[mw64ahw]

I came across this hand today and wondered whether I would get to 4♥ using a 2/1 GF approach?

---

In a similar vein - one from the Bermuda Bowl which had different outcomes on the tables

---

How would you approach the bidding on this?

[Winstonm]

I would say on both of these the lighter 2 over 1 allowance has advantages - more so in the first as some may consider the second hand worthy of a game force after a 1H opening. Still, hand 1 is no cinch to make 4H, and the slam in hand 2 is not laydown.

I would think the 2/1 auction in 1 would be: 1S-1N-2S-(pass or 2N) I think pass more likely.

In the second hand, the 2/1 auction depends on evaluations. I think opener should bid 2D as this hand is far from minimal so: 1H-1N-2D-2S-3H-4H At this point it is a difficult question whether to go on or not. As partner has limited his hand with the 1NT bid, a perfect minimum would be xxx, AKx, A10xxx, xx but if partner is bidding on xxx, Kx, A10xxx, KJx slam is a terrible idea and it might be hard to stop short of slam.

I would guess a decent auction to be: 1H-1N-2D-2S-3H-4H-4S-5D-6D-?

Tough hands for sure.

[manudude03]

On the first, it is not uncommon to play 1S-1NT-2S-2NT-3H as only promising 3 for this very reason. If playing this way, you pretty much need to be bidding 2H with 6-4 regardless of range.

On the second, I'd go 1H-1NT-2D-4H (a 3 card LR which improved). Not worried about missing slam here, and as Winstonm said above, it's not like slam is cold.

[mw64ahw]

manudude03, on 2021-August-25, 10:16, said:

On the first, it is not uncommon to play 1S-1NT-2S-2NT-3H as only promising 3 for this very reason. If playing this way, you pretty much need to be bidding 2H with 6-4 regardless of range.

On the second, I'd go 1H-1NT-2D-4H (a 3 card LR which improved). Not worried about missing slam here, and as Winstonm said above, it's not like slam is cold.

1S-1NT-2S-2NT-3H is a useful option; I currently play 1S-1NT-2S-2NT as 55 in the minors with short ♠ although I guess incorporating an invitational 5♥ would work

[HardVector]

The second one is one you can look at 2 ways, either as a min or as a game try. I'd make a limit raise with it. After 1h-1n(forcing), when I heard 2h, I'd jump to 4h.

[mikeh]

I’d miss game on the first one.

I’d not bid over 2S as responder. My partnerships open 1S on say AQxxxx xx Axx xx…don’t yours?

It’s not as if 4H is the contract of one’s dreams. On a diamond lead, one has to hook the heart immediately, down off the top if that loses, and when it wins, one has to take a spade finesse as well.

I think anyone claiming that they’d always or usually or even often reach 4H, playing 2/1, is fooling themselves….or put it another way…if your partnership routinely reaches 4H on these hands, I’d bet heavily against you in any long match against good players. For every win 6, you’ll be losing two or more 5 or 6 imp swings by getting too high.

As for non 2/1, I haven’t played such for a very long time, so I can’t pretend to know how the hands should be bid. Presumably responder bids 2H. Is opener strong enough to force to game? Related to that, is 3H forcing?

Anyway, if I lost a game swing on this hand, I wouldn’t be the least upset or thinking that I need to change my methods or style.

On the second one, if responder uses a forcing 1N as a prelude to a 3 card limit raise, north surprises him with 2D and south bids 2S to show a maximum raise of diamonds. It’s possible that they would now reach 6D, tho this is an indifferent slam to reach.even if the heart hook wins, one may still fail on 4-0 trumps offside, so it’s less than 50% on a spade lead, tho it’s better on any other lead.


Again,I wouldn’t be upset to miss this contract.

[sfi]

The original hand highlights the major weakness of 2/1 - invitational hands with 5 hearts. You can find a lot of these fits with auctions like:

1S - 1NT
2S - 2NT
3H

Where 3H shows a 3-card suit specifically to look for the 5-3 fit, catering to hands similar to East's. This means that opener needs to bid 2H rather than 2S on 6-4 hands, but I think showing 9 cards in the hand is better than showing 6 anyway. Another auction where you should be applying the same principle is:

1S - 1NT
2C - 2NT
3H

On the actual hand I'd be looking at the spot cards and go conservative by passing 2S, but it wouldn't take much more to invite.

[mw64ahw]

sfi, on 2021-August-25, 16:33, said:

The original hand highlights the major weakness of 2/1 - invitational hands with 5 hearts. You can find a lot of these fits with auctions like:

1S - 1NT
2S - 2NT
3H

Where 3H shows a 3-card suit specifically to look for the 5-3 fit, catering to hands similar to East's. This means that opener needs to bid 2H rather than 2S on 6-4 hands, but I think showing 9 cards in the hand is better than showing 6 anyway. Another auction where you should be applying the same principle is:

1S - 1NT
2C - 2NT
3H

On the actual hand I'd be looking at the spot cards and go conservative by passing 2S, but it wouldn't take much more to invite.

