[pbleighton]

Frances recently referred to a light 2/1 responding style (9+ hcp), with 1M-2x-2M showing a minimum hand with 5+ cards. I'd like her and any others who play this style to describe it, and describe how and why they play it
a) Is 1M-2m-3m forcing
What hands qualify for 1M-2x-3M
c) What are your rebids after 1D-2C
d) What NT range do you play - is part of the reason to invite with 9 opposite what may be 15-17 balanced?
e) How light do you typically open

etc.

I ask because I played something similar when I played very light openings. We would open with 10(9), and respond with 11, so we needed to be able to stop in 2M.
We found this quite playable. When we switched to a EHAA/FN type system (5cM with 1X = 13+ unbal/14+ bal and a 10-13 NT), our 2/1 response structure remained the same, though we now do it on 9+, and FG with 11. This is probably not optimal for very sound openers, but we're used to it, and my pd doesn't like 1NT Forcing.

Our rebids after 1M-2X show:
a) 2M = 5+, NF, invitational strength (9-10) only
1S-2H-3H = 5+, NF, invitational strength only
c) A rebid of a lower ranking suit (i.e. 1S-2C-2D) = forcing, any strength
d) All other bids are GF

2/1 is the most common system where I play, but there are a number of Standard American players. Some of them (including some good players) play 1M-2x-2M as NF, with the "stop in 2M" rationale, since they no longer have 13 hcp opposite an 11 hcp response - more like 12(11) opposite 10/11.

Comments?

Peter

[MickyB]

a) 1M:2m, 3m is NF
In simple methods, any single suiter with GF values jumps to 3M
c) If you are opening balanced hands with 1♦, the strength of 1D:2C has to depend on your NT range - IMO they should be GF opposite the balanced minimum.
d) Not for me
e) I open Rule of 19 in the majors

After 1Y:2X, I play 2N as a GF single suiter and 3X+1 as a GF raise, e.g. after 1S:2D, my rebids are:

2H Nat F1
2S Nat NF (includes 11-13 bal)
2N Spade single suiter, GF
3C Nat GF
3D Nat NF
3H 4+diamonds, GF
3S Splinter in hearts
3N 17-20 balanced
4C Splinter, serious about playing in diamonds
4D At least 5-5

My 1D opening is always 4+ cards unbal (may have longer clubs) so I use the same style of responses after 1D:2C.

[MickyB]

Missed out why I play it -

My system allows for opening flat 11 counts without the traditional losses of doing so, so it makes sense to open fairly light in the majors as well. Having decided we are going to open by rule of 19, it seems to make more sense to focus on reaching game when it is there and a safe part-score when it is not, as opposed to 2/1 GF which focuses on slam bidding.

[Robert]

Hi everyone

I played Acol several decades ago with a 8+ 2/1 style.

a 1M-2m-3m was NF

b Goren type, 15+-17 6+ suit(We played Acol 2 bids which ruled out many of
the jump major rebids)

c The system used a 12-14 1NT so any NT rebid was 15-16

1D-2C-2NT was not forcing 15-16, 1D-2C-3NT showed 17-18

d 12-14 1NT 1 any-1 any-1NT=15-16 and a jump 2NT rebid 17-18

e 9+ with a 6+ suit AQxxxx and a side King opened and made a minimum
non forcing rebid. 'Quick in' and 'quick out' was the style.

I have also played many light opening bid systems(often home made)

When I played Precision 'Two Down and Two Up', we opened 14+ 1C and the other bids were 9-13 in 1st and 2nd seat. To get back to normal bidding, we added two HCP to normal Precision bids. 1M-2/1 was 13+HCP forcing to 2NT.

We also played a 10-12 1NT opening so 1z-1y-1NT showed 13-15HCP.

Rebids were played in the Italian style of 2/1 forced to 2NT. Opener would often rebid his suit as a 'marktime' measure. Rebids of 2NT showed GF values and high reverses(new suits at the three level) were also GF.

It was a lot of fun to play. You rarely passed in 1st and 2nd seats. Preempts denied as many as 9HCP so they were a real 'warning' bid.

