[ahydra]

We play 5cM weak NT, though I think this applies to any non-2/1 system.

Given the following hands:

---

What do you call with West? 3D is obviously a bit wimpish and 4C/4D are overbids, taking you past 3NT which would be the ideal contract if East had ♠32 ♥10765 ♦AJ105 ♣KQ9, for example.

If 2NT (which is 15-19, forcing to 3NT), the natural call for East is a straight 3NT, and then a club lead through dummy's King is clearly a bit of a disaster. Partner is interested in changing our system over 2NT to find out about stoppers, but I get the feeling this would just tell opponents what to lead and is not worth the memory strain.

Would be grateful for any opinions on how to handle these kinds of hands. Is it worth poking around to make sure we've got all suits covered for 3NT, or is it best to just bid it and hope you have enough stoppers / tricks? Do any of the more modern expert methods (opener transfer rebids etc) help here?

Thanks,

ahydra

[Cyberyeti]

We play a GF not necessarily balanced 2N rebid over which we make the cheapest sensible response, so E would bid 3♦ saying no more than "I have 5+ diamonds and not 4 clubs". We would occasionally bid 3♣ with 3 very good clubs, so I think it's clear for W with KQs rather than aces to bypass 3N.

On your second hand, I've been in worse places than 4♠ which might play well given that N will have bid 3 hearts over 2N so they're unlikely to lead one and 3N is no bargain on a club lead.

[Zelandakh]

 ahydra, on 2015-December-13, 13:44, said:

We play 5cM weak NT, though I think this applies to any non-2/1 system.

Actually not, what matters is whether 1M - 2m; 2M is forcing. It is in SAYC, SEF and Forum D but not in Acol. Assuming it is forcing, the simplest solution is for an immediate raise to 3m to show extras while rebidding 2M and subsequently raising shows a weaker hand. After supporting the minor, new suits either show stops or are advance cue bids, to be clarified on the next round.

Obviously there are also methods that can help - relays for example make it easy to find the fit as well as show the extras and shortage below 3NT but I am guessing you are not looking to make such a radical change to the system.

[rhm]

One reason I prefer 2/1 as unconditional game forcing is that I know what will be forcing thereafter.
Not playing such a system you deem it not necessary to tell us what continuations you consider forcing and more important what might be not.
There is not much common agreement here. To mention just two agreements I know of and have played in the past are

1) Bidding is forced up to 2NT
or
2) responder will bid again if the bidding is below game.

From your comment it seems that you consider a minor suit raise not forcing on responder. Sounds to me like stone-age ACOL with 5 card majors.
Without any special further agreements I would bid 2♥ followed by a diamond raise, not ideal but hinting at club shortage
The worst what might happen is that partner will raise hearts, in which case I would follow up with 4♦.
It is unlikely that we belong in 3NT once partner raises hearts and if partner insists on hearts we might belong there.

You example hand is a good illustration why lowering the requirements for 2/1 and as a consequence lots of non forcing continuations is a much more difficult system to play.

Rainer Herrmann

[helene_t]

Zelandakh describes how it works if you play a 2♠ rebid as forcing.

If you play Acol, you have to rebid either 2NT or 4♦ (or 4♣ splinter). If you don't like either of those, you could agree that a balanced 12-14 with a 5-card major always opens 1NT while a minimum one-suited hand opens 2♠, showing say 9-12 HCPs (the weaker preempts would open a multi 2♦). Then the 2♠ rebid is forcing, showing either
- spades and a minor, too weak for 3♣
- spades only, 13-14 points i.e. not quite gf
- spades only, 15+ points but the suit not good enough for 3♠

and a subsequent 2NT bid by responder is also forcing. (In SAYC, responder's 2NT rebid is not forcing, but that is mostly because opener can have a balanced minimum).

You will then get too high when opener has a 5224 or 5314 11-count while responder has a 2452 or similar 10-count. So it isn't perfect either.

[ahydra]

 Zelandakh, on 2015-December-14, 03:32, said:

Actually not, what matters is whether 1M - 2m; 2M is forcing. It is in SAYC, SEF and Forum D but not in Acol. Assuming it is forcing, the simplest solution is for an immediate raise to 3m to show extras while rebidding 2M and subsequently raising shows a weaker hand. After supporting the minor, new suits either show stops or are advance cue bids, to be clarified on the next round.

Obviously there are also methods that can help - relays for example make it easy to find the fit as well as show the extras and shortage below 3NT but I am guessing you are not looking to make such a radical change to the system.

We don't play 1M-2x; 2M as forcing (responder can pass with a bare minimum 2/1, but will normally bid on). 1M-2x; 2y (y != M) is forcing though.

