hand 2
void-x-KJxx-KQJTxx
If you would stretch to consider hand 2 as a GF hand, make it slightly weaker (remove a J or Q) so you consider it invitational.

The point is HOW to bid such long minors hand when you do not want to give a preference to the major with the weak hand ?


Thanks all!

[Fluffy]

Call director on both mate, you have 11 cards on each case.

If you mean how to invite/bid your suit on std 2/1 we all have the same problem, some play 1♠-3♣ as invitational, but seems its not your case.

I prefer safe partscores than accurate games so my bid is this way:

1: 3♣ stop in here

2: 2NT I have a invitational 10-11.

[the hog]

Mauro,

Change your responding structure to 1 Major, by making 3m invitational. This seems the best way out of the dilemma and is played by a number of very good players Pszscola, Kwiecken etc. They play it as 9-11 and a good 6 card suit. I have played this and it works quite well and you can bid some nice 3N quickly without giving away too much information. You also make it harder for 4th hand to compete.

Now the weaker hands with a long suit can be bid via the forcing NT and there is no ambiguity as to the strength. Your strong minor hands are bid via your 2/1 of course.

This means you give up Bergen raises - not a major problem imo. Perhaps now it is best to play a 2N response as 10+ limit raise and have specialised responses after this to ask + show with a gf hand and to sign off with a min.

Cheers
Ron

[han]

I would have written the same reply as Ron, but since you specifically said that such replies were not allowed, I won't.

If forced to choose I would choose 3C as to play, just like Fluffy. main reason is that these come up more often, and with invitational hands you can guess to bid game or bid 2NT.

Clearly, you do have a problem (but then, any system does).

[pclayton]

In Lawrence 2/1, 2/1 its not an absolute GF unless opener shows extra via 2N or reverse or jump.

Its not that tough to work out these auctions. I don't like 1M - 3m as the invitational hand either, although its very playable. But to do so means loading too much onto the 2N major raise structure, going as low as a mixed raise. The 3 level gets used to ferret out responder's strength, instead of game / slam probes. This I won't give up.

So - 1M - 1N - 2x - 3m = 6-9 and at least a 6 card suit. No prob.

[whereagles]

eheh.. chamaco, you're getting into the very same things the french pick on to say 2/1 GF sucks

[Chamaco]

First of all, sorry for posting 11 card hands (just got out of a flu... - although it is not the 1st time I did that )

Second point:
sorry all, but I need to keep the followin structure:

1M: ?

2NT = invitational +, 4 trumps
3-level bids = preemptive or Fitshowing jumps

Therefore I cannot have a bid for 1-suited minors invitational, I have to go via 1NT forcing, and for too many reasons I cannot use the repaeat of the 2/1 suit as invitatiinal only.

--------------------------------------


Now the question is:
I know Max Hardy, in his version of 2/1, uses:

1) 2/1 absolutely GF
2) 3 of a minor as conventional raise of the major

Bergen, too, in one of his books, says he prefers 2/1 absoolutely GF, and he uses 3 of a minors as conventional raises.

Therefore, they are in the same situation as I am, in terms of invitational 1-suiters in a minor (they have to bid them via 1NT forcing).
How do they discriminate the 2 types of hands I posted ?
PLEASE DO NOT POST THAT HARDY'S AND BERGEN 2/1 SUCK
WOULD NOT BE A CONSTRUCTIVE POST
Thanks all !

[whereagles]

There's no easy way out, so this is the kind of thing you have to put up with playing 2/1. In fact, I've got to know players that make so many "exceptions" where a 2/1 is not GF that they ended up playing natural, with forcing 1NT as 5-12, where the only 11-12 hand is the balanced one (with or without fit).

[Chamaco]

whereagles, on Sep 29 2004, 12:46 PM, said:

There's no easy way out, so this is the kind of thing you have to put up with playing 2/1. In fact, I've got to know players that make so many "exceptions" where a 2/1 is not GF that they ended up playing natural, with forcing 1NT as 5-12, where the only 11-12 hand is the balanced one (with or without fit).

