[briannz556]

Hi
I was sitting West with this hand yesterday West which caused me issues:

---

My Partner and I are playing 2/1 Marty Bergen style bidding [ as best we can ] and we managed to get to 6D with various Control Bids. Can I seek expert opinion on a sensible approach to bidding a slam in either H or D. To get the ball rolling, I opened 1D and partner responded 1H. Jumping to 3C seemed to me to be the best way to force P to bid and at the same time describe my hand. Any help would be appreciated.

[The_Badger]

I've been looking at this 15 minutes and can't decide what is the best way to proceed. Given that there are many players more experienced in 2/1 than me, I'll let them give you a definitive answer.

[ggwhiz]

One key thing to agree on is that a jump shift, 3♣ here is game forcing. Your hand would not be worth that if your partner had responded 1♠ but I think it is after 1♥. That means that partner has to often make an uncomfortable courtesy 2nd bid over a 2♣ rebid with a good 8+.

You can both bid low and slow with East choosing 3♦ or 3♥ at their next turn and it sounds like they chose 3♦ since you control bid to slam from there.

Nothing is perfect but if East chooses 3♥ and you land in 6♥ to a low spade lead I don't like your chances and 6♦ even protecting from an opening club lead (if it mattered) is far superior. I wouldn't get it right all the time.

[briannz556]

 ggwhiz, on 2018-September-19, 15:21, said:

One key thing to agree on is that a jump shift, 3♣ here is game forcing. Your hand would not be worth that if your partner had responded 1♠ but I think it is after 1♥. That means that partner has to often make an uncomfortable courtesy 2nd bid over a 2♣ rebid with a good 8+.

You can both bid low and slow with East choosing 3♦ or 3♥ at their next turn and it sounds like they chose 3♦ since you control bid to slam from there.

Nothing is perfect but if East chooses 3♥ and you land in 6♥ to a low spade lead I don't like your chances and 6♦ even protecting from an opening club lead (if it mattered) is far superior. I wouldn't get it right all the time.

That sounds about right to my way of thinking. As it turned out 6H goes down on a D lead but 6D makes.

[The_Badger]

 ggwhiz, on 2018-September-19, 15:21, said:

One key thing to agree on is that a jump shift, 3♣ here is game forcing.

I was thinking on those lines too. I looked up a few 2/1 reference sources that I use but couldn't see one that said in this sequence 3♣ is unconditionally forcing to game. Though give responder the barest minimum hand for a 1♥ response, something like ♠QJxx ♥Kxxxx ♦x ♣xxx, and there is some play for a thin game depending on the lead or breaks.

[ggwhiz]

 The_Badger, on 2018-September-20, 03:05, said:

couldn't see one that said in this sequence 3♣ is unconditionally forcing to game.

I think that it's a newer wrinkle that we picked up on maybe 5-6 years ago. Most often happens with good and very shapely (6-5 type) hands. Better slam auctions for sure and forcing to game means we make most of them, not all.

[kuhchung]

I would probably land in 6H here. This is an ok slam to miss.

1D 1H
3C 3D
3H

The jump shift is a little light but like other posters said, the shape and partner's response help justify it. It's either that or rebidding 2C.
Responder bids 3D because he fits diamonds, and jump shifts can be a bit phony to force game, and because it's the cheapest call.
Opener shapes out with 3H, and at this point I would be forcing slam as responder in hearts.

Nobody can blackwood since you've both got some voids, so I would just guess to bid 6H at some point. I see that I go down.

Also, I am not an expert.

[gordontd]

 The_Badger, on 2018-September-20, 03:05, said:

I was thinking on those lines too. I looked up a few 2/1 reference sources that I use but couldn't see one that said in this sequence 3♣ is unconditionally forcing to game.

What conditions did you find stated that would allow it to be dropped below game?

[dokoko]

IMO a reasonable bidding would be

1♦-1♥
3♣-3♥ (not sure whether 3♦ may be passed)
3♠*-4♦
and control bidding to 6♦

Wests hand wants to declare, so if partner supports I prefer to play in diamonds - even at match points (but there might be some hindsight in this view).

[rhm]

 The_Badger, on 2018-September-20, 03:05, said:

I looked up a few 2/1 reference sources that I use but couldn't see one that said in this sequence 3♣ is unconditionally forcing to game.

 gordontd, on 2018-September-21, 00:15, said:

What conditions did you find stated that would allow it to be dropped below game?