We added two points to normal Precision in 3rd and 4th seats, 18+ 1C and
13-17HCP for normal openings. Tactical bidding was allowed and encouraged.

Regards,
Robert

[pbleighton]

Robert:

When you play 1M-2m-3m as NF, what do you rebid as opener when you have good 4 card support (say 5431 shape) and a good (GF+) hand?

Peter

[FrancesHinden]

You're asking two different questions, both of which are going to generate an essay in response..... one is _why_ play 2/1s in this manner, and the other is _how_ to play them like that.

I play in two fairly serious & regular partnerships. One plays light 2/1s with a lot of gadgets, the other plays 2/1 FG and semi-forcing NT with slightly fewer but still quite a lot of gadgets (what's more one plays NFBs at the 2-level after an overcall, one doesn't; one plays good/bad 2NT by opener, one doesn't....).

I don't want to get into a debate about which is better (or indeed whether something else altogether is better). I haven't found either approach to be so obviously superior than I want to give the other one up. I don't think what I describe here is necessarily the best set of methods even within this framework: we have hardly changed our constructive bidding systemic agreements in years as we have limited time and find other things (defensive signalling, competitive bidding etc) more interesting to discuss if we aren't playing bridge.

Note we play 5 card majors so we don't play Acol (we also don't play Acols 2s or strong jump shifts); we merely play Acol-style 2/1s
We play a 15-17 1NT opening (mini 1st NV) but often open 1M with 5332 with a 5CM.

What do I mean by a light 2/1?
I mean something slightly heavier than very old-fashioned Acol: we play a 2/1 as roughly 9+ HCP, i.e.
- game forcing opposite 15+ balanced
- after a 1M opening can stop in 2 of opener's M opposite a minimum
- after a 1D opening we play 2C forcing to 2NT opposite a weak NT.

Why play light 2/1s?
- the 1NT response is very well-defined. It can be happily passed. Responder doesn't have so many difficult rebid problems if opener does bid again, because he has already significantly limited his range.
- opener doesn't have to guess whether to invite on a good 14-15 hand after 1M-1NT; he can pass (this is why so many people now open 1NT on this shape; we solve the problem a different way).
- opener is not forced to 'invent' a rebid on a balanced hand after 1M - 1NT playing forcing/SF NT, so the 2m rebid can be trusted as genuine (although actually we still play 1M-1NT-2C as artificial to distinguish opener's strength. but you don't need to.)
- after a 2/1, opener's rebid immediately defines his strength. You don't get these murky 2/1 FG auctions where no-one knows how strong anyone is.
- if 4th hand bids, you are better placed in competition if responder has been able to bid his longest suit as you are more likely to know if it is a fit or misfit hand. Also, if he has limited his hand with a 1NT bid it's often easier for opener to judge wheter to compete. This is why most people who play 2/1 turn it off after 2nd hand intervenes.
- 1S - P - 2H is harder for 4th hand to bid over than 1S - 1NT
- if responder has an invite with 3-card support, he can bid his suit first before raising. This makes game bidding more accurate, as opener knows if his cards fit well or not (traditionally SF NT responds 1NT to 1S then jumps to 3S opposite a rebid and opener doens't know what useful cards would be). Similarly with a balanced invite, responder bids his suit then 2NT and opener has a better idea whether to accept or not.
- slam bidding is also much easier: slam bidding after 1M - 1NT is notoriously difficult because responder has said nothing about either his shape or his high cards. If responder's made a 2/1 you are one step further forward; if he hasn't then at least he's much more limited.
- if you bid 1S - 1NT - 2C - 2S (say), both opponents know you have limited your hands and they may want to protect. After 1S - 2D - 2S (say) it's extremely dangerous for second hand to pre-protect.


