[mgoetze]

---

2♥/2♠/3♣? Does 2♥ imply a weaker hand that might discourage partner from bidding 2NT with 15-16?

[straube]

Yes, it promises 6 hearts and a hand that couldn't GF immediately or rebid 3H invitationally. It's still a fairly wide range, but opener should not remove to 2N with only 15-16.
This hand should rebid 2S. If you don't mind giving up your natural 2D rebid, you could play Bart.

http://www.bridgeguy...convention.html

[mike777]

yes good hand for BART 2d here now

[quiddity]

Agree with 2♠, but I don't think 2♥ promises 6 or implies a weaker hand.

[lycier]

mgoetze, on 2015-December-15, 13:38, said:

2♥/2♠/3♣? Does 2♥ imply a weaker hand that might discourage partner from bidding 2NT with 15-16?

Never unless employ relay bid,something like Bart,Lisa or Gazzilli etc.
Forcing 1nt should include weaker and invitational hand in principle.

[awm]

2♥ is less than invitational. To invite with six hearts, bid 3♥ here (unless immediate jump shift was invitational, in which case 3♥ here shows a club fit).

Inviting with five hearts is a weak point in vanilla 2/1. The standard thing to do is bid 2nt. If opener has three hearts he can bid them on the way to game if accepting, but you can miss hearts opposite a 5314 11 count (for example).

BART (and other similar methods) solve this problem at the cost of losing a natural and NF 2♦ call in this auction.

[kenrexford]

awm, on 2015-December-15, 20:26, said:

2♥ is less than invitational. To invite with six hearts, bid 3♥ here (unless immediate jump shift was invitational, in which case 3♥ here shows a club fit).

Inviting with five hearts is a weak point in vanilla 2/1. The standard thing to do is bid 2nt. If opener has three hearts he can bid them on the way to game if accepting, but you can miss hearts opposite a 5314 11 count (for example).

BART (and other similar methods) solve this problem at the cost of losing a natural and NF 2♦ call in this auction.

For some reason, the way you explained this, which was very good, suggested an idea to me. With the emergence of 2C as an expansive tool, a 2D response tends to carry less weight. The diamond holding, conversely, is problematic with Bart. A possible theoretical solution that I have not before considered might be to make a 2D response the sole 2/1 that is not GF. Maybe a Lawrence 2D, a Hardy 2H, and a Modern GF semi-artificial 2C. A loose parallel exists in Colin Ward's Golady plus Toddler, and maybe he was onto something.

[mgoetze]

awm, on 2015-December-15, 20:26, said:

2♥ is less than invitational. To invite with six hearts, bid 3♥ here (unless immediate jump shift was invitational, in which case 3♥ here shows a club fit).

Inviting with five hearts is a weak point in vanilla 2/1. The standard thing to do is bid 2nt. If opener has three hearts he can bid them on the way to game if accepting, but you can miss hearts opposite a 5314 11 count (for example).

OK, but are you saying that the hand I gave in the OP is an invitational hand? I rather thought at the time, with 9 opposite 12-14, I don't want to be in game, but I certainly do want to give opener a chance to show more than 14, so I must keep the bidding alive. Is 2♥ or 2♠ (or possibly 3♣) the best way to do that?

By the way, I am well aware of the existence of Bart, Lisa, Gazzilli, etc. so y'all can stop mentioning those now.

[aguahombre]

2♠...willing to give up the magic 16's with four clubs which won't bid 2nt over my 2-card preference. Particularly ugly would be 5-3-1-4 languishing in 2♠. Maybe an opponent will help us out with a really stupid 3D balance when partner has that, and he will head to the bar muttering when we score up 4H.

[lorserker]

i think that 2h shows 5 hearts with some 8-11 points, or 6 hearts with some 6-9.
the example hand is a bit too weak for a 3c raise, imo.

[all loomis]

mgoetze, on 2015-December-15, 13:38, said:

---

2♥/2♠/3♣? Does 2♥ imply a weaker hand that might discourage partner from bidding 2NT with 15-16?

the general purpose answer is to not play 2/1. if you bid immediate 2h with 5 h's and 10+, your second rnd 2h is a comfortable 6-9. is this suit long enough? yes, if you instruct pd to bid 2s with just 1 h. then he has real c's. this technique requires that r. be 25xx, 16xx, 155x, or at least 3 c's. occasionally you will wish you were back in 2c, but in the age of 1n forcing, you seldom have that luxury any way.