A jump in a new suit by opener has been forcing to game in all natural systems I know for ages.
I also do not think that this is different between 2/1 , Standard American or any of its forerunner.

Whether I would jump to 3♣ with the actual hand is less clear.
Probably not.
From West point of view there are 3 possible trump suits and you do not know where you belong and you need room to find out.
I consider the chance that 2♣ will get passed out minimal. (Where are all the spades?)

When opener forces to game on the second round he will have trouble finding out how strong responder really is.

Rainer Herrmann

[mikeh]

in standard and 2/1 methods in NA, the jumpshift establishes a gf. This is important to the overcall design/function of the methods.

Establishing a gf, before strain is established, frees up all subsequent actions to be involved, initially, in exploring strain, without fear that a 'cheap' bid will be passed.

The other day I held AKQ10xxx Qxx Ax Q and partner opened 1H, I bid 1S (2S would have been a jacoby 2N type heart raise) and partner surprised me by jumping to 3C.

I was able to bid 3H (since I was planning eventually on keycarding so wanted to set hearts, not my virtually solid spades) and eventually we reached the laydown 7H (7N was also laydown).

My point is that having the game force established allows for relatively relaxed bidding thereafter.

Once in a while you will get too high. Don't sweat it. Even the best system in the world, played by the best players in the world, will lead on occasion to 'wrong' contracts. Bidding system design is all about trade-offs and all experts I know of, and I know some very strong players, agree that in the context of a wide-range natural based system, jumpshifts by opener are gf. Note that this is entirely different when playing a limited opening method, such as precision.

On this hand, responder has two concerns over 3C. One is that this hand has reasonable diamond support and it may be useful to show it. The other is that this hand has far longer and better hearts than so far promised, and maybe should show it. I wouldn't worry about the spade suit. We are never playing in spades, and I am not going to head directly for 3N with this hand.

I think it very close.

Seeing the hands, I have an easy 3D call because partner will bid 3H. Now, 3H is ambiguous. What is he to bid with say xx Ax AKJxx AKxx?

Note that 3H is not a cuebid...it is some support, but he may be under pressure...and in those circumstances responder should clearly be bidding 3N, but 4H will survive.

I can't tell whether in real life I'd bid 3D or 3H...as is often the case, knowing the hand makes it impossible to be objective.

Over 3H, which is definitely a plausible bid over 3C, opener has another decision. He's sort of stretched already, but the 3H call, confirming at least 5 hearts, makes his hand even stronger. Now, instead of a minimum jumpshift, his hand is at least a full value jumpshift.

Picure xxx KJxxxx Ax xx to see why.

And he'd raise to 4H with say Ax Qx KQJxx AKxx (although some would choose a 2N rebid rather than 3C).

However, back in the real world, had responder rebid hearts, I think I content myself with 4H and now I'm not at all sure what responder should do.

I think maybe


1D 1H
3C 3H
4H 4S cuebid
5C 5H 5C cuebid, 5H denies diamond control
?

But this is all far from clear and the auction might well end in 4H.

[pescetom]

 rhm, on 2018-September-21, 15:16, said:

A jump in a new suit by opener has been forcing to game in all natural systems I know for ages.
I also do not think that this is different between 2/1 , Standard American or any forerunner.

It's always been strongly forcing but in most older systems (including SA I think) not unconditionally to game. In modern 2/1 yes, Di Stefano and Martinelli are two texts I could cite.

[rhm]

 pescetom, on 2018-September-21, 15:39, said:

It's always been strongly forcing but in most older systems (including SA I think) not unconditionally to game. In modern 2/1 yes, Di Stefano and Martinelli are two texts I could cite.

Sorry but you are mistaken and this is part of any beginner lesson.
In fact a rebid in a lower ranking suit like 2♣ is wide ranging (12-18 HCP), precisely because the jump is unconditionally game forcing showing 19+ HCP, whether you play Standard American or ACOL or almost any other natural system with wide ranging one-bids.
(This is different in strong club systems where opener is already limited by not opening 1♣. Kaplan-Sheinwuld is insofar an exception for this particular sequence because KS plays a 2♣ rebid already as strong and forcing)

For example

http://www.rpbridge.net/1t69.htm

Rainer Herrmann

[pescetom]

 gordontd, on 2018-September-21, 00:15, said:

What conditions did you find stated that would allow it to be dropped below game?