What are the problems?
A couple of the problems are the obvious downsides of the pluses above: e.g. you sometimes play in 1NT after 1M - 1NT when bailing out to responder's long suit would be better; opener may misjudge in a game invitational auction after e.g 1S - 2D - 2S - 3S because you were forced to bid 2D on a Jxxx suit. The others are:

- delicate slam investigations are harder, particularly when responder has a strong hand with 3-card support for opener's major, as there are fewer forcing bids available. (we play gadgets to get round this in some sequences, but not all); a useful call playing 2/1 is 2NT e.g. 1S - 2D - 2S - 2NT as a 'lurk' but in our style that's NF and we're forced to invent a new suit (or invent a specific gadget) to make a forcing call.
- opener can't make a forcing raise of responder's suit below 3NT (we play gadgets to get round this)
- opener is sometimes forced to choose between making a non-forcing rebid on a hand that wants to drive game, and mis-describing their hand. The typical 'death' hands after 1S - 2D are long suits lacking in high cards such as KJxxxx AKx KQx x (book rebid is 3S) or AKJxx x Qxxx AKx (book rebid after 1S - 2H is 3D). Again, we play some artificial rebids, but they don't solve all problems.
- responder's 2/1 causes you to miss your best fit: a 5224 minimum opposite a 1534 10-count will bid 1S - 2H - 2S and never find the club fit. We try and get round this by not bidding 1S-2H or 1H - 2D on minimums with a singleton in partner's major, but it's not ideal.

(Once you decide that a 2/1 if FG opposite a balanced 15-count, that frees you to play 1M - 2x - 2NT as forcing and a whole new gadget-space opens out.... MickyB plays it as a single-suiter, while we play 1S-2H-2NT as 15+ balanced or FG with 6 poor spades or various forcing heart raises)

[FrancesHinden]

pbleighton, on Dec 10 2005, 05:29 AM, said:

a. Is 1M-2m-3m forcing
b. What hands qualify for 1M-2x-3M
c. What are your rebids after 1D-2C
d. What NT range do you play - is part of the reason to invite with 9 opposite what may be 15-17 balanced?
e. How light do you typically open

a. No.
b. Any single-suiter worth a game force opposite a minimum 2/1. You'd like to have a good 6-card suit but you might be stuck for a rebid. A 6331 without a good suit might make a forcing rebid in a 3-card suit. A 6322 might rebid in NT (but I don't like doing that personally).
c. Here we hit gadget-land, sorry: 1D - 3C is invitational, so 1D - 2C - anything - 3C is natural and forcing. 1D - 2C - 2D = natural unbalanced non-forcing. 2H = balanced outside the opening NT (2S = FG relay, 2NT/3D nat nf), 2S = natural reverse FG, 2NT = heart reverse FG. Traditionally 2D = natural NF, 2NT = balanced outside opening NT range (NF if you play strong NT), 2M = 16+ natural reverse.
d. 15-17 (10-13 1st NV). But as we open 1M with 5 even with 15-17 balanced this isn't really related to the choice of 2/1 style, although (of course) it's related to what's included in the various gadgets.
e. Fairly soundly. Again, I don't think this is really connected to the 2/1 style. We don't (in general) open 5322 11-counts, only about half of 5422/5431 11-counts, and a 10-count needs a 6-card suit or a 5-5. (Obvious exceptions for exceptional hands and 3rd seat NV.)



a. This is a problem with the method. We actually play 1S - 2C - 2D as artificial and 1S - 2C - 3C as forcing; after the other 1M-2m sequences 3S is a forcing raise; 3NT is 5422 15-17 with 4-card support and honours in the short suits; 2NT rebid is forcing, includes 18-19 5422 with 4-card support; that leaves 4m as a serious raise happy to go past 3NT (but loses out on one of the splinters and loses some space).

b. In fact we bid 1M-2m-3H to show a game-forcing single-suiter in the major; responder bids 3S to agree the major and we can get out easily in 3NT, or responder can rebid their own suit naturally or bid a new suit naturally with a real 2-suiter. We play 1S - 2H - 3S as a good suit and 1S - 2H - 2NT includes FG with poor spades.

[Gerben42]

Actually I was looking for something like this not for a standard system but for a system with light opening bids, i.e. 1♥ = 8 - 14, 5+♥ (extreme). Then if you keep the 2/1 bids the same standard as in normal 2/1 style you're basically in the same position.

