[dickiegera]

---

Should 2NT showing 10-11 pts by a passed hand not be used if partner is a 3rd seat opener or should
opener pass 2NT and not bid 3♣?

Thank you

[hrothgar]

dickiegera, on 2013-January-13, 09:01, said:

---

Should 2NT showing 10-11 pts by a passed hand not be used if partner is a 3rd seat opener or should
opener pass 2NT and not bid 3♣?

Thank you

Most 2/1 variants use a 2NT response to a 1M opening to show a raise of partner's major.
This is played opposite both 1st/2nd seat openings and 3rd/4th seat openings.

If you do choose to play a natural 2NT response

1. Opener can not pass with such a distributional hand. You need to be able to show shape
2. Responder should not correct back to NT with good club support and weak holdings in the unbid suits

[helene_t]

if you play 2/1 then West has a 1NT response, not a 2NT response, if he were an unpassed hand. I don't see why you would want to play it differently by a passed hand.

The 2NT response can be played as a game forcing balanced hand (obviously that is not possible by a passed hand), or as a strong raise of opener's suit.

The 3NT bid was wrong also. 3♣ is a suggestiong to play and West should pass it.

[aguahombre]

helene_t, on 2013-January-13, 09:30, said:

if you play 2/1 then West has a 1NT response, not a 2NT response, if he were an unpassed hand. I don't see why you would want to play it differently by a passed hand.

The 2NT response can be played as a game forcing balanced hand (obviously that is not possible by a passed hand), or as a strong raise of opener's suit.

The 3NT bid was wrong also. 3♣ is a suggestiong to play and West should pass it.

All of this.

East seems to have understood 2NT as intended, and his 3C rebid must be to play. Responder's distribution must be what it is when 2NT by a passed hand is natural, and opener could have placed the final contract higher if she had more strength.

Regarding what 2N/1M by a passed hand can be used for, there are other choices than the "Jordan sans double" option.

One, which we like, is to show a minor 2-suiter (5+5+) with less than 10 pts.

For the poll about "who" was wrong, only 3NT was an error by a person, IMO. 2NT is just an agreement by this partnership which I don't like.

[rsteele]

One heart seems automatic and 2NT seems to fit the agreements. 3C with an unbalanced hand seems standard but at this point I think the proper rebid is 3 hearts. As 2C Drury would show the ten point hand with 3+ hearts a three heart bid now shows a doubleton heart with doubts about game.

[aguahombre]

rsteele, on 2013-January-13, 14:14, said:

One heart seems automatic and 2NT seems to fit the agreements. 3C with an unbalanced hand seems standard but at this point I think the proper rebid is 3 hearts. As 2C Drury would show the ten point hand with 3+ hearts a three heart bid now shows a doubleton heart with doubts about game.

Opener already eliminated doubts about game. He didn't bid game. It is not necessary for responder to show anything at this point. He has already shown no spade suit, a balanced hand (even if we don't like the treatment), and his point range. It is time for responder to stop showing the same thing, and abide opener's decision to play in 3C.

[MrAce]

dickiegera, on 2013-January-13, 09:01, said:

---

Should 2NT showing 10-11 pts by a passed hand not be used if partner is a 3rd seat opener or should
opener pass 2NT and not bid 3♣?

Thank you

I will skip what 2 NT means in this or that system, since your explenation was clear that both pds knew what 2 NT meant, and this is their system.

The problem started about the meaning of 3♣ over a limited 2NT bid. Tbh i don't know what the standart is, but i know very good pairs who plays it forcing, with the idea that says "there is no looking for perfect partscore over 2NT" and they gain advantage with the hands like openers in your example but opener has more strength 17+ lets say. They then do not have to jump or waste space, after all when u hold a 3514 hand and 18 hcp, you may wanna go slam if you have a club fit and u may wanna sit on 3NT if you don't. But they can not retreat from 2NT when they want to. So it is not as black and white as Aguaman says about opener's 3♣ bid.

