[the hog]

2H. The hand is worth 2 1/2 H but that is not a legal bid. Of course I will bid 3H over 2S.

[rhm]

 MrAce, on 2012-January-26, 20:05, said:

2♥ for me.

My reasons are;

...
2♥ bid can occasionally may miss a borderline game, as Andy suggested but i think this sort of hands are being over concerned.

I consider this the understatement of the year.
A borderline game for me is a partner hand, where game has about 50% chance, not one where game may be cold and an overtrick likely and partner still has good reason to pass 2♥.

This will happen almost always when partner has 3 hearts and a singleton spade or if he has 4 cards in hearts and a minimum 1NT response with shortage in spades.
Yes, I am better off bidding 2♥ if the hand is a total misfit and partner is not maximum for his 1NT response.

I am prepared to bet against this outcome. It is a matter of probabilities. Is it more likely that partner will pass 2♥ when you have game or that you will get overboard if you bid 3♥?
I think chances are just too good that we have a heart fit after this start. This is partly a matter of hand evaluation. Exchange my majors and 2♥ would be clearcut.
How can responder tell when you bid only 2♥ either way? He can't.

I think 2♥ is a clear-cut error at all forms of scoring and for those, for whom game forces must be underwritten by llyods play a different game.

And let's not forget there are hands where the aim is not to reach 4♥ but 6♥, partner having something like ♠x, ♥Axxx, ♦KJTxx, ♣xxx .

I have seen people (not you of course) playing 2♥+4 more than once.

Rainer Herrmann

[phil_20686]

 kenrexford, on 2012-January-26, 06:22, said:

This is not as easy as you suggest, IMO.

If partner has ♠Kx ♥Axx and whatever small cards you want in the minors, 4♥ has great play and may even make an overtrick.

Reduce your hand, however, to ♠Axxxx ♥KQJx ♦Qxx ♣x, and 2♥ might even be in jeopardy.

The point is that partner is not capable of bidding their hand, not because of a lack of skill but because of a lack of space and safety.

?????

If partner has a doubleton spade he will putyou back unless he has 4 hearts. If he has 4 hearts he will raise unless he is at the very bottom of his range. If partner is 1-3 in the majors game will not be good.

If partner puts you back to two spades you have a 3h bid shoulding 55 and 15-18 ish but not enough to GF, which gets your hand across nicely.

IMO the real problem hand is Axxxxx AKJTx x x, now a hand like x Qxx xxxx Axxxx will pass 2H despite being cold for game. fortunately these hands that play will opposite a stiff in your first suit are pretty rare.

[kenrexford]

A couple of people seem to be thinking that Responder's ability to correct back to 2♠ with 2♠/3♥ solves the problem, because this allows Opener to rebid again.

The problem, however, as I mentioned was two-fold. Sure, the "greater problem" from the standpoint of missing game is the 1♠/3♥ scenario. But, playing in an inferior 2♠ with a 5-2 fit and going down one can also be as bad at matchpoints when the 4-3 or even 5-3 heart fit makes. The courtesy correction has its own problem when Opener has a bare minimum and Responder is light.

[mikeh]

This is a routine, utterly routine, 2♥ bid.

Of course we may miss a few games. That's life.

The overbidders who bid 3♥ gf on this hand always go on and on about how well this works when partner has the unlikely but plausible hand that causes the partnership to miss game over 2♥, and never, ever, seem to recognize that their approach endplays partner on a host of more probable hands, and seriously impairs the auction on the admittedly few hands where, opposite a real gf, slam is available..

If you find that bidding 2♥ on these hands creates real problems in your partnerships, then either get a better partner (if the problem is that partner is passing 2♥ when he shouldn't) or change methods.

Big club methods, for example, handle these hands very well. They carry baggage of course, else all top pairs would play big club rather than a substantial minority as is the case.

No method handles all hands well. 2/1 doesn't handle this one well. That doesn't justify calling this hand a gf. Just accept that some hands fall into the seams in the method, live with it and move on.

