[semeai]

In all of my serious partnerships, at least past the beginner/intermediate stage, I've played 2/1 GF, so I don't have much of an understanding of good treatments of non-GF 2/1.

Which styles of non-GF 2/1 are used effectively by expert pairs (let's exclude "GF unless suit rebid" from the discussion, as that's almost 2/1 GF.)? How do they manage choice of games decisions and slam interest auctions reasonably? Are there any little gadgets (not big ones like relay systems) that help out --- I'm thinking something analogous to how e.g. Bart helps 2/1 systems on hands that non-GF 2/1 is better at?

By style I mean answers to questions like: (assume the auction was 1S-2D)
a) Is 2S or 2N the catchall?
b) Does 2D promise a rebid? If not, which of 2S, 2N, 3D are forcing?
c) If 1S-2D;3D or worse 1S-2H;3H is NF, how do you bid with a good raise?
d) What is forcing after 1S-2D;2H? How does bidding the 4th suit work here?

My impression is that at the least there are expert "non-GF 2/1" American, British, and French pairs which answer some of these differently, so hopefully the answer is that multiple styles work well and have had some modern development leading to good cog and slam auctions. What are they? Any resources/write-ups not aimed at beginners/intermediates to look at?

[manudude03]

In SAYC, responder promises a rebid (unless opener rebids game).

I believe 2S is the catchall bid.

Since responder promises a rebid, you don't need to worry about b) or c).
As for d), it's just the same way as say 1C-1H-1S-2D, just a level higher. Opener will have to be a little careful not to endplay responder though. Those auctions are often messy. It is most often bid for lack of a stopper though.

[hotShot]

IIRC the French 2/1 promise a rebid,

As for the British (Acol) 2/1, I think they use stuff like New Minor forcing and 3rd/4th suit forcing.

[semeai]

manudude03, on 2011-June-20, 09:49, said:

As for d), it's just the same way as say 1C-1H-1S-2D, just a level higher. Opener will have to be a little careful not to endplay responder though. Those auctions are often messy. It is most often bid for lack of a stopper though.

In this case, after 1S-2D;2H, wouldn't 3C be bid hands with long diamonds and GF values and hands with 4 hearts and GF values also? (Possibly also spade raises with GF values, but maybe 3S is GF if all limit raises just bid 1S-3S.)

It seems a lot to untangle, especially if you then want to e.g. explore for slam below 4H if there's a 4-4 heart fit. For example, maybe it goes 1S-2D;2H-3C;3x-?, x = anything but diamonds. Now how do you have an intelligent heart auction?

Probably there's a solution (I can pretend to make up some, but none too pleasing). Are there expert pairs that play this style of Standard American? (Added: or other style of non-GF 2/1 for which the answer to (d) is the same.)

[gordontd]

semeai, on 2011-June-20, 09:39, said:

By style I mean answers to questions like: (assume the auction was 1S-2D)
a) Is 2S or 2N the catchall?
b) Does 2D promise a rebid? If not, which of 2S, 2N, 3D are forcing?
c) If 1S-2D;3D or worse 1S-2H;3H is NF, how do you bid with a good raise?
d) What is forcing after 1S-2D;2H? How does bidding the 4th suit work here?

a) When playing a weak NT, or a French style where a 2NT rebid shows a strong NT, 2NT is forcing so the catchall is 2♠.

b) In Acol, 2♦ does not promise a rebid, but a new suit by opener is a one-round force. Some play that 2/1s are forcing to 2NT, but it's not a common treatment.

c) Playing that 1♠-2♦-3♦ is NF, you have to do something else to force: some will rebid 2NT (forcing) even with support; splintering to 3♥ is another option; playing a 3NT rebid as showing something like 5242 15-17 is also a possibility.

d) In Acol after 1♠-2♦-2♥ nothing is forcing except FSF.

(These answers assume a fairly modern style of Acol - traditionally even fewer sequences were forcing).

[semeai]

gordontd, on 2011-June-20, 10:08, said:

c) Playing that 1♠-2♦-3♦ is NF, you have to do something else to force: some will rebid 2NT (forcing) even with support; splintering to 3♥ is another option; playing a 3NT rebid as showing something like 5242 15-17 is also a possibility.

That's a nice meaning for 3NT. Is 1S-2H;3N played as 5-4-2-2 by some as well? Then you could always splinter or bid 3NT with a GF heart raise and still have some room for cuebidding.

gordontd, on 2011-June-20, 10:08, said:

d) In Acol after 1♠-2♦-2♥ nothing is forcing except FSF.

Are there any nice solutions to the problems with this, e.g. as in my post just above yours, or is it all an uncomfortable mess?

Also, are there adv/exp level Acol systems books that discuss things like the 3NT rebid above?

