[maris oren]

partner bids 1 ♦. Opponents pass. I have 4 ♥ and 5 ♣ 11 hcp. WHAT SHOULD I BID?

[Cyberyeti]

 maris oren, on 2021-January-17, 05:20, said:

partner bids 1 ♦. Opponents pass. I have 4 ♥ and 5 ♣ 11 hcp. WHAT SHOULD I BID?

What system are you playing ?

If you're playing 2/1, you're not good enough for 2♣ so you bid 1♥.

If you're playing Acol (or SAYC I suspect), you bid 2♣.

There is only one complication I can think of which is that some people (me included) play 1♦-2♣-2♦-2♥ as an artificial ask, if you play this as GF (we don't), you might want to respond 1♥ with a minimal 2/1.

[morecharac]

 Cyberyeti, on 2021-January-17, 06:00, said:

If you're playing 2/1, you're not good enough for 2♣ so you bid 1♥.

I will point out that if you do play 1♦-2♣ as 2/1 it's now an Alert.

Using Standard American, I'd respond 1♥. 2♣ is available as a natural rebid if partner rebids ♠ or NT.

[Cyberyeti]

 morecharac, on 2021-January-17, 14:57, said:

I will point out that if you do play 1♦-2♣ as 2/1 it's now an Alert.

Using Standard American, I'd respond 1♥. 2♣ is available as a natural rebid if partner rebids ♠ or NT.

What do you do if partner rebids 2♦ ?

[pescetom]

 morecharac, on 2021-January-17, 14:57, said:

I will point out that if you do play 1♦-2♣ as 2/1 it's now an Alert.

It is 2/1 however you play: I assume you mean 2/1 GF.
And 1♥-2♣ GF is not an Alert? Somewhat illogical.
Although we do not alert 2/1 either GF or INV, which I guess could seem illogical too.

[johnu]

 morecharac, on 2021-January-17, 14:57, said:

I will point out that if you do play 1♦-2♣ as 2/1 it's now an Alert.

Under what jurisdiction???

[blackshoe]

 morecharac, on 2021-January-17, 14:57, said:

I will point out that if you do play 1♦-2♣ as 2/1 it's now an Alert.

Not quite sure what you mean by that. 2♣ is certainly a 2 over 1 response. If you mean that if it's forcing it requires an alert, then I ask which part of the new alert regulation says that.

Edit: "It's now an alert" suggested to me that you're talking about ACBL regulations, since those just recently changed. If you're not, I withdraw the question, but I'd like to know what jurisdiction you're talking about.

[Zelandakh]

 Cyberyeti, on 2021-January-17, 06:00, said:

If you're playing Acol (or SAYC I suspect), you bid 2♣.

The modern form of Acol typically responds 1♥ with this hand, with 1♦ - 2♣; 2♦ - 2♥ getting defined as natural and game-forcing.

[Cyberyeti]

 Zelandakh, on 2021-January-19, 07:15, said:

The modern form of Acol typically responds 1♥ with this hand, with 1♦ - 2♣; 2♦ - 2♥ getting defined as natural and game-forcing.

This is something I don't recognise as acol, 2♥ for most acol players is not FG, 2N, 3♣, 3♦ and 3♥ are NF over it for most.

[mikeh]

 morecharac, on 2021-January-17, 14:57, said:

I will point out that if you do play 1♦-2♣ as 2/1 it's now an Alert.

Using Standard American, I'd respond 1♥. 2♣ is available as a natural rebid if partner rebids ♠ or NT.

I may be mistaken, because wild horses couldn't get me to play 'pure' standard American, if such a thing exists and if anyone knows what it is:)

However, I think that by now even SA plays 1S 1H 1S 2C as 4SF, and equally 1D 1H 1N 2C as some form of new minor.

Maybe, if the OP plays Acol, standard Acol is so out of touch with modern bidding theory that it doesn't use 4SF or any form of NMF. If that's true, I recommend to the OP that she learn another method:)

[Tramticket]

 Zelandakh, on 2021-January-19, 07:15, said:

The modern form of Acol typically responds 1♥ with this hand, with 1♦ - 2♣; 2♦ - 2♥ getting defined as natural and game-forcing.

I'm not aware of Acol players who play it as game forcing. It is a one-round force for almost everyone, but very old-school Acol players might play it as non-forcing!

As far as the opening post goes, I respond 2C if I think that I am worth two bids, but respond 1H if I am inclined to pass after 1D-2C-2D.

[Cyberyeti]

 mikeh, on 2021-January-19, 13:25, said:

I may be mistaken, because wild horses couldn't get me to play 'pure' standard American, if such a thing exists and if anyone knows what it is:)

However, I think that by now even SA plays 1S 1H 1S 2C as 4SF, and equally 1D 1H 1N 2C as some form of new minor.

Maybe, if the OP plays Acol, standard Acol is so out of touch with modern bidding theory that it doesn't use 4SF or any form of NMF. If that's true, I recommend to the OP that she learn another method:)

Standard acol uses 4SF except 1♣-1♦-1♥-1♠.

Quoting from the EBU's standard english doc it is not FG at the 2 level

Quote

After the fourth suit is bid at the two level, the following rebids by opener are not forcing:
A minimum rebid in opener’s first suit
A minimum rebid of no trumps
Simple preference for responder’s suit (often only doubleton support)

Other rebids are forcing to game. Fourth suit at the three level is forcing to game. These guidelines are similar to bidding after a reverse. It follows that to use fourth suit at the two level you need at least 11 HCP and at the three level, a good 12 or so. Avoid FSF if you can make a natural descriptive bid.