I'd just like to know how Bergen and Hardy (which both have the same constraints as me) cope with this problem...

[inquiry]

Hi, welcome to my solution.. I keep 1M-2NT as a rasie, I use 1M-3m as fit jump (both meet your requirements).

I play 1M-2D as abosolute game force, and 1S-2H as asbosulte game force.. (that meets your requirment).

I play 1M-2C as three type of hands, one is absolute game force with clubs, one is balanced hand 11 hcp or more, and one is very nice constructive raise or better with three trumps (or four trumps if less than good 10 hcp).. So this is slghlty off your requirement.

What this allows is

1S - 1NT
2H - 2NT <--- to be not "natural"

Here I play 2NT basically as reverse good/bad 2NT (akin to Marshal mile's suggestion for how g/b2NT should be played... so for me....

1S-1NT
2H-3C <--- this is weak hand with clubs

1S-!NT
2H-2NT
?

Here opener knows responder has good hand with a minor, he bid 3C only if he is willing to stop if partners suit is clubs. He bids 3D only if he is willing to stop if his partner suit is diamonds, but not willing to stop if his partner's suit is clubs. You could reverse the meaning and bid 3m with the good hand, and 2NT as lebenshol if that makes more sense to you.

My treatment can be seen at..Unloadiing Forccing 1NT

[Chamaco]

inquiry, on Sep 29 2004, 01:37 PM, said:

Hi, welcome to my solution.. I keep 1M-2NT as a rasie, I use 1M-3m as fit jump (both meet your requirements).


I play 1M-2C as three type of hands, one is absolute game force with clubs, one is balanced hand 11 hcp or more, and one is very nice constructive raise or better with three trumps (or four trumps if less than good 10 hcp).. So this is slghlty off your requirement.Unloadiing Forccing 1NT

Ty Ben,
as usual it is very nice to see you focus on giving answers to the questions given the mentioned constraints rather than commenting on how bad the constraints are...

However, in this case your solution does not fit well with what I had prviously in mind:

I like to play that the 2/1 suit is 5 card suit, "à la Lawrence/Gitelman".
At the same time I like to keep 2NT à la Jacoby (including invitational hands) and 3m as FSJ.

That leaves the problem of the balanced GF hand, so I use 2C as ambiguous:
1) GF with 5+ clubs
OR
2) GF balanced

1M:2C
?

Opener bids now
2D = artificial waiting bid, ask rsponder to describe; if responder rebids 3C, it is single suiter GF with clubs (that's why bid and rebid clubs cannot be invitational);
If responder bids new suit, he has clubs and that suit; if responder support at 2nd round, he has clubs and 3+ cd support; if he bids NT, he is GF balanced, may still have 3 cd support (not 4 cd support, wd go via J2NT)
2M = artificial, shows a hand which is happy to suport a 5 card club suit; responder bids as above;
2oM = natural.

[inquiry]

Chamaco, on Sep 29 2004, 09:58 AM, said:

inquiry, on Sep 29 2004, 01:37 PM, said:

Hi, welcome to my solution.. I keep 1M-2NT as a rasie, I use 1M-3m as fit jump (both meet your requirements).


I play 1M-2C as three type of hands, one is absolute game force with clubs, one is balanced hand 11 hcp or more, and one is very nice constructive raise or better with three trumps (or four trumps if less than good 10 hcp).. So this is slghlty off your requirement.Unloadiing Forccing 1NT

Ty Ben,
as usual it is very nice to see you focus on giving answers to the questions given the mentioned constraints rather than commenting on how bad the constraints are...

However, in this case your solution does not fit well with what I had prviously in mind:

I like to play that the 2/1 suit is 5 card suit, "à la Lawrence/Gitelman".
At the same time I like to keep 2NT à la Jacoby (including invitational hands) and 3m as FSJ.