[gordontd]

semeai, on 2011-June-20, 10:04, said:

In this case, after 1S-2D;2H, wouldn't 3C be bid hands with long diamonds and GF values and hands with 4 hearts and GF values also? (Possibly also spade raises with GF values, but maybe 3S is GF if all limit raises just bid 1S-3S.)

In the Acol case, 1♠-3♠ shows a four-card limit raise, and the delayed raise shows a three-card limit raise, so all of those other hands need to go through 3♣.

semeai, on 2011-June-20, 10:04, said:

It seems a lot to untangle, especially if you then want to e.g. explore for slam below 4H if there's a 4-4 heart fit. For example, maybe it goes 1S-2D;2H-3C;3x-?, x = anything but diamonds. Now how do you have an intelligent heart auction?

I think you've correctly identified one of the weaknesses of the system.

[andy_h]

Although I have played 2/1 GF throughout my life, I do know that in a non-2/1 GF framework 1S-2H-3H and 1S-2x-2H-3H have to be GF otherwise I think it's unplayable. Stopping on a dime on 3H is a very small target when you could benefit that as a GF which would give you the amount of space for a potential slam. You might push yourself too high when both players are minimum (opener 11 and responder 10) but any time opener has a 12 or 13 count then I'm sure you'll be in a normal game. This is probably not "standard" in SAYC but it's definitely a good agreement to have.

[awm]

Here's what Elianna and I play, based loosely on SAYC:

(1) After 1♠-2♥, rebidding 2♠ is a catch-all. This is forcing one round and could be any minimum hand, or a hand with extras where no other bid is suitable. All other rebids by opener are forcing to game and show 15+ hcp (perhaps a bit lighter with a good fit or extra shape). This includes 1♠-2♥-2NT and 1♠-2♥-3♥. If opener rebids 2♠, then responder's non-forcing rebids below game are 2NT and 3♥. Other rebids by responder are game-forcing and (basically) natural. Note that 1♠-2♥-2♠-3♠ is forcing; we take another route with our 3-card limit raises (so 2/1 is GF if we have a 3+ card fit for opener).

(2) Sequences after 1♥-2♦ and 1♠-2♦ are similar to the above; however the specific sequence 1♠-2♦-2♥ is ambiguous about strength. In this sequence, responder's 2♠ rebid is not forcing (normally honor-doubleton support and invitational values), 3♥ is not forcing, 2NT, and 3♦ are not forcing.

(3) After 1♥-2♣, we use 2♦ as a catch-all. It shows either a natural diamond rebid, or any minimum hand. All other rebids by opener are forcing to game (15+ or a bit less with a fit or extra shape). After 1♥-2♣-2♦, responder's non-forcing non-game rebids are 2♥ (honor-doubleton), 2NT, and 3♣. Raising diamonds is a game force because opener doesn't need a real suit there, and tends to show extra shape (like a 4-6 hand).

(4) After 1♠-2♣, we similarly use 2♦ as a catch-all but it now denies holding 4+♥. Thus 1♠-2♣-2♥ is ambiguous about strength. In these auctions any of 2♠, 2NT, 3♣ are non-forcing, as is 1♠-2♣-2♥-3♥.

(5) Fourth suit forcing to game is available in 2/1 sequences, especially 1M-2♣-2♦.

(6) We have special agreements about the sequence 1♠-2m-2♥ to force game in hearts. Here we have four of responder's minor as a game-forcing heart raise with a strong holding in the minor rebid, four of the other minor is a game-forcing heart raise with control of that minor (we make the cheaper call if both are valid). We can also game force by bidding the fourth suit and then correcting to hearts; this shows a slam-interested hand unsuitable for either of the 4m jumps. And of course we can bid 4♥ (which is quite minimum and "to play")

(7) The one hand type that is very difficult to bid in this method is responder's single-suited game force. We use strong jump shifts to the three level (1M-3m or 1♠-3♥) to show this specific hand type.

Compared to 2/1, we do quite a bit better on the invitational responder hands. We have trouble on some slam auctions where responder has a big hand and opener is minimum (need to temporize to GF) but we have a potential advantage on slam auctions where opener has extras (because opener often shows his 15+ at second turn).

[mgoetze]

semeai, on 2011-June-20, 09:39, said:

[left] In all of my serious partnerships, at least past the beginner/intermediate stage, I've played 2/1 GF, so I don't have much of an understanding of good treatments of non-GF 2/1.

There are several other treatments, they are:
(a) 2/1 promises a rebid
(b) 2/1 forcing to 2NT
© 2/1 "merely" forcing 1R

I think (a) is by far the most popular approach, with (b) and © largely having fallen out of favor. I do think (b) works well on 1♦-2♣ auctions, though. I'll answer the rest based on (a).

Quote

a) Is 2S or 2N the catchall?

2NT is usually agreed to show either the same range as a 1NT opener (e.g. 15-17) or the below it (e.g. 12-14). I believe the former is more popular, but this depends to some extent on how often you open 1NT with 5-card majors.