If responder bids on over opener’s minimum rebid, the partnership is forced to game.

It doesn't use NMF/checkback/Crowhurst, although most acol players do.

[Tramticket]

 mikeh, on 2021-January-19, 13:25, said:

Maybe, if the OP plays Acol, standard Acol is so out of touch with modern bidding theory that it doesn't use 4SF or any form of NMF.

I can reassure you that 4th suit forcing is standard in Acol and has been for at least 70 years.

Some, including me, even play 4th suit forcing as game forcing!

Check back is more usual than NMF.

[mycroft]

 mikeh, on 2021-January-19, 13:25, said:

I may be mistaken, because wild horses couldn't get me to play 'pure' standard American, if such a thing exists and if anyone knows what it is:)

"Pure" standard american should be "exactly what you and I play, but with non-forcing 1NT and 2/1s being Limit+ (and the changes needed to make that work)." In 90+% of auctions, you'd never notice the difference.

But cue the story, which I'm sure you've read before, of my first bridge teacher who taught us 2/1 back in 198x. "A good SA system you know well can be as good as a good 2/1 system. But if you go to the partnership desk and say you play 2/1, you'll get a partner who plays all the things needed to make a good standard system work. If you get a 'can't play 2/1' partner, you can't guarantee that. For this reason alone, we're teaching 2/1." The only thing that has changed in the intervening is that now, if you get a partner that can't play 2/1 at the desk, you can't guarantee they can *play*.

[blackshoe]

Mentor, some 25 years ago: "I will not play 2/1."
Me: "Why not?"
Mentor: "It restricts my judgement too much."
Me: "That's fine for you, but I don't have any judgement!"

[morecharac]

 Cyberyeti, on 2021-January-17, 15:45, said:

What do you do if partner rebids 2♦ ?

If I have a ♦ void I run to 2NT and hope.

If I have 2-card support I pass.

If I have a singleton ♦ I pass and hope opponents decide to compete.

[morecharac]

 blackshoe, on 2021-January-18, 17:12, said:

Not quite sure what you mean by that. 2♣ is certainly a 2 over 1 response. If you mean that if it's forcing it requires an alert, then I ask which part of the new alert regulation says that.

Edit: "It's now an alert" suggested to me that you're talking about ACBL regulations, since those just recently changed. If you're not, I withdraw the question, but I'd like to know what jurisdiction you're talking about.

ACBL Alert Procedure.

Or the it-was-there-in-print-until-I-tried-to-find-it-after-spending-the-last-three-days-combining-households jurisdiction.

From memory, I was shocked that 1M-2♣ 2/1 GF was explicitly mentioned as not an Alert but 1♦-2♣ was left out.

I'll be thankful if anyone shows me that I'm either right or wrong. I've been through the new AP three times and really wish they'd run it past some non-bridge-expert proofreaders.

[helene_t]

If you play a strong NT system with 5-card majors you probably have to bid 1♥, as partner will rebid 2NT with a minimum and you will pass and may have missed a hearts fit.

You could agree that opener rebids 2♦ with a balanced minimum and that you can then bid 2♥ which wouldn't force to game, but I don't think that's standard anywhere.

If you play weak NT and/or 4-card majors, you could agree to bid 2♣ with this hand and then, after opener's 2♦ minimum rebid, could bid 2♥ which wouldn't force to game.

But I think that most pairs, regardless of NT range and whether they play 4-card majors or 5-card majors, play the auction
1♦-2♣
2♦-2♥
as forcing to game.

So the short story is: respond 1♥ unless you have a different agreement with partner. Which you presumably don't have, since you asked this question

[Stephen Tu]

 morecharac, on 2021-January-20, 20:53, said:

ACBL Alert Procedure.

Or the it-was-there-in-print-until-I-tried-to-find-it-after-spending-the-last-three-days-combining-households jurisdiction.

From memory, I was shocked that 1M-2♣ 2/1 GF was explicitly mentioned as not an Alert but 1♦-2♣ was left out.

I'll be thankful if anyone shows me that I'm either right or wrong. I've been through the new AP three times and really wish they'd run it past some non-bridge-expert proofreaders.

2/1 *non-forcing* is an alert.

If 1M-2c is played as only 2+ clubs as many do these days (clubs or balanced, so 1M-2D shows 5+), it's an alert. If 3+ natural(ish) forcing strongish (whether one round, promising rebid, or GF) in minors it's not an alert. (1S-2H needs to show 4+ to be "natural" and thus unalertable but practically everyone plays it as 5+ if natural).

2/1 natural *showing GF*, or *showing inv+*, hasn't been alertable in ACBL since I think 1995 (maybe 96?). Prior to that I think playing it GF was alertable, I am a bit fuzzy as to exactly when the reg was changed but it was at least 25 years ago.

[Zelandakh]

 Tramticket, on 2021-January-19, 13:56, said:

I'm not aware of Acol players who play it as game forcing. It is a one-round force for almost everyone, but very old-school Acol players might play it as non-forcing!

As far as the opening post goes, I respond 2C if I think that I am worth two bids, but respond 1H if I am inclined to pass after 1D-2C-2D.

You should probably update your sources. See 2.3.1 of the official EBO Modern Acol system file:

Quote

With suits of unequal length, bid the longer first unless the hand is too weak to respond at the two level. Show a 4-card major at the one level in preference to a longer minor at the two level with fewer than 13 HCP. To bid the longer minor and then the 4-card major is called a Responder’s reverse and is forcing to game.