1♠-1NT-2♣ is less of an issue given a 2♣ relay gadget that requires 2♦ unless a relay break condition is met.
Opener then bids 2♥ with 3♥ otherwise 2♠ so responder can pass with 5♥ or invite with 3♥/3♣ w. 5♣♥/3♦ w. 5♦♥

Relay breaks can occur with 6+♥ or weak with 3♠ or weak with short ♠ such that
1♠-1NT-2♣
--2NT weak w. 55♣♦ short ♠
--3♣ weak 6/7+♣ short ♠
--3♦ weak 6/7+♦ short ♠
--3♥ weak 6/7+♥ short ♠
The above 4 options can also be used to show invitational hands, but these occur via the 2♦ relay.
Alternatively just use the relay break for invitational hands

Coming back to the 2/1 issue with the first hand if slightly stronger, the following should work for invitational (or otherwise) hands with short ♠
1♠-1NT-2♠
--2NT 55♣♦/6+♦/5♥ with ♠ singleton, responder can correct a 3♣ response to ♦ or ♥.
--3♣ 6+♣
--3♦ 5♥ with ♠ void

[mw64ahw]

HardVector, on 2021-August-25, 10:52, said:

The second one is one you can look at 2 ways, either as a min or as a game try. I'd make a limit raise with it. After 1h-1n(forcing), when I heard 2h, I'd jump to 4h.

The Solder-Arnold partnership opposite Masood & Zia reached 4♥ via
1♥-1NT
2♦-3♥
4♥
making 12 tricks
I would have thought a ♠ cue would have been better with that distribution and MLT even with a the ♥ slam being a long shot. looking at the hcp count

[DavidKok]

In standard 2/1 these are difficult hands to bid, which is why some experienced partnerships adopt gadgets to solve these issues. Which I then copy.

I'd get to 4♥ on the first hand with the auction 1♠-2♣*(one of four hand types); 2♦*(asks)-2♥(10-11 points with 5+ hearts, 2- spades); 3♥-4♥ (West could jump to 4♥ over 2♥ instead, it's close. It's probably better to play 3♥ as a GF slam try).

The second hand is more difficult to judge. I think we'd start 1♥-2NT*(9-14 points with at least 3-card support) and now North has to decide between 4♥ (to play} and 4♦ (GF, mild slam try, natural side suit). As the cards lie 4♦ would propel the partnership to a red suit slam - South would raise to 5♦ and North picks a slam. If North goes low with 4♥ on the second round that ends the bidding.

[mikl_plkcc]

The difficulty of describing hand shapes properly is the reason that I hate 2/1 compared to Standard American. It will frequently lead to missing game based on shape rather than strength, and I value shape much stronger than strength.

[Winstonm]

Seems like the only problem comes from the heart suit after a 1S opening - and that makes me wonder if there shouldn't be some way to make 1S=2H initially a 1-round force without destroying the advantages of 2/1.

The rebids or opener that might be affected in order to use an artificial game force without a heart fit would be: 2S, 2N, 3C, 3D.

2N is probably best which would then mean that 2S would have to incorporate 11-14ish hands that otherwise would bid 2N.

So, to recap, in 2/1 the auction 1S-2H would not initially be game forcing but would promise a second bid if opener showed a minimum. Opener could create an artificial game force by bidding 2N or natural game forces with 3C, 3D, 3H, or 3S.


Opener would show a minimum and no heart fit with 2S, after which responder's 2N or 3H ? would be passable but all other bids confirm an original game force.

[DavidKok]

Winstonm, on 2021-August-26, 14:21, said:

Seems like the only problem comes from the heart suit after a 1S opening - and that makes me wonder if there shouldn't be some way to make 1S=2H initially a 1-round force without destroying the advantages of 2/1.

The rebids or opener that might be affected in order to use an artificial game force without a heart fit would be: 2S, 2N, 3C, 3D.

2N is probably best which would then mean that 2S would have to incorporate 11-14ish hands that otherwise would bid 2N.

So, to recap, in 2/1 the auction 1S-2H would not initially be game forcing but would promise a second bid if opener showed a minimum. Opener could create an artificial game force by bidding 2N or natural game forces with 3C, 3D, 3H, or 3S.


Opener would show a minimum and no heart fit with 2S, after which responder's 2N or 3H ? would be passable but all other bids confirm an original game force.

Sounds completely unplayable to me. 1♠-2♥ was originally one of the first GF 2/1 bids (even in systems that are not full 2/1 GF), and to the best of my knowledge this was because of the difficult of the resulting auction if it could be only invitational. Destroying the GF part also means you lose fast arrival. I'd much rather bunch the hearts hand in with 2♣, 1NT or a simple 3♥.

[mw64ahw]

Munir & Fazili bid the 50% grand in 7♦ and made the 13 required.
The 2♦ bid was key here as was the K♥ in East's hand?

---

[mikeh]

mw64ahw, on 2021-August-27, 07:48, said:

Munir & Fazili bid the 50% grand in 7♦ and made the 13 required.
The 2♦ bid was key here as was the K♥ in East's hand?

---

It’s not 50%. It’s close but definitely under 50%.

Indeed, give declarer KQJx in diamonds and it’s still under 50%.

Iow, it’s the kind of grand one bids when one knows the opps are significantly better than one’s own team.