[fromageGB]

I'm an adherent of the school that says opener rebids his major (after a 2 over 1 GF) unless strongish (say 15+ hcp) and this does not show additional length. Without that strength you don't bypass 2M to support, bid NT, or a new suit.

A friend wants to play that a bid of 2M shows a 6 card suit, and without that you make a natural rebid such as 2NT or 3m. Looking for help here - how does that work? I can see it working if you open 1NT with a 5 card major, so a 2NT rebid after a 2/1 can be made with a 12-14, or with an 18+ that will take further action when responder signs off in game, but this question is in the context of always opening 1M on a reasonable 5 card major, regardless of strength.

In this case, how does the bidding handle the portrayal of strength? I can see the situation arising that you end in 3NT with both parties having a 16 count, and neither feeling strong enough to take unilateral action.

Advice welcome.

[Endymion77]

You obviously have to open 1NT with balanced hands (15-17) with a 5 card major, otherwise it's difficult to handle those hands no matter if the response is 1 over 1 or 2 over 1.

I normally play that after 1M - 2m, 2NT is 12-14 or 18-19 balanced, 3m (supporting the 2/1 suit) and 2M don't show extra strength, and all other bids show extra strength. So if you can't rebid 2NT or raise partner's response and have no extra strength, you're sometimes forced to rebid 2M with 5.

[Endymion77]

Actually, 1S - 2m - 2H also shouldn't promise extra strength or you'll bury a lot of 4-4 heart fits.

[BillHiggin]

The best advice I can give is to refer you to someone else's advice.
Andrew Gumperez did some articles on Bridge Winners discussing this issue. See:
http://bridgewinners...esome-2m-rebid/
http://bridgewinners...-schuler-shift/

Perhaps you might find something useful in his thoughtful presentation.

[FrancesHinden]

I don't think it can work without doing one of two things:

(i) open 1NT on all strong NT hands in range, and rebid 2NT on weak off-shape minimums (e.g. with a 5314 you have to rebid 2NT after 1S-2D)

or

(ii) After 1S-2C, 1S-2D and 1H - 2C, rebid 2NT on 15-17 balanced, and step 1 is any minimum or 12-14/18-19 balanced, with step 1 a further relay. I leave what to do about 1S-2H and 1H-2D as an exercise for the reader. (There are other artificial continuations possible rather than this one)

I don't think you can combined all of opening 1M with 15-17 balanced, playing a 2M rebid showing 6 and not play artificiality somewhere.

[BillHiggin]

FrancesHinden, on 2013-September-02, 16:07, said:

I don't think it can work without doing one of two things:

(i) open 1NT on all strong NT hands in range, and rebid 2NT on weak off-shape minimums (e.g. with a 5314 you have to rebid 2NT after 1S-2D)

or

(ii) After 1S-2C, 1S-2D and 1H - 2C, rebid 2NT on 15-17 balanced, and step 1 is any minimum or 12-14/18-19 balanced, with step 1 a further relay. I leave what to do about 1S-2H and 1H-2D as an exercise for the reader. (There are other artificial continuations possible rather than this one)

I don't think you can combined all of opening 1M with 15-17 balanced, playing a 2M rebid showing 6 and not play artificiality somewhere.

What I have seen (certainly not what I advocate) is:
1M-2m, rebid 2N on <15 or 18+ (and show the big hand with another move later) or 3N on 15-1

[mgoetze]

fromageGB, on 2013-September-02, 07:44, said:

Advice welcome.

My advice would be to read the following two threads, especially the contributions of Justin Lall thereto:

http://www.bridgebas...arts-or-3clubs/
http://www.bridgebas...ts-or-2-spades/

I would also give the additional advice that you can check my BBF systems index at http://bridge.mgoetze.net/bbf.html before asking such questions; you may discover they have been covered quite comprehensively already.

[rhm]

FrancesHinden, on 2013-September-02, 16:07, said:

I don't think it can work without doing one of two things:

(i) open 1NT on all strong NT hands in range, and rebid 2NT on weak off-shape minimums (e.g. with a 5314 you have to rebid 2NT after 1S-2D)

or

(ii) After 1S-2C, 1S-2D and 1H - 2C, rebid 2NT on 15-17 balanced, and step 1 is any minimum or 12-14/18-19 balanced, with step 1 a further relay. I leave what to do about 1S-2H and 1H-2D as an exercise for the reader. (There are other artificial continuations possible rather than this one)

I don't think you can combined all of opening 1M with 15-17 balanced, playing a 2M rebid showing 6 and not play artificiality somewhere.

Agreed, but a matter of perspective.
If you rebid 2M to show a minimum default hand, what is natural about this bid?
Why is step1 considered artificial but rebidding your major without extra length not?
What is standard is often considered natural while new ideas are considered artificial until they become standard.

