Page 1 of 1
2m+1 "New Minor Forcing" After 1m - 1X; 2m
#1
Posted 2011-November-07, 14:45
I've read various places on the forums that current thinking is that
1m - 1X
2m - 2m+1
is artificial and GF [not just F1, correct?]
Is this standard? and what are the common follow-up meta-agreements?
An example auction (though I'm interested in general as well):
1♣ - 1♠;
2♣ - 2♦;
3♣ - 3♥;
3N
What's (ostensibly) going on in this auction? Is 3H just a grope? What are opener's priorities over 3H?
1m - 1X
2m - 2m+1
is artificial and GF [not just F1, correct?]
Is this standard? and what are the common follow-up meta-agreements?
An example auction (though I'm interested in general as well):
1♣ - 1♠;
2♣ - 2♦;
3♣ - 3♥;
3N
What's (ostensibly) going on in this auction? Is 3H just a grope? What are opener's priorities over 3H?
"I think maybe so and so was caught cheating but maybe I don't have the names right". Sure, and I think maybe your mother .... Oh yeah, that was someone else maybe. -- kenberg
"...we live off being battle-scarred veterans who manage to hate our opponents slightly more than we hate each other.” -- Hamman, re: Wolff
"...we live off being battle-scarred veterans who manage to hate our opponents slightly more than we hate each other.” -- Hamman, re: Wolff
#3
Posted 2011-November-07, 14:55
I think most play it as just invitational-plus, i.e. forcing for 1 round.
In this example auction:
1♣ - 1♠;
2♣ - 2♦;
3♣ = I still just have Clubs, sorry
- 3♥ = This creates the game force, and since we are bidding as natural as possible, this must show ♥ values and a ♦ problem.
3N
In this example auction:
1♣ - 1♠;
2♣ - 2♦;
3♣ = I still just have Clubs, sorry
- 3♥ = This creates the game force, and since we are bidding as natural as possible, this must show ♥ values and a ♦ problem.
3N
#4
Posted 2011-November-08, 01:28
I have one partnership where 2m+1 is forcing and one where 3♣/2♦ and 2♦/2♣. In both cases it is artificial and game forcing and sort of feels like a 4sf response structure.
#5
Posted 2011-November-10, 19:06
Thanks for the input. The page Zel included was particularly useful.
"I think maybe so and so was caught cheating but maybe I don't have the names right". Sure, and I think maybe your mother .... Oh yeah, that was someone else maybe. -- kenberg
"...we live off being battle-scarred veterans who manage to hate our opponents slightly more than we hate each other.” -- Hamman, re: Wolff
"...we live off being battle-scarred veterans who manage to hate our opponents slightly more than we hate each other.” -- Hamman, re: Wolff
#6
Posted 2011-November-11, 06:09
This is also sometimes called "Bourke relay"; Tournament Acol by Bird and Bourke includes a discussion of it.
#7
Posted 2011-November-11, 09:45
campboy, on 2011-November-11, 06:09, said:
This is also sometimes called "Bourke relay"; Tournament Acol by Bird and Bourke includes a discussion of it.
Thank you thank you.
It's nice to have a reference to point to when discussing this with new partners.
"I think maybe so and so was caught cheating but maybe I don't have the names right". Sure, and I think maybe your mother .... Oh yeah, that was someone else maybe. -- kenberg
"...we live off being battle-scarred veterans who manage to hate our opponents slightly more than we hate each other.” -- Hamman, re: Wolff
"...we live off being battle-scarred veterans who manage to hate our opponents slightly more than we hate each other.” -- Hamman, re: Wolff
#8
Posted 2011-November-15, 10:43
wyman, on 2011-November-07, 14:45, said:
An example auction (though I'm interested in general as well):
1♣ - 1♠;
2♣ - 2♦;
3♣ - 3♥;
3N
What's (ostensibly) going on in this auction? Is 3H just a grope? What are opener's priorities over 3H?
1♣ - 1♠;
2♣ - 2♦;
3♣ - 3♥;
3N
What's (ostensibly) going on in this auction? Is 3H just a grope? What are opener's priorities over 3H?
Since nobody's taken you up on this, I'll take a shot at interpreting. Am assuming that 2♦ was an artificial GF bid. I also haven't looked at any of the writeups to see if any of this is addressed specifically, so this is just trying to apply NMF/4SF type of logic to this situation.
3♣: denies 4♥, denies 3♠, denies 4♦, by infererence from all that shows 5+♣, denies having BOTH ♦/♥ stoppers for NT
3♥: showing 4♥ (and 5♠ by implication). You ask if this is "just groping"...seems like what is effectively the 2nd descriptive bid of your hand should still be honest, showing a full 4♥. You can save the "groping"/fragment-showing for the 3rd descriptive bid if needed.
3N: ♦ stopped, willing to play NT across from a 54xx shape. Likely 2335. Maybe 1336 or 2236.
#9
Posted 2011-November-15, 11:46
campboy, on 2011-November-11, 06:09, said:
This is also sometimes called "Bourke relay"; Tournament Acol by Bird and Bourke includes a discussion of it.
Yes, the Bourke Relay was written up in BW a few years back ( I believe ) .
Here is an example:
To take the easiest auction:
1c 1s 2c ?
2d = art GF
2h = natural, constructive
2s = to play
2nt = natural, invitational
3c = natural, invitational
3d / 3h = I am not sure but I think Bourke plays this as an
invitational two suiter
3s = natural, invitational
3nt = natural, to play
- - - - - - - - - - -
To take the hardest auction:
1h 1s 2h ?
2s = to play
2nt = natural, invitational
3c = art GF
3d = natural, invitational
3h = natural, invitational
3s = natural invitational
3nt = to play
Don Stenmark
TWOferBRIDGE
"imo by far in bridge the least understood concept is how to bid over a jump-shift
( 1M-1NT!-3m-?? )." ....Justin Lall
" Did someone mention relays? " .... Zelandakh
K-Rex to Mikeh : " Sometimes you drive me nuts " .
TWOferBRIDGE
"imo by far in bridge the least understood concept is how to bid over a jump-shift
( 1M-1NT!-3m-?? )." ....Justin Lall
" Did someone mention relays? " .... Zelandakh
K-Rex to Mikeh : " Sometimes you drive me nuts " .
#10
Posted 2011-November-16, 03:06
If you are willing to introduce some artificiality then you can use the first steps to show 4-5 distribution:
1C - 1S
2c - 2D:
2H = 5 clubs, 4 diamonds
2S = 5 clubs, 4 hearts
1C - 1H
2C - 2D:
2H = 5 clubs, 4 diamonds
1D - 1S
2D - 2H:
2S = 5 diamonds, 4 hearts
This has the advantage that all higher steps promise a 6-card minor.
1C - 1S
2c - 2D:
2H = 5 clubs, 4 diamonds
2S = 5 clubs, 4 hearts
1C - 1H
2C - 2D:
2H = 5 clubs, 4 diamonds
1D - 1S
2D - 2H:
2S = 5 diamonds, 4 hearts
This has the advantage that all higher steps promise a 6-card minor.
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.
- hrothgar
- hrothgar
Page 1 of 1