Quote

b) Does 2D promise a rebid? If not, which of 2S, 2N, 3D are forcing?

See above: normally, yes.

Quote

c) If 1S-2D;3D or worse 1S-2H;3H is NF, how do you bid with a good raise?

If 2/1 promises a rebid then raising responder's 2/1 should show extras and thus be game-forcing (though I suppose some people play that you can get out with 1x-2y-3y-3x). If you are playing that 2/1 is forcing through 2NT you could temporize with 2♠ first. If you are playing that 2/1 is merely forcing and nothing else, you are stuck, and I'm sure that's one of the reasons experts don't play stone-age ACOL anymore.

Quote

d) What is forcing after 1S-2D;2H? How does bidding the 4th suit work here?

3♣ is an artificial game-force, whereas 2♠, 2NT and 3♦ are all non-forcing. I'm not sure about 3♥, Andy does make a good point that it is likely better played as forcing but I think many play it as NF.

Disclaimer: I am not an expert.

[lowerline]

semeai, on 2011-June-20, 09:39, said:

In all of my serious partnerships, at least past the beginner/intermediate stage, I've played 2/1 GF, so I don't have much of an understanding of good treatments of non-GF 2/1.

Which styles of non-GF 2/1 are used effectively by expert pairs (let's exclude "GF unless suit rebid" from the discussion, as that's almost 2/1 GF.)? How do they manage choice of games decisions and slam interest auctions reasonably? Are there any little gadgets (not big ones like relay systems) that help out --- I'm thinking something analogous to how e.g. Bart helps 2/1 systems on hands that non-GF 2/1 is better at?

By style I mean answers to questions like: (assume the auction was 1S-2D)
a) Is 2S or 2N the catchall?
b) Does 2D promise a rebid? If not, which of 2S, 2N, 3D are forcing?
c) If 1S-2D;3D or worse 1S-2H;3H is NF, how do you bid with a good raise?
d) What is forcing after 1S-2D;2H? How does bidding the 4th suit work here?

My impression is that at the least there are expert "non-GF 2/1" American, British, and French pairs which answer some of these differently, so hopefully the answer is that multiple styles work well and have had some modern development leading to good cog and slam auctions. What are they? Any resources/write-ups not aimed at beginners/intermediates to look at?

Playing 2/1 10+ myself, I follow these rules after 1M-2x:

• 2nt is gf, by opener or by responder, e.g. 1♠-2♦-2nt or 1♠-2♣-2♠-2nt
• Support for openers second suit is gf, e.g. 1♠-2♣-2♦-3♦
• Support for responders suit is gf, e.g. 1♠-2♦-3♦
• These are non-forcing: e.g. 1♠-2♦-2♥-3♦ (suit rebid) or 1♠-2♦-2♥-2♠ (preference) or 1♠-2♥-2♠-3♠ (inv)

Any strong hand that doesn't have a forcing descriptive bid goes via the gf 2nt. With shortness in openers major responder will have to respond 1nt with 10, occasionally with 11.

Steven

[semeai]

Thanks Adam, that's a nice setup. Do you play it 11+ or 10+, and is 1NT still (semi-)forcing? The heart raises in (6) seem decent. It seems at first glance not as good as just playing 2/1 GF on those hands perhaps, but maybe it's as though you've already bid a "serious" cuebid and not too much different from a 2/1 GF auction playing non-serious 3NT. The artificial catchalls seem good, and are the sort of gadgets I was looking for with my "analogous to bart" comment.

A thought: Does anyone play transfers starting with the 4th suit? For example, on 1S-2D;2H-?, one could play that 3C shows a 3D rebid (F or not), 3D shows a 3H rebid (F or not), and 3H is "4th suit," basically always stopper asking (or maybe 3H is a spade raise, and 3S is stopper asking, but the opportunity to temporize after the 4th suit may be more valuable than the extra space after a spade raise). Are there problems with this?

[semeai]

lowerline, on 2011-June-21, 07:35, said:

These are non-forcing: e.g. 1♠-2♦-2♥-3♦ (suit rebid) or 1♠-2♦-2♥-2♠ (preference) or 1♠-2♥-2♠-3♠ (inv)

Where do opener and responder end up with non-GF values and a 5-2 spade fit after 1S-2H? Is the last auction how such hands would be bid?

Quote

Any strong hand that doesn't have a forcing descriptive bid goes via the gf 2nt. With shortness in openers major responder will have to respond 1nt with 10, occasionally with 11.

That's an interesting thought, to only bid 2/1 on invitational hands with a doubleton (or better) spade.