I know also a lot of good players who plays it as retreat from 2NT, they gain advantage when 2NT is inferior and 3 something makes or goes less down than 2NT. But they have to waste space when they have bigger hands.

I think it is better to know what 3♣ meant in your pdship, worst is just like all agreements, not to have any agreement about it. (Lurpoa would love this) However in your example responder was wrong because he/she bid 3NT. If his pd bid 3 ♣ to play he obviously should have passed. If he thought it was forcing, then he should have bid something else than 3NT to show his fit, which he didn't. So in this case it was easy to assign the blame imo.

EDIT : I just recognized that, if 2NT denied 4 card spades, and 3 card hearts, then responder knows that his pd is already aware of the fit, if he is that good, bidding 3NT may be a good idea to show lack of interest for slam despite the fit. (assuming he thought 3♣ was forcing)

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

if 2NT showes 10-11/12 bal., 2NT is fine.
It may not be the best usage, if you regular open light in 3rd seat, but that is
something to discuss before hand.

3C is certainly reasonable, if it does not promise add. strength, ..., which is a
matter of agreement.
I think should 3C show add. strength, over 2NT the room is small, and opener will
usually have a real opener.
If 3C is forcing, 3NT is clear given the bal. nature of the hand, if 3C is non forcing,
pass is clear as well.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[kenberg]

I don't play this 2NT agreement, but I will give this a shot anyway. After pass-1♥-2NT I cannot imagine East being comfortable passing.

Treatment 1: 3♣ is non-forcing. Seems right for West to pass.

Treatment 2: 3♣ is forcing. If so, I think that West should now bid 3♥. His 2NT on 10-11 opposite a passed hand was clearly passable, so this 3♥ bid cannot be construed as a sudden enthusiasm for playing in hearts. Tolerance yes, enthusiasm no. Anyway, West would have bid Drury, if available, instead of 2NT if he had three cards. So the 3♥ should be very unambiguous. After the passable 2NT, I would regard a doubleton KT as support worth showing.
At any rate, 3♥ is a lot more playable than 3NT.

I imagine that pass-1♥-2NT-3♣-3♥ ends the auction. Probably you would prefer to be in 3♣ instead of 3♥, but you might bring it in. Suits have been known to split 3-3. And maybe we get a spade somehow. Well, it's better than 3NT. Third hand light openings don't always work out, and if pard is going to be bidding 2NT on an ten or eleven count with no known fit, there might often be trouble.

Added: You ask "Should 2NT showing 10-11 pts by a passed hand not be used if partner is a 3rd seat opener?"That is certainly something to discuss. Maybe approach it as "What should West do after East opens a third seat 1♥? It seems to me the answer has to lie along the lines of "Either we have to find something other than 2NT or else we have to go very easy on light third seat openings".
My style, fwiw:
I don't care all that much for light openings in third seat, especially since first seat openings keep getting lighter and lighter, but I can at least imagine opening this 1♥. Probably I would do it. Partner, as we play, would bid 1NT with the West cards. . This is forcing in style, meaning that W could have ten or eleven points, perhaps a bad twelve, but I am allowed to pass if I opened light. Here East wants out of NT. So Pass-1♥-1NT-2♣. Nice, except the 2♣ doesn't promise four. But I should have either shape or decent strength, else I would have exercised my option and passed 1NT. West can see it is safe to bid 3♣. Either I am weak and shapely, as here, and I pass 3♣, or else I am strong enough and we go where our choices lead us.

[Fluffy]

Only after west understands basic concepts about bidding his hand twice, accepting partner's decisions etc, you can move forward and start discussing advanced topics such as 1NT vs 2NT response.

[Trinidad]

Fluffy, on 2013-January-14, 08:06, said:

Only after west understands basic concepts about bidding his hand twice, accepting partner's decisions etc, you can move forward and start discussing advanced topics such as 1NT vs 2NT response.