Rainer Herrmann

[cherdano]

In one of the Challenge match videos posted on bridgewinners (sorry, don't remember which one!), Steve Weinstein and Gavin Wolpert mention that they are strongly in favour of the 2M rebid showing 6. (Meckwell also play that, though of course it's easier in strong club!) Of course, they all use Frances' option (i).
Thought this is noteworthy, especially as it goes against majority expert practice in the US.

[straube]

I see this is in the natural bidding discussion, but artificiality can help a lot. For example, let's say you adopt the notion that 1H-2m, 2S shows 4 spades but no extras. Then what does 1H-2m, 2H-2S show? A 5/6? Only 4? Are we still trying to pattern both hands?

If 1M can be 15-17 bal

1H-2m,
.....2H-various
..........2S-2-fit for hearts
.....2S-4 spades
.....2N-15-17
.....3om-5+ and good hand

1S-2m
.....2H-various
..........2S-2-fit for spades
.....2S-4 hearts
.....2N-15-17
.....3om-5+ and good hand

I'm sure one could improve on that. Also, if you open 15-17 5M332 with 1N you have a lot of extra room.

[JLOGIC]

cherdano, on 2013-September-03, 03:12, said:

In one of the Challenge match videos posted on bridgewinners (sorry, don't remember which one!), Steve Weinstein and Gavin Wolpert mention that they are strongly in favour of the 2M rebid showing 6. (Meckwell also play that, though of course it's easier in strong club!) Of course, they all use Frances' option (i).
Thought this is noteworthy, especially as it goes against majority expert practice in the US.

You're right...Meckwell, Greco/Hampson, Grue/Cheek etc all play this way, but they are all strong clubbers. I agree it's rare in the US for a natural pair to play this style, but it's worth noting they aren't rebidding 3m on 5431 mins, they are just making 2N their default bid regardless of stoppers. When I played with Steve we agreed 1S 2H 2S is the only auction 2S can be 5, and we had some artificial followups over that (he said that's the only auction where 2M as 5 is necessary). It's kind of true, that is the hard one, compared to 1S 2C 2S which can easily be played as showing 6 if you don't care a ton about stopper issues, and 1M 2D where if you are willing to raise on 3 and bid 3C with 5-5 minimums can be played as showing 6.

I am not convinced, there are gains in 2M promising 6 in standard obviously but I'm not sure they are enough to compensate when you hve such a wide ranged opener and need to limit it somehow. Also raising diamonds showing 4 has seemed beneficial to me even when diamonds show 5.

2 over 1 auctions in a standard system frame are so complex that I am thinking the people who play really artificial stuff in those auctions may have the right idea.

[mike777]

unopposed 2/1 auctions are also becoming more of a rare bird.

I see more and more forum members overcalling on less and less.


As for limiting openers range, an ever wider range of one bids, throwing more and more hands into some types of nt opener seems to becoming more popular. The result being one assumes opener has a minimum range hand whatever his rebid choice is. Of course that means you live with the problem of 2 suited hands that have extras and the opp are silent.

[Zelandakh]

How would it work out to take Frances' option i and invert the 2M and 2NT rebids? That is, if 2M shows the minimum and 2NT shows a 6 card suit? It seems to me that the catch-all minimum hand types need more sorting out than the 1-suiters and that we should therefore devote more space to them so there is some sense to such an inversion. Did you consider such a method in your partnership with Steve, Justin? Are there some additional pitfalls that make the normal way round better? (Note: remember I have never played 2/1, so something of a novice here - please forgive me if this is obvious.)

Also, on the subject of artificiality, the relay method that I sometimes suggest handles showing extras relatively easily along with the 6th major suit card, where appropriate. There is a little issue with showing lots of extras (18/19+) but those hands are at least somewhat rarer (and obviously, limited openings help out here too).

[BillHiggin]

Zelandakh, on 2013-September-05, 05:33, said:

How would it work out to take Frances' option i and invert the 2M and 2NT rebids? That is, if 2M shows the minimum and 2NT shows a 6 card suit? It seems to me that the catch-all minimum hand types need more sorting out than the 1-suiters and that we should therefore devote more space to them so there is some sense to such an inversion. Did you consider such a method in your partnership with Steve, Justin? Are there some additional pitfalls that make the normal way round better? (Note: remember I have never played 2/1, so something of a novice here - please forgive me if this is obvious.)

Also, on the subject of artificiality, the relay method that I sometimes suggest handles showing extras relatively easily along with the 6th major suit card, where appropriate. There is a little issue with showing lots of extras (18/19+) but those hands are at least somewhat rarer (and obviously, limited openings help out here too).

The reversal of 2M and 2N meanings is known as "Schuler Shift" and is discussed(favorably) by Andrew Gumperez in the second article that I mentioned earlier in this thread.

[FrancesHinden]

One disadvantage is you may get 3NT the wrong way up. A minimum opening bid with a 6-card major is likely to have fewer tenaces and fewer high cards than a game forcing 2/1 opposite.
I generally don't worry too much about this, because it's a bit random who should be decalrer most of the time, but some people care.