[katonka]

I have a regular pard. We discuss our partnership through e-mails

Here is my question.

Pard opens 2 Clubs, I respond: 2 Diamonds, pard responds 2 Spades,

I am holding 2 Spades, 4 Hearts, 3 diamonds, 4 Clubs and around 6 to 8 points.

It seems to me that most players respond with 3 NT. I feel this is wrong and I actually should respond by saying 3 Diamonds or maybe 3 Hearts.

I feel this is a artificial bid that tells my pard to bid 3 NT or to bid the spades again if having 6 or more.

My reasoning on this is that I want my pard to bid the 3 NT so the lead will be coming to the large hand instead of through it. Stayman and Jacoby are based on this and it should be done whenever possible. And it also leaves the bidding open for her response of 3 spades if she has 6 or more spades without having to go to 4 spades and me only having one.

I am hoping some of the experts that follow and help on this forum will help me with this one.

[whereagles]

with 2434 it seems right to bid

2♣ 2♦
2♠ 2NT

Now opener can:
- bid 3x with a side 4-card suit (you raise 3♥ to 4, else bid 3NT)
- rebid spades with 6 (you bid 4♠ then)
- bid 3NT with 5332/5242/5224 shapes (you pass)

[Cyberyeti]

What are your other responses ? is 2♦ any negative or do you play a 2♥ double negative. Is 2♠ unconditionally forcing to game ?

[wank]

3nt is pretty bad, but considerably better than 3d or 3h. just bid 2nt and let partner describe his hand. you can continue bidding later to convey your extra strength.

3d and 3h should be natural with at least a decent 5 card suit. there is absolutely no reason your own suit can't be trumps.

[mr1303]

Yes - 2NT after 2C 2D 2M should be a suggestion of playing NT, not some catch all bad hand bid.

[billw55]

The most important thing is that you and your partner understand each other. When you say "most people bid 3NT", that may be because the pairs you are observing do not have clear agreements in this situation, and just want to be sure they reach a playable contract.

If you think 3♦ or 3♥ should be artificial, feel free to give it a try, but just be sure partner agrees beforehand.

[rmnka447]

I certainly wouldn't bid 3 NT if my partner opened with a 2 ♣ bid.

With most of the partners I play with, we play 2 ♦ as a waiting bid. If you and your partner do so too, then you need to decide what bid shows a bad hand. In our agreements, we play that the bid of the cheapest suit is a 2nd negative to show the bad hand. As a result any other bid is forward going.

In addition, we play very disciplined positive responses direct over 2 ♣. A direct 2 of a major response promises 5 + cards to two honors and a hand with at least 1 1/2 QTs. A direct 3 of a minor response promises 5+ cards to 2 top honors and a hand with at least 2 QTs. Hands that don't qualify for these positive responses start with the 2 ♦ waiting bid.

Under this scheme, 2 NT becomes a forward going bid promising somewhere between 6-20 HCP and not having something else to show.

That would be responder's rebid with the hand you describe.

This use of 2 NT is valuable as it keeps the bidding low and lets the big hand have more space to describe their hand. (Keeping the bidding low and letting the big hand tell their story is a very important principle to adhere to in bidding these hands.) Consider if you bid 2 NT forward going and opener rebids 3 ♥. You would have a very easy 4 ♥ bid knowing you have at least a 4-4 fit. If opener instead rebids 3 ♠, you now know partner has at least 6 spades and can raise to 4 ♠. If opener rebids 3 of a minor and you have stoppers in the other suits, you can bid 3 NT. Or, if you have a ♥ stopper only after opener rebids 3 of a minor, you can rebid 3 ♥ asking about the 4th suit for NT.

Rebidding 3 NT with the hand you described precludes that further exchange of information. Unless opener is very distributional, it may be very difficult for opener to bid over 3 NT and risk bidding past the last makeable game.

[katonka]

whereagles, on 2014-September-02, 09:23, said:

with 2434 it seems right to bid

2♣ 2♦
2♠ 2NT

Now opener can:
- bid 3x with a side 4-card suit (you raise 3♥ to 4, else bid 3NT)
- rebid spades with 6 (you bid 4♠ then)
- bid 3NT with 5332/5242/5224 shapes (you pass)

is it not possible that he can pass the 2 NT? I would not consider it forcing.

And I have also brought the lead to my weak hand instead of to his big hand. Is this also not a good thing?

[helene_t]

2nt is forcing. After the 2s bid the only part score we can stop in is 3s.

Don't worry too much about who becomes declarer. It's more important to reach the right contract. Besides, most of the time we won't be playing notrumps

[Cyberyeti]

helene_t, on 2014-September-02, 16:55, said:

2nt is forcing. After the 2s bid the only part score we can stop in is 3s.

Don't worry too much about who becomes declarer. It's more important to reach the right contract. Besides, most of the time we won't be playing notrumps

Many people play 2♣ GF unless opener rebids 2N so 2♠ is forcing to game (and hence 3♠ shows a better hand than 4♠).

[helene_t]

Cyberyeti, on 2014-September-02, 17:35, said:

Many people play 2♣ GF unless opener rebids 2N so 2♠ is forcing to game (and hence 3♠ shows a better hand than 4♠).

Yes.

BTW 3♠ would be stronger than 4♠ even if 2♠ is only forcing to 3♠. It is rare that one wouldn't want to be in game with a fit - three spades and a doubleton is probably enough even with zero hcps. With 3334 and zero HCPs you can make a second negative (or a neutral 2NT if you don't have agreed on a second negative).