[awm]

semeai, on 2011-June-21, 07:37, said:

Thanks Adam, that's a nice setup. Do you play it 11+ or 10+, and is 1NT still (semi-)forcing? The heart raises in (6) seem decent. It seems at first glance not as good as just playing 2/1 GF on those hands perhaps, but maybe it's as though you've already bid a "serious" cuebid and not too much different from a 2/1 GF auction playing non-serious 3NT. The artificial catchalls seem good, and are the sort of gadgets I was looking for with my "analogous to bart" comment.

A thought: Does anyone play transfers starting with the 4th suit? For example, on 1S-2D;2H-?, one could play that 3C shows a 3D rebid (F or not), 3D shows a 3H rebid (F or not), and 3H is "4th suit," basically always stopper asking (or maybe 3H is a spade raise, and 3S is stopper asking, but the opportunity to temporize after the 4th suit may be more valuable than the extra space after a spade raise). Are there problems with this?

Our official 1NT range is 5-10; it is not forcing. The 2/1 bids are 11+ on balanced hands, but 10 is pretty common with a bit of shape. Our major suit raise structure uses 1M-3M as a limit raise and 1M-2NT as limit raise or better (we also play splinter raises). Note that we have two ways to make limit raises, so we can distinguish between three and four card ones (actually our distinction is that the 2NT limit raise is a "bad limit raise, usually 3" and the 3M limit raise is a "good limit raise, usually 4").

[Gerben42]

In the Dutch magazine IMP there was an article about this recently. Lowerline has summarized it already. It's good.

[Siegmund]

As already discussed, you need some very firm agreements about 1M-2m-2M, 1M-2m-2NT, and 1M-2m-3m especially if you open light: you need at least one way to bail out below game with 11 opposite 11, and you need to take some time to think about what it should be.

It helps greatly to un-burden the 2m rebids of some of the hands that 2/1ers like to put in them. For instance, if it's your partnership style to respond 1S to 1H anytime you have 4 spades, you now have the option of 1H-2m-2S as "third suit forcing", giving you two paths to reach 2NT and 3m, one of them gamegoing one of them signoffish.

It is an area without much in the literature -- since where system regulations allow, there has been a lot of work on making either 1NT or 2C an artificial game-force, and making all the other 2-level responses limited or even nonforcing, but not very much work on Acol or SA style 2m=positive but not GF values systems.

Nice to hear gerben's and awm's posts. About time someone wrote up a set of agreements.

[medtor]

I believe that Mike Lawrence's 2/1 book from many years ago had an "escape" for 2/1 sequences....1S....2C
2S....3C 3clubs could be passed if a terrible fit has been uncovered such as this....I don't know if he still plays this method.

[semeai]

Gerben42, on 2011-June-21, 10:56, said:

In the Dutch magazine IMP there was an article about this recently. Lowerline has summarized it already. It's good.

Neat. Is it online? It does sound potentially good.

Can you answer the question I asked lowerline? That is, what happens with a minimum opener with 5♠ and fewer than 3♥ faces an invitational responder with 2♠ and 5♥? Maybe 1♠-2♥;2♠ is nonforcing?

Siegmund, on 2011-June-21, 20:24, said:

It helps greatly to un-burden the 2m rebids of some of the hands that 2/1ers like to put in them. For instance, if it's your partnership style to respond 1S to 1H anytime you have 4 spades, you now have the option of 1H-2m-2S as "third suit forcing", giving you two paths to reach 2NT and 3m, one of them gamegoing one of them signoffish.

Nice idea. I've usually played that with a game going hand you bid your longest suit first, but surely if it helps the system it would be workable to bid 1♠ first with 4♠-long minor. Of course you still need to figure out what to do over 1♠ openers now.

Having one of these lebensohl-like bids like your impossible 2♠ or lowerline/gerben's 2NT (or rubensohl-like as I was thinking above with transfers starting at the 4th suit) somewhere in your system seems valuable. Precisely where to put it is not clear.

[Vampyr]

mgoetze, on 2011-June-21, 02:17, said:

© 2/1 "merely" forcing 1R

I think (a) is by far the most popular approach, with (b) and © largely having fallen out of favor. I do think (b) works well on 1♦-2♣ auctions, though. I'll answer the rest based on (a).

© is by far the most popular approach around here.

Quote

2NT is usually agreed to show either the same range as a 1NT opener (e.g. 15-17) or the below it (e.g. 12-14). I believe the former is more popular, but this depends to some extent on how often you open 1NT with 5-card majors.

This treatment seems very unusual to me. Normally a bid of 2NT shows the range that wouldn't have opened 1NT.

[helene_t]

Vampyr, on 2011-June-22, 15:43, said:

© is by far the most popular approach around here.

Among experts? My impression is that most English experts play 2/1. I could be wrong.

Quote

This treatment seems very unusual to me. Normally a bid of 2NT shows the range that wouldn't have opened 1NT.

It is standard in France so "very unusual" is exaggerated. But maybe it is not the most common treatment worldwide.