[jerdonald]

BBO forum,

I was dealt this hand this week:
S AK6
H AQ65
D
C AKQT72

my partner held:
S Q523
H T84
D T853
C 98

I opened 2 clubs and since we play steps partner bid
2 diamonds, I bid 3 clubs and he passed.

We have discussed double negative responses but he
decided not to use it here. Should I just have
gone to 5 clubs. As you can see 6 clubs is easy.

How else could this bidding sequence have gone? Please
don't suggest we change our system.

Thanks for any response.
jerryd

[pigpenz]

what is your double negative here, cheaper minor or 3NT?

[jerdonald]

Pigpenz,
It would be the cheapest minor. If I had rebid a major after
his 2 diamonds he would bid 3 clubs. In this case since I
bid 3 clubs so I would think a rebid of diamonds of the next
cheapest bid, hearts in this case, would be a double negative.

jerryd

[pigpenz]

Ok old fashion Goren the second negative would be 3 NT
That way you could still show a major over three of a minor

[barmar]

When you say you bid "steps", do you mean control steps or HCP steps? If it's HCP, you don't need a double negative, since you've already limited your hand very precisely.

[jerdonald]

Barmar,
Steps for us is HCP, D 0-3, H 4-6, S 7-9 etc.

jerryd

[barmar]

Then after a 2♦ response, I'd expect that you're allowed to stop short of game, and responder can pass the rebid if he has tolerance and no suit of his own to bid. If opener wants to force to game even if responder has a Yarborough, he needs to jump.

Yes, this makes bidding minors difficult, since it means you have to go past 3NT. Minors are always a PITA. Jumping to 5♣ would be wrong -- partner could easily have a club void and length in a major.

Is 6♣ really "easy"? Looks to me like it requires 3-3 spades and ♥K on side, as well as a normal trump split (3-2 or singleton J).

[jerdonald]

Barmar,
So your saying my bid is 4 clubs. If you had responders hand
would you go on to 5 clubs?

The clubs were 3/2 and one defender tossed a spade as I was
drawing trump so spades split and the heart K was on side.

Three teams bid and made 6.

Thanks,
jerryd

[Stephen Tu]

-I wouldn't say 6c is "easy". You need club J to fall, heart finesse, and a 3-3 break in a major. Even 5c isn't cold although it's a good contract. You'd definitely want to be in 5 not 6 on average.

-Nobody who's any good plays step point count responses to 2c. The problem with point steps is that random #s of HCP, especially Qs and Js, don't really tell you where or how high you want to go, because finding fits and which HCP are useful and not useful is more important. They significantly interfere with finding fits below game level leaving room for cue bidding. Switch to something else (search forum for ideas).

-Even when responder shows a bad hand, new suits really need to be played as at least 1-round forcing, unless perhaps if you are playing a system with 2+ strong opening bids (e.g. Benjamin 2s, where 2d is also strong artificial). Otherwise opener with a two-suiter may find responder passing with game easily making in the second suit. Or he has to jump, and that makes showing both suits below 3nt impossible. The only rebid responder should be able to pass is 2nt. Or perhaps a major (2c-2d-2h-?-3h) after having made a 2nd negative or double-negative first response.

-On this sequence, 2c-2d-3c, I've begun to think that it's not right to play any 2nd negative, I think it's too important to be able to find 5-3/5-4 major fits, responder should be able to bid a 5 cd major over 3c even when very weak. I think this is more valuable than being able to stop in say 4c after 2c-2d-3c-3d!-4c, or having 3M promise a couple Qs. You definitely don't need a 2nd negative playing a 0-3 hcp step, your first bid was already double-neg! So I think 3d should just be non-descript noise, no 5 cd major, not great hand for clubs, may or may not have diamonds. So the auction could go something like 2c-2d-3c-3d-3h-3s-4c-5c.

Quote

Please don't suggest we change our system.

Don't understand this. If your bidding sequence here is systemic allowed, then you have to change your system to get better results.

[jerdonald]

Steven Tu,
All very good info. As you point out 6 clubs wasn't easy.

I understand your comment about not wanting to change our
system. I have used 2 diamonds weak, waiting and 2 diamonds
says I have an ace or king but haven't used steps to show
controls.

Which of these responses do most experts prefer?

jerryd

[fromageGB]

Without changing the system in a significant way, you can adopt Stephen's key points :
> You definitely don't need a 2nd negative playing a 0-3 hcp step, your first bid was already double-neg!
> new suits really need to be played as at least 1-round forcing

My suggestion would be for responder to ALMOST automatically bid the next step after opener's rebid, then he can give preference or pass if that 2nd rebid is not a jump. The "almost" comes in when responder has something specific worth showing, such as a 6 card suit or 5 cards with the shown points in that suit.

Edit - as Stephen said, if opener's first rebid is NT, you can pass that, but of course you can transfer with a 5 or 6 card suit.

This post has been edited by fromageGB: 2013-January-20, 12:28

[TWO4BRIDGE]

"Steps" is one of the 2 worst conventions in Bridge .

You might look into the 2H! = "bust" over a 2C open .... no A or K or 2Q's ( some use QJ suited instead of 2Q's ) .

[ahydra]

Normally 2C = "23+ or GF". The only time responder should pass is if he holds a 0-2 HCP hand after 2C-2D-2NT; anything else, responder must not pass below game, even if he holds 5432 432 432 432.