[Zelandakh]

You can think of it this way - over a 1♠ opening the natural response is 1NT, over which Opener will describe their hand further (or pass with a balanced minimum). Over a strong 2♠ nothing much has changed except that partner will not have a balanced minimum and therefore will not pass. In this way 2NT acts as the bucket response in much the same way as 1NT over 1♠.

Also, it may not be North American standard any more but I would suggest that the style in which 2♣ followed by a suit rebid is a game force is so much easier for N/B/I to handle as to be strongly recommended. Yes it gives you a problem with a genuine Strong Two hand type but those hands are comparatively rare and you can sometimes get by with a fake jump shift. Meanwhile avoiding the situation of not knowing which calls are forcing (such as with 2NT here) will make these auctions run much more smoothly.

[Zelandakh]

Oh yes, as an addition to what Helene wrote above me, raising 2♠ to 4♠ traditionally showed a good hand but no first round control. Some will also include no trump king in this these days if playing RKCB. With a weaker hand you start off with 2NT and then bid spades later - that is meant to provide a warning to Opener about moving past 4♠. The point is then that the direct 3♠ raise is not only better but also promises an ace (or a key card if playing that variation). This additional information can be helpful in making slam decisions.

[helene_t]

I wouldn't recommend using fake jump shifts for the 18-20 one-suited hands. If the objective is to make the system as simple as possible then I think fake jump shifts are worse than a semi-gf 2♣.

Most can rebid either 3NT (with 6(322)) or make an auto-splinter. The rest will have to overbid a little and open 2♣, even if it is GF.

[fromageGB]

Another point is not to worry about the fact that it is you playing the hand in NT, because NT will (probably) not be the contract. I assume you play some sort of 5 card stayman or puppet over a 2NT open? Then partner will not have bid 2♣ 2♠ with a balanced hand, because he would open 2NT or rebid 2NT for you to use that inquiry. He should be single-suited or two-suited, and by bidding the next step (2NT here) you enable him to freely bid his second suit.

This "bid the next step when opener rebids a major" is considered compulsory by some players, because it facilitates partner's hand description, and is not done with only a very weak hand, but can be strong.

If you don't want to make the 2♣ followed by a suit bid being game forcing, although that is easy, you can agree with partner that if he does NOT have a game force hand without help, you can pass his third bid at the 3-level. This means if he he does have game in his own hand he has to jump or reverse on the third bid. This is playable, having the advantage that you can happily open 2♣ with a trick short of game, and the disadvantage that there is less room for slam investigation. A better alternative might be that a 2♦ reply is artificial denying an A or K, while a 2♥ reply is artificial showing an (any) A or K. Over 2♦ he then has to jump in the second suit to force game, but after your 2♥ he does not have to because your bid sets up the game force.

[helene_t]

I really think that
2♣-2♦
2♥-(secondnegative or second relay or w/e)
3♦
should be forcing.

If you have a gf two-suited hand it is quite hopeless having to jump to the 4-level, especially if your second suit is a 4-card suit.

If you have a semi-gf two-suited hand it is no problem opening at the 1-level since you have an easy rebid.

BTW if you want responder to distinguish immediatel between the positive hands without clear direction and the busts, it is quite universal to play 2♦ as positive and 2♥ as negative.

[fromageGB]

helene_t, on 2014-September-03, 04:10, said:

BTW if you want responder to distinguish immediately between the positive hands without clear direction and the busts, it is quite universal to play 2♦ as positive and 2♥ as negative.

Although why this is more common has never been explained to me. I prefer 2♦ as negative because that facilitates the Kokish 2NT that gives the point range clarification that is needed when responder has little, but not needed when has the positive.
2♣ 2♦(neg) 2NT = 22/23
2♣ 2♦ 2♥ 2♠(forced) 2NT = 24/25
This makes responder's judgement of game easier.

Conversely, 2♣ 2♥(neg) 2NT must have a wider range as it is the only way of rebidding 2NT, so responder has a bigger guess.

Edit - typos

This post has been edited by fromageGB: 2014-September-06, 14:37

[fromageGB]

helene_t, on 2014-September-03, 04:10, said:

If you have a semi-gf two-suited hand it is no problem opening at the 1-level since you have an easy rebid.

The problem is that partner passes a 1-bid and you miss game when you are a trick short of being GF. One-suited or two-suited. If you open these 2♣ GF you have the alternative problem of going off in game.

[mycroft]

Ah, but with 2♥ negative, Kokish allows responder to determine slam prospects better. Remember that 2NT is 100% forcing after 2♣-2♦. Reasonably simple to me to decide on game: 2♣-2♥; 2NT says "I have more than 21, but need some help from you. Do you have *any*?" I'm not as comfortable with 2♥ "no A no K, could be 12", because now 2NT does need to have a range.

It's not that 2♥ negative is a *good* convention (it's not - for many reasons); it's that 2♣-2♦ immediate game force is worth the 2♥ (and 2NT, and potentially 2♠) fuddle.

[akwoo]

I'm more of the opinion that a 2♥ negative should be weak enough that the auction 2♣-2♥-2N-3N should be for all practical purposes nonexistent. If memory load for such a rare sequence wasn't a consideration, I would consider playing 2♣-2♥-2N-3♣ as a diamond transfer and 2♣-2♥-2N-3N as a club transfer. (Opener of course has the option to super-accept the 3N transfer by passing, for example with ♣KQx missing 5+ controls)