That leaves the problem of the balanced GF hand, so I use 2C as ambiguous:
1) GF with 5+ clubs
OR
2) GF balanced

1M:2C
?

Opener bids now
2D = artificial waiting bid, ask rsponder to describe; if responder rebids 3C, it is single suiter GF with clubs (that's why bid and rebid clubs cannot be invitational);
If responder bids new suit, he has clubs and that suit; if responder support at 2nd round, he has clubs and 3+ cd support; if he bids NT, he is GF balanced, may still have 3 cd support (not 4 cd support, wd go via J2NT)
2M = artificial, shows a hand which is happy to suport a 5 card suit; responder bids as above;
2oM = natural.

You are two thirds the way home....

I too use 2/1 GF with 5+ cards,
I too use 2NT as jacoby-esque.. with limit raise or better
I too use 2C as true 2./1 GF with clubs or as a balance hand....

Now if you make two slight modifications to your two club bid, you have the perfect solution.

First, don't make it balanced GF hand.. lower the balance part so that 2C followed by 2NT is game invite (if and only if opener shows an absolute minimum over 2C.. if he shows extra, then of course 2NT is game force)... This really isn't much of a stretch.. But this is very important to the question you pose in this thread.. because it means that there is no such thing as a natural 2NT rebid after you respond 1NT. This gives you the ability to harness the 2NT rebid artificiallly to separate good hands from bad hands for the 1NT response. You will find this trick solves the problem you posed here and many others...That isn't too much of a change to your system is it?

I also throw in a "sound constructive raise" to my two clubs response. I did this for two important reasons. First, I like to raise with support, so just as people are now using 1S-3S as four card support weak, I use 1S-2S as three card support weak. So I can go through 2C with a normal constructive raise (8 to 10 hcp) or limit rasie with three card support (11-12). The second reason is to turn the forcing 1NT into a semi-forcing 1NT.

The reason why "forcing 1NT" is forcing, is partner might have a balanced hand and game values, or might have 11-12 and three card support. By moving this hands out to 2C (and you have already moved out the balanced ones) 1NT now becomes "semi-forcing" as responder never has a game forcing hand, and never has a fit for opener (weak fits go 2M or 3M, strong fits go 2C, 2N, 3C/3D).

I think your structure can be fine witjout pulling the raises out of 1NT, but just allow 2C to be game invite balance or better. I think you might consider this minor change to your response schedule of 2C.. opener bids 2D as you said, fine (I use 2D as well on most hand), but rebids 2M on very weak openers. Now if responder has the balanced no=game force hand, over openers 2M, he can pass (to play) in the 5-2 (or 5-3 fit). If he has any other hand, he can keep going. So when opener rebids 2D, the balanced not GF hand can become game force.

Ben

[whereagles]

I read Max Hardy's book a long time ago. What I remember was if it's a jump, it's invitational. Otherwise weakish.

1S 1NT
2C 2/3D = weak/inv

1S 1NT
2D 3C = weak. With inv I guess you must bid 2NT. Not ideal, of course, but it's even worse if you hold

x
Qxx
xx
KJTxxxx

and can't bid 3C now.

[cherdano]

Ben, thanks for reminding about your 1NT-unload thread.

How do you distinguish between invitational balanced and GF balanced after 1M-2♣? Does responder have to rebid 3NT, say after 1M-2♣-2M? I assume a new suit bid would be natural and imply 2♣ was natural 2/1 GF? What do you rebid with the constructive raise in this situation?

Thanks, Arend

[inquiry]

cherdano, on Sep 29 2004, 11:17 AM, said:

Ben, thanks for reminding about your 1NT-unload thread.

How do you distinguish between invitational balanced and GF balanced after 1M-2♣? Does responder have to rebid 3NT, say after 1M-2♣-2M? I assume a new suit bid would be natural and imply 2♣ was natural 2/1 GF? What do you rebid with the constructive raise in this situation?

Thanks, Arend

First, this 2C only is after first or second seat opening bid, after third and fourth it is three card support drury....