Here's an example of a competitive five card major system where if responder returns to the opening suit the game force is dropped:


Italian 5 card major system
(See top of page 39).

This is not widespread but neither unknown nor unreasonable.

[pescetom]

 rhm, on 2018-September-22, 05:10, said:

Sorry but you are mistaken and this is part of any beginner lesson.

Sorry but you are generalizing and I am not mistaken. See previous post for just one example of a system where it is not unconditionally game forcing. RP is a great source of wisdom for beginners though, I agree.

[rhm]

 pescetom, on 2018-September-22, 10:25, said:

Here's an example of a competitive five card major system where if responder returns to the opening suit the game force is dropped:

https://www.scribd.com/doc/2

(See top of page 39).

This is not widespread but neither unknown nor unreasonable.

What has money exchange to do with our discussion?
There is no page 39

Rainer Herrmann

[The_Badger]

mikeh's thread

https://www.bridgeba...everse-bidding/

is an interesting read on reverse bidding. Reverse bidding is not unconditionally forcing to game in all systems. Certainly not when I played bridge regularly. Discounting 2/1 where a two level response by responder automatically establishes a game forcing situation, the general rules of reverse bidding were a one level response by responder followed by a two level reverse rebid by opener were forcing for one round; a two level bid by responder followed by any reverse by opener, or, a one level response by responder followed by a high reverse (three level reverse) by opener were unconditionally forcing to game.

I think we all agree there are marginal hands for reversing in the 16-17 range, where the bidding goes 1♦ - 1♥ - 2♠, and stronger hands of 18+ HCPs [plus distributional points.]

My take is that any reverse at two level by opener is 16+, but when you make a high reverse at the three level you should have 18+ especially in response to a one level response from responder.

Even with a three card fit for ♥s, the hand is worth 18+ That's why 3♣ should be unconditionally forcing in any system.

[smerriman]

 The_Badger, on 2018-September-23, 01:45, said:

Reverse bidding is not unconditionally forcing to game in all systems. Certainly not when I played bridge regularly.

A reverse is not forcing to game. 3♣ is a jump shift, not a reverse, and *is* forcing to game.

[rhm]

 The_Badger, on 2018-September-23, 01:45, said:

mikeh's thread

https://www.bridgeba...everse-bidding/

is an interesting read on reverse bidding. Reverse bidding is not unconditionally forcing to game in all systems. Certainly not when I played bridge regularly. Discounting 2/1 where a two level response by responder automatically establishes a game forcing situation, the general rules of reverse bidding were a one level response by responder followed by a two level reverse rebid by opener were forcing for one round; a two level bid by responder followed by any reverse by opener, or, a one level response by responder followed by a high reverse (three level reverse) by opener were unconditionally forcing to game.

I think we all agree there are marginal hands for reversing in the 16-17 range, where the bidding goes 1♦ - 1♥ - 2♠, and stronger hands of 18+ HCPs [plus distributional points.]

My take is that any reverse at two level by opener is 16+, but when you make a high reverse at the three level you should have 18+ especially in response to a one level response from responder.

Even with a three card fit for ♥s, the hand is worth 18+ That's why 3♣ should be unconditionally forcing in any system.

Reverses are different in the sense that opener has no other way showing the reverse suit
Nevertheless due to the bidding space they consume, reverses are strong and forcing, that is "almost" game forcing with only few exceptions. (There are different opinions what these exceptions should be)
A jump in a new suit is different in the sense that opener can always show the suit without a jump. For this reason a jump in a new suit tends to be even more expensive in term of bidding space than a reverse.
If openers initial opening bid was wide ranging, skipping a whole level is not very sensible unless you want to force unconditionally to game opposite a minimum response.
Stopping on a dime thereafter is a poor idea.

Rainer Herrmann

[nullve]

IMO,

1x-1y; 2z(x<z<y)

and

1x-1y; 3w(w<x<y)

are F1 and FG, respectively, only opposite a positive Responder, regardless of what books on standard bidding aimed at non-experts say. The reason is that a good player will often respond on subpositive (~0-4 hcp) hands in an attempt to improve the contract, and his best bet over 1x-1y; 2z/3w will then often be to pass, even though it could lead to silly results, as in

Opener: AKx-AQ-AQTxxxx-x
Responder: Jxxxx-xxx-x-Jxxx
Auction:

1♦-1♠
2♥-P

or

1♦-1♠
3♣-P,

where Opener has faked a second suit.