[gnasher]

 mikeh, on 2012-January-27, 10:51, said:

Big club methods, for example, handle these hands very well. They carry baggage of course, else all top pairs would play big club rather than a substantial minority as is the case.

No method handles all hands well. 2/1 doesn't handle this one well.

I don't think this problem is caused by playing 2/1. The problem is with not playing any methods after 1♠-1NT.

[kenrexford]

 gnasher, on 2012-January-27, 10:56, said:

I don't think this problem is caused by playing 2/1. The problem is with not playing any methods after 1♠-1NT.

Ding! Ding! Ding!

[mikeh]

 gnasher, on 2012-January-27, 10:56, said:

I don't think this problem is caused by playing 2/1. The problem is with not playing any methods after 1♠-1NT.

I think you are being too pedantic. Of course one may use gadgets in any method, but the vast majority of players who play 2/1 don't play a gadget here that would work. For example, many 2/1 players have bart available in auctions that start 1S 1N, but that doesn't help with the OP hand.

I now regret not writing:

'When I refer to 2/1 as a method, I intend only to refer to 2/1 as played and understood by the vast majority of players familiar with 2/1....that form of 2/1 doesn't handle this hand type well. When I suggest that you change your methods, and mention big club as an example, I do not mean to suggest that it is impossible to modify the approach almost universally known as 2/1 so as to handle it. While others have mentioned Gazilli, unless I expressly mention it here, someone is going to nitpick'

Heck, there I was, trying to be a little less discursive than normal, and I get criticized for not being sufficiently specific. It's a tough world here on the forums

[lamford]

I would bid 3H as partner will pass 2H with something like ♠x ♥10xx ♦AKxx ♣xxxxx when game is very good. What methods would help on this hand? I think it is hugely different that you have ♠A10xxx and ♥KQJxx rather than ♠KQJxx and ♥A10xxx. Partner will not be 3-1 in the majors but he might well be 1-3.

[rhm]

 lamford, on 2012-January-27, 11:23, said:

I would bid 3H as partner will pass 2H with something like ♠x ♥10xx ♦AKxx ♣xxxx when game is very good. What methods would help on this hand? I think it is hugely different that you have ♠A10xxx and ♥KQJxx rather than ♠KQJxx and ♥A10xxx. Partner will not be 3-1 in the majors but he might well be 1-3.

Of course you will only make "a few" games other will miss routinely

And your partners will not have to make courtesy raises, going down in 3♥ when 2♥ was the limit for no good reason.

Rainer Herrmann

[lamford]

 rhm, on 2012-January-27, 13:05, said:

Of course you will only make "a few" games other will miss routinely

And your partners will not have to make courtesy raises, going down in 3♥ when 2♥ was the limit for no good reason.

Rainer Herrmann

We should have a game some time. You and I seemed to be the only people to agree on a "Hesitation Exclusion Blackwood" ruling a while ago - the one with screens.

[FrancesHinden]

I think 2H is completely obvious, and anything else just asking to get too high.

p.s there are gadgets other than Gazilli, of course, and I play some of them, so with one partner I can bid 3H showing a 5-5 invite, and with the other I can bid 2H, constructive (about 14-17). But if the options are (i) game force or (ii) bid 2H, the latter is clear.

[FrancesHinden]

 Fluffy, on 2012-January-26, 07:16, said:

I only need ♥Axx ♠xx across for a shot at game, what are you guys doing with 2♥?

For me it is even bete since 3♥ shows 5-5

well, that needs spades 3-3, I don't mind missing that game.

The 3H bidders are all focussed on partner's perfect 3-card heart holding opposite. They seem to be missing two things:
(i) sometimes partner doesn't have 3- or 4-card heart support, and you will go off in 3NT
(ii) if you bid 3H, that shows 5-4 majors game forcing. What are you going to do if partner bids 3NT over it? If partner bids 3S?