Over 2C, opener responds almost exactly as if if it was drury. He will rebid his major if he would pass a limit raise with 11.12 hcp and three card support.. think abou that, if partner doesn't want to be in game opposite a balanced 11,12 with three card support, where does he want to be opposite a balanced 11,12 with two card support? Not game. So if I bid 2C with 11, 12 and partner rebid his suit, I pass. Sure you maybe in a 5-2 fit, but you might be in 6-2 or even 5-3 ... if you balanced hand included three card support). So over this 2M, I play 2NT as 100% forcing.

So far this has worked well.. I guess someday there will be the ahnds were being in exactly 2NT will be better than 2M... but it hasn't happened yet. This means if partner bids 2D, he has more than a dead a minimum. Now, I play 2NT by responder as showing two card support, balanced 11/12, or 16+ balanced (it is now forcing, given openers failure to bid 2M).

The only time a 2NT rebid actually is nonforcing and shows exactly 11/12 is this auction.. 1S-2C-2H-2NT... here opener can pass, because 2H did not promise extras, it just showed 5-4 in the majors.

Now to your other questions...

1M=2C-2M ... does a new suit imply clubs? Yes, anything other than pass or NT promoses clubs.. EVEN A RAISE TO 3S promises clubs.

1M-2C-2M... what do you do with a construtive raise? I pass. with any hand 8 to 12 points and 3 card support I pass tis 2M... if I decide that my 12 points is too good to pass, I jump to 4S. The one thing I don't do is bid 3S, wihch is slam try with real clubs and real spade support.

1M-2C-2M... does responder have to bid 3NT? No, 2NT is now forcing, see above.

How do you distinguish between invintational and GF balanced after 1M-2C? Opener helps. If he bids 2D (extra valuses), then 3NT is 13-15 balanced, 2NT is 11-12 or 16+.. .if 16+ and partner showed extra with his 2D, you will not accepet a simple 3NT sign off.. you can bid 4NT quantattitve over openers 3NT signoff. If opener rebid 2M (weak and pasable), iwth invite balanced, I just play 2M.

Ben

[Chamaco]

inquiry, on Sep 29 2004, 02:18 PM, said:

I think your structure can be fine witjout pulling the raises out of 1NT, but just allow 2C to be game invite balance or better.

Ben, ty very much !

I think I may adopt a part of your suggestion with some modifications as follows, because I hate having an inv+ NT bid rather than a inv NT bid and a GF bid.

I think I'll include the balanced GF hand in the 1NT forcing hand, and keep in ur pseudoDrury 2C ONLY the invitational balanced.

This translates in the following 1NT forcing sequence

1M:1NT
2X:2NT = "à la lebensohl", can show either the GF hand OR the weak minor hand. Opener is forced to 3C, to which responder may correct to D, to play, or bid something else showing the strong NT hand.

1M:1NT
2X:3m is the invitational one suiter.

[inquiry]

Chamaco, on Sep 29 2004, 01:07 PM, said:

Ben, ty very much !

This will solve the problem hand you proposed, let me know what other problems creep in (mostly competitive auctions I suspect).

Ben

[pclayton]

Ben's 2♣ response is curious.....

Although I like the idea; is it legal in the US?

[inquiry]

pclayton, on Sep 29 2004, 02:54 PM, said:

Ben's 2♣ response is curious.....

Although I like the idea; is it legal in the US?

It should be mid chart legal. It is essentially a cross between drury (which is legal on general chart, but only by a passed hand) and 2C as game force (consider balanced game try as drury-like with slightly inadequate support). Barry Crane use to use drury after even first seat opening. This was part of his theory that the three level was dangerous, so using drury allowed major suit game tries to stop in two of a major rather than 3 of a major. It worked in the 60's and 70's and it works today... legal is another issue all together.

Mid chart, again, it will be legal. because of the clause that says "All other constructive rebids and responses are permitted - except for:" and then it list some exceptions, this isn't one fo the exceptions.

Ben