[dave_w]

gnasher, on 2012-April-15, 02:52, said:

If you could bid 1♦-2♣;2♦-2♥ non-forcing 2♥, that would be more descriptive, but nobody plays this as non-forcing. Even if you played it as a one-round force, it would be an overbid with a misfit, bad suits, and only a ten-count. But nowadays "everyone" plays this sequence as game-forcing, so 2♣ isn't even a possibility.

How do you play this sequence as GF? Did you notice that responder has passed in 2nd seat. They can't make a GF, in fact 2♥ is NF in much the same way as 1♥ is NF and ANYTHING a PH bids is NF (except I suppose a splinter)

Nabooba, on 2012-April-15, 03:01, said:

Does this mean that you play a system in which a subsequent 2♥ bid is non forcing? If so, then 2♣ is right for you. However if you play that 2♥ is forcing, then how will partner ever "be able to figure out my shape later"?

Of course a subsequent 2♥ bid is NF. Did you also miss that the responder is a passed hand?

I wonder if anyone's vote would change if they'd looked at the auction and seen that they are a passed hand. It's easy to know this at the table .... but when given a problem you have to look at the auction to know what you've already bid (I'm a 1♥ bidder regardless).

[mgoetze]

Yes, I do in fact play that all bids by a passed hand are non-forcing. Sue me.

[gnasher]

dave_w, on 2012-April-15, 05:01, said:

Did you notice that responder has passed in 2nd seat.

No, I hadn''t noiced that. However, that just creates a different problem: partner may pass 2♣ when we belong in hearts.

[dake50]

The problem as I see it, is which of 2C to promise 10 points
- hoping partner continues 2H if he has 4xH.
Or 1H and hope partner gives me a chance to show my max-pass.
If he's not trying game and quits after either 2C or 1H,
I like 2C - hoping opponents reopen. No cheap 1S for them.

[lalldonn]

mgoetze, on 2012-April-15, 00:32, said:

Because if I don't bid 2♣ now partner will never be able to figure out my shape later.

- And if you belong in 1NT, which I would say is probably your most likely contract at this point, will it really matter that you showed your shape so well?
- He might pass 2C when you belong in hearts.
- Your comment could also be made if you had a 2 count.

[mgoetze]

lalldonn, on 2012-April-15, 10:13, said:

- And if you belong in 1NT, which I would say is probably your most likely contract at this point, will it really matter that you showed your shape so well?
- He might pass 2C when you belong in hearts.

I think these points are much more relevant at matchpoints and indeed I would unthinkingly bid 1♥ at matchpoints.

Quote

- Your comment could also be made if you had a 2 count.

Sure. However it wouldn't be quite as relevant - if I had a 2 count there wouldn't be any potential slam decisions coming up.

[straube]

I think 2C by a passed hand should show something like a weak two in clubs. it should emphasize the suit and less so the points. I played against two locals who were not on the same wavelength here. Responder bid. a four-card club suit to show she had ten points. She got to play in her 4-1 fit when 3N was probably making.

[aguahombre]

I am a bit surprised by the lopsided vote (with which I agree). I would have thought more posters would want to take alleged advantage of their passed-hand status and perpetrate a 2C response.

[straube]

I'm not surprised. I voted 1H, but my second choice would have to be 1N...which ought to infer at least 3 clubs. If partner has 4/4 in the minors, he can offer a choice for what should be an 8+ card fit. Responding 2C with KTxxx is very directional. I mean, I would never preempt this suit at the two-level so I wouldn't make a NFB with it now. Partner ought to expect something more like xx Kxx xx AJxxxx.

[han]

I suspect some 2C haters missed the fact that we are a passed hand, but I still think 1H is clearly right. You say that you will never be able to show your pattern if you start with 1H, but partner will not expect a 4-card major when you bid 2C. He'll be passing with all minimal 4-4-4-1's for example, and playing in 2C would look a little silly then!

Still, a useful question.

[rhm]

rmnka447, on 2012-April-14, 22:52, said:

Simple bid 1 ♥. There's not enough points to bid 2 ♣ and reverse into ♥s.

A very wise old player when asked about his secret to success at bridge said "I don't do anything that I can be criticized for in the post mortem." Sounds sort of corny...

It is.

Rainer Herrmann

[lalldonn]

Why are you thinking slam already? If you are that concerned then you probably shouldn't play 2/1 game forcing since you have the same issue if you aren't a passed hand as well.

[Cyberyeti]

1♥ I think.

2♣ would just about be possible but an overbid as I play a Bourke type relay, I would have to bid 1♦-2♣-2♦-2N to show a minimum F1 2/1 with 4+ clubs 4 hearts, this might work too so no strong preference.

[mike777]

thought this was a 1h wtp?

same bid as if unpassed hand. same issues.

[WellSpyder]

rmnka447, on 2012-April-14, 22:52, said:

A very wise old player when asked about his secret to success at bridge said "I don't do anything that I can be criticized for in the post mortem." Sounds sort of corny, but it's actually great advice.

Easier said than done! I find that what I can be criticised for can depend on the other hands at the table, so it is sometimes impossible to find an action that won't be criticised some of the time.....

[mgoetze]

lalldonn, on 2012-April-18, 16:23, said:

Why are you thinking slam already? If you are that concerned then you probably shouldn't play 2/1 game forcing since you have the same issue if you aren't a passed hand as well.

As a matter of fact I do like playing 2/1M GF but 1♦-2♣ not GF.

Anyway, why not think about slam once in a while... they do come up now and then. The only question is how big is the risk of missing a game by bidding 2♣, and I guess I had a different estimation of that than most of the responders in this thread.