Let's give partner a couple of possible hands:

Kx
x
KJ10xx
QJ10x

now 3NT is obviously the right spot and he'll bid it over 3H

but with

xx
Axx
Jxxx
Qxxx

he'll bid 3NT over 3H on this as well, and if I have to play in game (which I'm happy not to do) then 4H is much better.

[lamford]

 FrancesHinden, on 2012-January-27, 13:46, said:

Kx
x
KJ10xx
QJ10x

now 3NT is obviously the right spot and he'll bid it over 3H

That hand has only 12 cards. But you make a good point that 3H may well lead to the wrong game.

[cherdano]

 mikeh, on 2012-January-27, 11:11, said:

I think you are being too pedantic. Of course one may use gadgets in any method, but the vast majority of players who play 2/1 don't play a gadget here that would work. For example, many 2/1 players have bart available in auctions that start 1S 1N, but that doesn't help with the OP hand.

I think you two are having a European-versus-North American disconnect here. I am pretty sure that among 2/1 players outside of North America, Gazzilli and variants of it are much more common than, for example, Bart.

[lamford]

 nigel_k, on 2012-January-25, 18:12, said:

Pass.

A bit eccentric with 5-5.

[FrancesHinden]

 rhm, on 2012-January-27, 05:37, said:

Yes, I am better off bidding 2♥ if the hand is a total misfit and partner is not maximum for his 1NT response.

And let's not forget there are hands where the aim is not to reach 4♥ but 6♥, partner having something like ♠x, ♥Axxx, ♦KJTxx, ♣xxx .

You are better off bidding 2♥ every time partner is maximum, because you can find the right game.
Also, you are far more likely to get to slam opposite x Axxx KJ10xx xxx after rebidding 2H than after rebidding 3H (1S-1NT-2H-4D is extremely descriptive, after 1S-1NT-3H good luck working out when slam is good and when it isn't)

The times you are better off bidding 3♥ are when partner is about to pass 2♥, which is when he has a very suitable minimum.

[rhm]

 lamford, on 2012-January-27, 11:23, said:

I would bid 3H as partner will pass 2H with something like ♠x ♥10xx ♦AKxx ♣xxxx when game is very good. What methods would help on this hand? I think it is hugely different that you have ♠A10xxx and ♥KQJxx rather than ♠KQJxx and ♥A10xxx. Partner will not be 3-1 in the majors but he might well be 1-3.

Of course you will only make "a few" games other will miss routinely

And your partners will not have to make courtesy raises, going down in 3♥ when 2♥ was the limit for no good reason.

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

 FrancesHinden, on 2012-January-27, 15:12, said:

You are better off bidding 2♥ every time partner is maximum, because you can find the right game.
Also, you are far more likely to get to slam opposite x Axxx KJ10xx xxx after rebidding 2H than after rebidding 3H (1S-1NT-2H-4D is extremely descriptive, after 1S-1NT-3H good luck working out when slam is good and when it isn't)

The times you are better off bidding 3♥ are when partner is about to pass 2♥, which is when he has a very suitable minimum.

A remarkable logic. You may find slams with the same hand when your partner shows a weak hand by bidding 2♥ only and miss slams (or games) when your partner takes away valuable bidding space to show a much stronger hand.
Strange though it may sound, my experience suggests otherwise.
We lesser mortals have to take all our courage to raise 2♥ with x Axxx KJ10xx xxx and many would simply pass 2♥ at the table I am sure.
But if the bidding starts 1S-1NT-3H I would in deed bid 4D with the above hand.
The bidding might then continue, 5D-5H-6H

Rainer Herrmann

[cherdano]

 rhm, on 2012-January-27, 16:37, said:

We lesser mortals have to take all our courage to raise 2♥ with x Axxx KJ10xx xxx and many would simply pass 2♥ at the table I am sure.

But this is posted in the A/E forum, so I hope we are allowed to assume partner is not an idiot.