I have however been strongly considering raising the min strength for 2/1 to 11 HCP (or a good 10) such that we can then play 2/1 as forcing to 2NT. (Partner has finally stopped making very light openings ) This would enable the methods described above, which look rather interesting. Can you please clarify:
- 1M-2m; 3m-3x (stop or advance cue); does opener's 4m = "slam interest" or "we don't have stoppers for 3NT"?
- 1M-2m; 3m-3NT promises stops in both unbid suits I guess? What if m = diamonds and responder has a club stop but no oM stop?

Thanks,

ahydra

[Zelandakh]

You bring up one of my favourite topics . Standard is to play stopper shows and control-showing bids here but, as you point out, that gives Responder a problem when not holding a suitable stopper. On this auction Responder can probably get away with 3M most if the time but this is a situation that comes up time and again in natural bidding.

The more complicated solution is to play stopper asks rather than stopper shows but that has a corollary, in that the advance cue bids are now the suit where Responder was lacking a control rather than showing one. That is probably a bridge too far for you and your partner so you will just have to muddle through.

The last point is 4m. The rule here depends a little on how forcing you consider the auction. Many play a GF auction as not allowing a stop in 4m while others simply play it as forcing to 3NT. If the former then 4m is a slam try if that makes sense. If the latter then a reasonable way of playing is for 4m to be natural and non-forcing if partner has denied a specific stopper, whether explicitly (by skipping a suit) or implicitly (because they were unable (or unwilling) to bid 3NT). As the latter is more complicated, I would suggest playing the first way for a while. If you get frustrated with that, consider the second. If you do, I also suggest doing a search on PK's posts in the area - he has a lot of optimised rules for stopping in 4m on auctions like this that might be useful.

[jallerton]

 ahydra, on 2015-December-13, 13:44, said:

We play 5cM weak NT, though I think this applies to any non-2/1 system.

Given the following hands:

---

What do you call with West? 3D is obviously a bit wimpish and 4C/4D are overbids, taking you past 3NT which would be the ideal contract if East had ♠32 ♥10765 ♦AJ105 ♣KQ9, for example.

If 2NT (which is 15-19, forcing to 3NT), the natural call for East is a straight 3NT, and then a club lead through dummy's King is clearly a bit of a disaster. Partner is interested in changing our system over 2NT to find out about stoppers, but I get the feeling this would just tell opponents what to lead and is not worth the memory strain.

Would be grateful for any opinions on how to handle these kinds of hands. Is it worth poking around to make sure we've got all suits covered for 3NT, or is it best to just bid it and hope you have enough stoppers / tricks? Do any of the more modern expert methods (opener transfer rebids etc) help here?

Thanks,

ahydra

The West hand is an awkward one to show in most systems (just agreeing to play a 2/1 as game forcing doesn't solve the problem unless you have some pretty sophisticated agreements thereafter.) A non-forcing 3♦ is more than "a bit wimpish" and partner will never expect this shape for 2NT, not to mention the wrong-siding issue.

Note that if Opener's rounded suits are the other way round, or if the minors are swapped such that the initial response is 2♣, Opener has an easy 3-level splinter available, allowing Responder to select 3NT in a hand with values stuffed in the splinter suit. So the dilemma you face is only an issue when the response is 2♦, Opener has 4-card support and shortage in clubs.

On the actual West hand, whilst 3NT could be the last making contract, the slam potential is too great to ignore. Picture the pointed suits aces opposite. Playing traditional methods, I would bid 4♣, prepared to apologise if 3NT is the last making spot.

 ahydra, on 2015-December-14, 07:11, said:

We don't play 1M-2x; 2M as forcing (responder can pass with a bare minimum 2/1, but will normally bid on). 1M-2x; 2y (y != M) is forcing though.

I have however been strongly considering raising the min strength for 2/1 to 11 HCP (or a good 10) such that we can then play 2/1 as forcing to 2NT. (Partner has finally stopped making very light openings ) This would enable the methods described above, which look rather interesting. Can you please clarify:
- 1M-2m; 3m-3x (stop or advance cue); does opener's 4m = "slam interest" or "we don't have stoppers for 3NT"?
- 1M-2m; 3m-3NT promises stops in both unbid suits I guess? What if m = diamonds and responder has a club stop but no oM stop?

Thanks,

ahydra

Playing a 2/1 as forcing to 2NT creates all sorts of other problems; I don't recommend it, (especially) if playing weak NT. It's better to stick with 2/1 as forcing to 2M (so FG opposite 15+ balanced) or if you are going to force your 15-16 balanced hands to keep the bidding open after a 1NT responses, then you might as well play the 2-over-1M as forcing to game and get some benefit back there.