[bd71]

---

Generic 2/1. With no specific agreement, how would you intend or interpret 2N?

[Zelandakh]

I would usually bid my better minor unless I had very long spades...

[mich-b]

minors.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Unusual for the minors.
It is not the same with a 4th seat balance where: 1H - p - p - 2NT = natural .

[mikeh]

Minors, but 1♠ P 2♠ 2N is, imo, better played as any two suited takeout

[han]

I would prefer to play the Romanian 2NT in mikeh's auction: hearts and a minor. As gwnn might say, I like hearts better than clubs.

I would agree that any two suits is the "standard" meaning.

[Raff90]

For me its minors.

[aguahombre]

Of course, Standard is to play 2NT as a variation of Treadwell. It shows a heart stopper and asks partner to bid 3NT with a long running suit. But, playing 2/1, we are showing the minors.

[ArtK78]

aguahombre, on 2012-February-09, 12:16, said:

Of course, Standard is to play 2NT as a variation of Treadwell. It shows a heart stopper and asks partner to bid 3NT with a long running suit. But, playing 2/1, we are showing the minors.

I am not sure if that is Treadwell or Inverted Treadwell (with the other showing a solid suit and asking for a heart stopper). You probably have it right.

Thanks for the tribute to Dave.

[shevek]

Natural.

I'll try this method for 10 years and get back to you.
My guess is I'll do better by 2021, when opener will often have a 10-count & responder 4.

This may seem silly to you but consider (1♦) no (2♦) 2NT, where natural seems even more sensible.

[Charlie Yu]

shevek, on 2012-February-12, 21:08, said:

Natural.

I'll try this method for 10 years and get back to you.
My guess is I'll do better by 2021, when opener will often have a 10-count & responder 4.

This may seem silly to you but consider (1♦) no (2♦) 2NT, where natural seems even more sensible.

Well, given that most people play this as inverted minor, 2NT　natural is hardly useful.

[Statto]

Charlie Yu, on 2012-February-13, 00:27, said:

Well, given that most people play this as inverted minor, 2NT　natural is hardly useful.

Yeah, the argument works better for the OP case of 1♥-2♥. By 2022 this may well just promise 13 cards

[mgoetze]

Lurpoa and Statto are on an upvoting spree!

[JLOGIC]

mikeh, on 2012-February-09, 10:15, said:

Minors, but 1♠ P 2♠ 2N is, imo, better played as any two suited takeout

Mike you gotta get with the times, this is almost standard as michaels at the top level now. That is probably more of an imp treatment, but it's important to get to 4H, and partner showing any 2 suits hurts that a lot. I remember Diamond-Platnick had a disaster because they had a misunderstanding about that, I'm not sure if one of them assumed it was michaels or if they had that agreement and one of them forgot.

Agree 1H p 2H 2N is minors.

[mikeh]

JLOGIC, on 2012-February-13, 14:12, said:

Mike you gotta get with the times, this is almost standard as michaels at the top level now. That is probably more of an imp treatment, but it's important to get to 4H, and partner showing any 2 suits hurts that a lot. I remember Diamond-Platnick had a disaster because they had a misunderstanding about that, I'm not sure if one of them assumed it was michaels or if they had that agreement and one of them forgot.

Agree 1H p 2H 2N is minors.

I have got to get out more

Thx for the update: I will tell my partners.....heck, I had trouble with my current partner persuading him that it wasn't just the minors

[han]

It's already standard at the top level? I bet that from now on people will take gwnn's suggestions more seriously.

[JLOGIC]

han, on 2012-February-15, 09:24, said:

It's already standard at the top level? I bet that from now on people will take gwnn's suggestions more seriously.

Yes I realized I might have been wrong. I am having group think with the "las vegas crew" and the "former-junior crew" being so intertwined and so numerous that I think that sample is good for "most top level players" if all of them play something, but it's a very biased sample. For instance if I know or think I know that a group of Hampson, Fred, Curtis, Levin, Weinstein, Jacobus, Passell, Wold, Greco, Joe, Kevin, Kranyak, Joel, Johnny all play something that it is stanard at the top level, but really when one or two of those people "discover" something and tell the rest they are all likely to start playing it, so it's not a valid sample to say it's standard at the top level in USA. However, that is a lot of the top US players lol, especially since if they all play something it often came down from Rodwell and some people like Compton are very in that loop so probably play it too, and if Hampson plays it then Diamond/Platnick probably know it, etc.

It is funny how completely influential Rodwell and Hampson are in what is "standard" among a lot of players at the top level in USA, hence almost everyone in that group except for Joel and Johnny and Levin/Weinstein playing a very similar version of strong club (called Meck lite). Rodwell is a known great theoretician but Hampson deserves more credit for being one as well.

[whereagles]

2NT as natural here is extremely risky. There is a big difference between

1x pass 1y 1NT and
1x pass 2x 2NT

You're a level higher and opps have found a suit for the lead.

Thus 2NT should be artificial and a two-suiter is a good agreement for it.