[lalldonn]

1♦ 1♠ P P
2♣ 2♥ 2NT=?

1♦ is precision style, 11-15 with 2+ diamonds

[ArtK78]

If third seat has 5 diamonds, he could bid 2♦ directly over 1♠. With 4-4 in the minors, he can raise to 3♣ over 2♥. And even with 4-3 in the minors, third seat can compete in one minor or the other if he chooses to do so (although it may be problematic which minor to compete in). It would be nice to be able to compete with 2NT to show both minors, but it is rarely necessary.

However, with a penalty double of 1♠ and values, third seat has no choice but to pass over 1♠. Now that the auction has come back to him, he has to do something over 2♥. 2NT is needed here to show a hand with values and long spades.

[lalldonn]

Assume you can't bid 2♦ directly over 1♠, that's something else (although of course with 5 diamonds you could bid 3♦ over 2♥ so it really doesn't matter)

[CSGibson]

We have the agreement that if 2N in competition has a reasonable alternative meaning to natural, then it is something other than natural. Here I would think it is a competitive call, asking opener to bid their better minor. I think X would be the hand that had a penalty pass of spades.

[gszes]

I use 2n to show two different types of 1s penalty pass hand

2n shows no heart stop (where we are extremely unlikely to want to x
the opps 2h bid)
x shows a heart stop (in case p wants to convert this to penalty)

we use 2s to ask p to pick their best minor or we can raise to 3 of our best
minor.

This system might wrongside NT on ocassion but it has the extra flexibility
to still hammer the opps in a misfit

[kenrexford]

Interesting sequence theoretically. I think one decent approach might be to use a combination of lebensohl and unusual, by way of the "one or both" approach that I came up with recently:

2♠ = competitive only with one or both minors (meaning, either competitive only with diamonds, competitive only with clubs, or competitive seeking help -- ala unusual). If Opener prefers diamonds, he bids 2NT (3♣ with club preference), and then Responder places the contract (if it stops here).
2NT = extras with support for both minors (unusual-ish with extras)
3minor = extras, natural

[perko90]

Is your question really getting at:

What does it mean (if not discussed previously)?

or

What should it mean?

Without any discussion, I would think "bid your best minor" is the most obvious choice.

But if you're asking what's the best meaning for 2NT, I'll defer to Ken & Co.

[nige1]

lalldonn, on 2012-June-28, 11:59, said:

1♦ 1♠ P P
2♣ 2♥ 2NT=?
1♦ is precision style, 11-15 with 2+ diamonds

Perhaps, here ...

• 2♠ = Natural.
• _X = Good misfit e.g. ♠KJxxxx ♥AQx ♦ xx ♣ xx.
• 2N = Good hand with ♠ and a minor fit (probably ♦) e.g. ♠ KJxxxx ♥ x ♦ Kxxx ♣ Ax.
• 3m = natural
• 3♥ = ♠ & ♣

[Phil]

I assume 2♣ is showing 10 cards in the minors. Possible shapes are 4-6, 5-5, or 6-4.

I can see:

A. 2N is equal length in a minor asking opener to choose. Probably 3-3, but maybe 4-4.
B. 2N is a competitive raise to 3m and 3m shows more values. This could help opener make an intelligent x of 3M or, more likely, compete to 4m when its right.

Getting to the right strain is more important here. I vote for "A".

However, in a 2/1 setting, I think I like "B", because 1) Opener's shape is better known and 2) Opener's range is much wider.

[rduran1216]

Phil, on 2012-June-29, 09:29, said:

I assume 2♣ is showing 10 cards in the minors. Possible shapes are 4-6, 5-5, or 6-4.

I can see:

A. 2N is equal length in a minor asking opener to choose. Probably 3-3, but maybe 4-4.
B. 2N is a competitive raise to 3m and 3m shows more values. This could help opener make an intelligent x of 3M or, more likely, compete to 4m when its right.

Getting to the right strain is more important here. I vote for "A".

However, in a 2/1 setting, I think I like "B", because 1) Opener's shape is better known and 2) Opener's range is much wider.

Why can't 2c be 2335? I dont understand people saying 2c is both minors here, its a precision system.

[Phil]

rduran1216, on 2012-June-29, 09:35, said:

Why can't 2c be 2335? I dont understand people saying 2c is both minors here, its a precision system.

Well, ask Josh, but generally:

- 1♦ - 1M - 2♣ (not in comp) promises 9 cards in the minors.

- I do not know what their 1N opening range is - probably 14-16. With 2335 he is doubling. With 3235 or 3325 I'm thinking he's passing.

- I also doubt he's reopening with 22(45) or 3145. Maybe, barely maybe something like xxx x AKxx AKJxx.

If I am wrong on any of these matters, Josh can correct me.

If you've played a precision system before, you'd know these things.

[lalldonn]

I learned after this came up that when playing precision with strong notrumps it's a good agreement that 1♦ 1M P P 1NT is both minors longer diamonds, whereas 2♣ is equal or longer clubs.

Obv I would pass out 3235 11-13, and pass or double 2335.

[wank]

it should be natural - Xing with all penalty doubles of spades is silly on this auction where opener has largely denied a decent heart holding by not doubling.

[steve2005]

For sure a ♠ trap

[psyck]

For sure 2NT is that Unusual Inverted Psycho Rumpelsohl creature.

[jallerton]

Phil, on 2012-June-29, 09:29, said:

I assume 2♣ is showing 10 cards in the minors. Possible shapes are 4-6, 5-5, or 6-4.

Surely it can't be right to bid the same way with 4-6 and 6-4 in the minors. How is partner expected to judge which strain to select?

[Phil]

jallerton, on 2012-July-02, 15:11, said:

Surely it can't be right to bid the same way with 4-6 and 6-4 in the minors. How is partner expected to judge which strain to select?

Well, that's what 2N is for. But I like Lalldonn's use of 1N better to help untangle these.

[mfa1010]

lalldonn, on 2012-June-29, 12:02, said:

I learned after this came up that when playing precision with strong notrumps it's a good agreement that 1♦ 1M P P 1NT is both minors longer diamonds, whereas 2♣ is equal or longer clubs.

We play something similar:
1NT is both minors, equal or longer diamonds
2♣ is longer clubs.

[mfa1010]

I would assume 2N to be natural, since responder could so easily have that hand. I think my regular partner would agree, so I would not be nervous about using it at the table.
There is a good case for 2N unusual but much less so when opener can choose from 1N/2♣ with both minors.

[lalldonn]

At least neither of us should feel too bad. I had 3-3 in the minors and wanted to compete, clee thought natural and bid 3NT. Natural didn't occur to me because I wasn't looking at it, and in competition 2NT just sounds not-natural to me. I don't know what we concluded but I'll try not to make that bid next time.