[nige1]

mgoetze, on 2015-December-15, 13:38, said:

2♥/2♠/3♣? Does 2♥ imply a weaker hand that might discourage partner from bidding 2NT with 15-16?

---

I rank

• 2♥ = Usually 6-cards but your ♥ suit is chunky. Nevertheless, there is a risk of playing in a silly contract.
• 2♠ = Raise/preference (IMO less constructive than 2♥).
• 3♠ = Jump preference (an overbid).
• Pass = Unenterprising.
• 3♣ = Unlikely to achieve much.
• 3♥ = Fit jump (but only by agreement).

[straube]

A few references fwiw

Grant/Rodwell...1S-1N, 2C-3H example xx AQJxxx Kxx xx knr 12.6

Hardy...1S-1N, 2C-3H example 4 AKJT73 QT92 64 knr 15.1

Bergen...1S-1N, 2D-2H example 4 KQJ65 8743 965 "Remember that partner may have only 3 diamonds."

Bergen...1S-1N, 2m-2H example 84 KJ9432 7 Q763

Root...1S-1N, 2D-2H example 62 KQJ96 74 T987 "shows 6 to 10 points and a very strong five-card suit, or any six-card or longer suit. In effect your 2H bid says
'Partner, I have no support for your two suits, but I have a very substantial suit of my own; I am prepared to play my suit even if you pass with a singleton heart.' "

[gszes]

2h is merely an expression of a reasonable place to play opposite a minimum non fitting auction. While 6 hearts would be nice 5 decent hearts is fine like this hand. Bypassing 2h risks losing the heart suit and even worse a heart game opposite many merely reasonable opening bids. It is true that 2s might play better than 2h if opener is short but probably not much better and if opener runs we will have a vastly superior idea on where to settle. I would not run the risk of a 2H bid K2 87432 QJ QJ32 (2s) though I would with K2 JT982 xx QJ32 but would not have much heartache for anyone that passed 2c.

[fromageGB]

Call me a wimp, but pass is better than 2♥ in my view. I don't want to play in hearts opposite a 5xx5 or 5xx4. The yellow box says "3+ clubs", but I understand a non-forcing NT may be passed if opener had 3 clubs only. While opener may have a 15/16 hand in these methods (I assume) surely a 12-14 with clubs is more likely? Even if partner is a max 16, NT does not look too good to me with a diamond lead marked.

Pass. I'm unenterprising on this.

[mgoetze]

fromageGB, on 2016-January-02, 15:47, said:

While opener may have a 15/16 hand in these methods (I assume) surely a 12-14 with clubs is more likely? Even if partner is a max 16,

A jump shift to 3♣ is gameforcing. For some people 3♣ would even be artificial, and their maximum for 2♣ would be 19, but with nothing so fancy, we'll say the max is 17. It's certainly not 16.

Taking a false preference on 9+ points is a completely standard thing to do in these sorts of methods, my only question here was whether 2♥ might be even better than the false preference. Pass is not an option as far as I'm concerned.

[aguahombre]

mgoetze, on 2016-January-02, 16:00, said:

Taking a false preference on 9+ points is a completely standard thing to do in these sorts of methods, my only question here was whether 2♥ might be even better than the false preference. Pass is not an option as far as I'm concerned.

Taking a false pref on 9 or 10 points is completely standard. 2♥ might well be better here; but I probably wouldn't do it unless the spades were xx and the hearts a bit chunkier. I agree that passing 2♣ is just plain wrong.

[fromageGB]

In which case, if partner may be 17, I agree at IMPs. (I hate these very wide ranging rebids though.) If you make any bid, presumably partner is going to bid something with a 16/17, so whether ♥ or ♠ does not matter in that sense. ♥ is better in that it will push him to NT if he has ♦ stops, say a 5134 shape. Conversely, if he is weak, ♥ is worse because he will pass in a bad fit while you have a much better club fit.

As you are assuming/hoping he is strong, I'd go with hearts. If I'm forced to play this wide range method at MPs I'd probably tank for a long time before coming down on hearts or pass. Thinking that he can't be balanced (if his 1NT may include a 5 card major), if he is 16/17, presumably he would have rebid spades on a 6xx4, so the options left for the 2♣ rebid are very limited. This pushes the odds way back into the weak category, so having tanked, I'm passing.