Unless you have some specific non-standard meaning for the 2C bid which means it isn't a GF, then your partner was wrong to pass. He should just bid 3NT (or maybe 3S).

ahydra

[Cyberyeti]

ahydra, on 2013-January-20, 13:30, said:

Normally 2C = "23+ or GF". The only time responder should pass is if he holds a 0-2 HCP hand after 2C-2D-2NT; anything else, responder must not pass below game, even if he holds 5432 432 432 432.

Unless you have some specific non-standard meaning for the 2C bid which means it isn't a GF, then your partner was wrong to pass. He should just bid 3NT (or maybe 3S).

ahydra

Seconded, certainly in the UK, 2♣-2♦-2N is the only sequence you can pass, 3♦ is the normal second negative if not playing lowest NT.

[GreenMan]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-January-20, 12:48, said:

"Steps" is one of the 2 worst conventions in Bridge .

... Fishbein?

[barmar]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-January-20, 12:48, said:

"Steps" is one of the 2 worst conventions in Bridge .

You might look into the 2H! = "bust" over a 2C open .... no A or K or 2Q's ( some use QJ suited instead of 2Q's ) .

How would that solve the problem on this hand?

No matter what your system, South has a really bad hand. All he has is one queen, but it turns out to be perfectly placed opposite North's AKxx. Swap South's spades and diamonds, and you can't even make 5♣, since there's no way to get to dummy to take the heart finesse (assuming it's on). You need some pretty sophisticated methods to locate a specific queen needed for making game -- it probably needs to be based on a strong club system, to give you enough bidding space.

I'll bet the pairs who bid slam just blasted and got lucky. There's no system for that.

[fromageGB]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-January-20, 12:48, said:

You might look into the 2H! = "bust" over a 2C open .... no A or K or 2Q's ( some use QJ suited instead of 2Q's ) .

Jerdonald, you certainly would be recommended to change to this, or something similar, if you were to change.

There is debate over the inclusion of Qs in deciding whether you have a negative or a positive, because when you have a weak hand the Qs may be worthless when partner's 2♣ is based on a more distributional hand rather than a balanced hand. When he has a balanced hand, of course your Qs are good, but after your negative you just raise 2NT to game with undisclosed QJs. When he has shown his suits, then you can decide whether your Qs are pulling their weight. Because of this, some play that a positive is an ace or a king.

The other variable is whether you bid 2♦ or 2♥ with a negative. I prefer 2♦ as it gives more room to decide on whether game is viable, and if you bid 2♥ with a positive, then you don't need the room because you are forcing to game anyway. However, it seems to be a trend to make 2♦ the positive and 2♥ the negative. I don't really know why, and have not seen an explanation. Maybe two4bridge can enlighten us?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

fromageGB, on 2013-January-21, 05:44, said:

However, it seems to be a trend to make 2♦ the positive and 2♥ the negative. I don't really know why, and have not seen an explanation. Maybe two4bridge can enlighten us?

A few comments:
1) Mike Lawrence awhile back had an original article on this.
" A 2H response allows the partnership in certain defined sequences to drop the auction below game. "

2) More recently -- The 2H super negative has fallen out of favor among pros because it interferes with Kokish -- which solves some of the problems that might occur with 100% waiting 2D.

3) And finally a Meckstroth quote about the use of 2H :
" The last thing opener needs to know after 2C is that you're broke."
[ I think this means that he favors the "first thing" knowing that you are broke rather than later ] .

[fromageGB]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-January-21, 09:14, said:

A few comments:
1) Mike Lawrence awhile back had an original article on this.
" A 2H response allows the partnership in certain defined sequences to drop the auction below game. "

2) More recently -- The 2H super negative has fallen out of favor among pros because it interferes with Kokish -- which solves some of the problems that might occur with 100% waiting 2D.

3) And finally a Meckstroth quote about the use of 2H :
" The last thing opener needs to know after 2C is that you're broke."
[ I think this means that he favors the "first thing" knowing that you are broke rather than later ] .

Thanks for this, it's the first I have seen as to any reasoning.

My comments would be :
1) If a negative 2♥ allows you do drop out below game, a negative 2♦ does so even better.

2) Yes, I agree with this, but I was not aware it was falling out of favour. Comments (including yours) in recent threads led me to believe that 2♥ negative was being preferred. Assuming you bid a positive (A or K, maybe optional queens), OR a negative (denies a positive), and you use ♦ or ♥ as your only 2 (frequent/common) bids, then a 2♥ negative is bad because it interferes with Kokish, whereas a 2♦ negative does not. It is particularly after a negative that you need Kokish more, as you are not in a game force. Kokish gives you two ways to bid 2NT, and the split afforded in the strength ranges for these means that a negative responder is better placed to decide whether to pass 2NT or bid 3NT. If you have a negative 2♥, then it means you do not have Kokish and have only one range for 2NT.

Another advantage of having Kokish available when you are negative is that it lets opener bid a 2-suiter including hearts. 2♣ 2♦, 2♥ 2♠, 3something can be passed or corrected.

I think the argument for a negative 2♦ rather than a negative 2♥ is convincing.

[barmar]

@TWO4BRIDGE Can you provide citations for these quotes from Lawrence and Meckstroth? In particular, the interpretation of "the last thing" depends on the context. By itself that phrase usually means something is uninteresting, but if it's part of a list of things you need to know then it's important.