That is unfair.

There is also a basic concept (though certainly not universal) that the only way to decline a natural game invitation is by passing. If you were taught this concept, there can be no doubt that 3♣ was forcing (most likely to game).

So, it seems West thought 3♣ was forcing, while East thought it was not forcing. We call that a misunderstanding and it happens all the time in bridge.

Rik

[TylerE]

Personally I think that passed hands don't get to bid past 2 of openers suit in this sort of situation.

So, for me, over 1♥, responders options are 1♠, 1NT (NF), 2♣/2♦ (Modified Reverse Reverse Drury), or 2♥.


Modified Reverse Reverse Drury:

2♣ = 4 card raise, any strength
-2♦ = Strength ask
--2M = Less than an invite raise
--Anything else, invite+, pattern/help suit showing
2♦ = 3 card raise, invite+
2M = 3 card raise, less than an invite

[aguahombre]

Trinidad, on 2013-January-14, 09:56, said:

There is also a basic concept (though certainly not universal) that the only way to decline a natural game invitation is by passing. If you were taught this concept, there can be no doubt that 3♣ was forcing (most likely to game).

There are also concepts which conflict:

1)When partner has made a natural game invitation with a bid which describes his exact distribution and range, we just place the contract.
2)When we have a void, and the defenders are known to have nine cards in that suit plus a bullet or two, playing 2NT might not be a good idea.

If opener with the given distribution, but slammish intent (rare opposite a PH), wants to convey such...she could bid 4C.

[Trinidad]

aguahombre, on 2013-January-14, 10:50, said:

There are also concepts which conflict:

Exactly. And it is a matter of partnership agreement which concept has the right of way in which situation.

This partnership wasn't on the same wavelength about the order of priority. That is fundamentally different from "West not understanding basic concepts of bridge bidding" as Fluffy was suggesting.

Rik

[MrAce]

Rik for president !

[aguahombre]

Trinidad, on 2013-January-14, 11:40, said:

Exactly. And it is a matter of partnership agreement which concept has the right of way in which situation.

This partnership wasn't on the same wavelength about the order of priority. That is fundamentally different from "West not understanding basic concepts of bridge bidding" as Fluffy was suggesting.

Rik

Yes. I wasn't in disagreement with you; just attempting to add.

[ArtK78]

Personally, I have almost never seen anyone who plays a natural 2NT response to a one of a major opening playing 2/1 game forcing. 2NT by an unpassed hand is almost universally played as some form of major suit raise. This is also true as a passed hand, although 2NT may not be some sort of forcing major suit raise.

If this partnership has the agreement that 2NT shows a balanced invitational hand by a passed hand, then I will say that such an agreement is misguided. There are very few bids in bridge worse than 2NT as a passed hand. When partner has a light opening, it gets you too high in a large number of cases, and it may make it difficult or impossible to get to the right strain. When partner has a good hand, there is probably no harm done, but the auction may still be awkward.

Virtually 100% of 2/1 players play that a 1NT response by an unpassed hand to a one of a major suit opening is forcing (some play semi-forcing). Very few play that a 1NT response is natural and nonforcing. As a passed hand, the agreement should not change, except that opener can pass 1NT with a balanced light opening hand. I refer to this as 1NT intended as forcing. I suppose that some would call this semi-forcing. On the hand in the OP, the bidding can proceed as in Ken's example in the last paragraph of his post.

The question is more interesting if opener had bid one of a minor suit. But I still hate the natural and invitational 2NT response by a passed hand.

[ggwhiz]

The 3nt bid is ludicrous.

3♣ is to play with these agreements which I don't think are horrible at all but if 3♣ was forcing or even encouraging, you could be on for 7♣/♥ and down a gazillion in 3nt.

[Zelandakh]

ggwhiz, on 2013-January-14, 16:05, said:

3♣ is to play with these agreements

What agreements? What Rik said is 100% correct and should pretty much finish this thread.