Less extreme but similar in Polish ♣ with light opening style for 1non-♣ (1♥ = 10 - 17, 5+♥).

[FrancesHinden]

I have seen some people playing limited openers go to a different extreme: play 2/1s as non-forcing, and put all strong hands through a forcing 1NT response.

[Robert]

Hi pbleighton

The primitive Acol that I played was a very natural system. With 4 card support and GF values, you('surprise') jumped to 4m as a GF.

I still used the classical methods of bidding. With 5224 I would jump raise and with 5314 shape I would bid 'around the clock' to show shortness and 4 card support. Splinter bids are 'nothing new under the sun.'

I played Acol two bids which eliminated many hands from the one of a major openings.

It quickly evolved into a mix of science and Acol style bidding.

Have you seen a copy of POWER(or his POWER ACOL book) by Ron Klinger. He uses 2C* and 2D* as artificial bids over his openers to show 10-12 inv. and 13+ GF. By shifting the ranges around, you might be able to handle 'lighter' opening bids.

One of his methods uses 1M-2C-2D to show less than 14HCP. Higher bids are GF opposite a 'known' 10-12 responder.

Perhaps you can play 1M-1NT* F1, 2C* as inv. range and 2D* as GF?

Regards,
Robert

[whereagles]

pbleighton, on Dec 10 2005, 10:29 AM, said:

Frances recently referred to a light 2/1 responding style (9+ hcp), with 1M-2x-2M showing a minimum hand with 5+ cards.  I'd like her and any others who play this style to describe it, and describe how and why they play it
a) Is 1M-2m-3m forcing
b ) What hands qualify for 1M-2x-3M
c) What are your rebids after 1D-2C
d) What NT range do you play - is part of the reason to invite with 9 opposite what may be 15-17 balanced?
e) How light do you typically open

etc.

I ask because I played something similar when I played very light openings. We would open with 10(9), and respond with 11, so we needed to be able to stop in 2M.
We found this quite playable.  When we switched to a EHAA/FN type system (5cM with 1X = 13+ unbal/14+ bal and a 10-13 NT), our 2/1 response structure remained the same, though we now do it on 9+, and FG with 11.  This is probably not optimal for very sound openers, but we're used to it, and my pd doesn't like 1NT Forcing.

Our rebids after 1M-2X show:
a) 2M = 5+, NF, invitational strength (9-10) only
1S-2H-3H = 5+, NF, invitational strength only
c) A rebid of a lower ranking suit (i.e. 1S-2C-2D) = forcing, any strength
d) All other bids are GF

2/1 is the most common system where I play, but there are a number of Standard American players.  Some of them (including some good players) play 1M-2x-2M as NF, with the "stop in 2M" rationale, since they no longer have 13 hcp opposite an 11 hcp response - more like 12(11) opposite 10/11.

Comments?

Peter

I am familiar with French Standard, where a 2/1 is usually 10+ hcp and 4+ cards (except 1♠-2♥ which is 5 cards). In this style, the 2/1 bid is auto-forcing, meaning responder is obliged to make at least one further bid. Within this scheme, we have:

a) 1M-2m-3m: game-forcing, shows extras (15-20 hcp). With 11-14 and support, you take advantage of the auto-forcing nature of the 2/1 and rebid your major (which can be 5-cards), supporting afterwards.

b ) 1M-2x-3M: game-forcing, good 6 card suit, 15-17. (With 18-20 you open a strong 2 - this is another thing of the french style.)

c) After 1♦-2♣:
2♦ = 11-14, catch-all bid (may have club support). Now 2NT and 3♣ is NF, but 3♦ is game-forcing.
2M = reverse 15-20, game-forcing.
2NT = 12-14 balanced. Now 3♣ by responder is NF.
3♣ = game-forcing support 15-20.
3M = splinter.
3NT = 18-19 balanced.

d) 1NT is usually 15-17, no 5 card major. The rebid 1M-2x-2NT shows 15-17 balanced and is game-forcing. With 12-14 you rebid the major: 1M-2x-2M.

e) The scheme works ok with openings starting from a good 11.

[pbleighton]

Thanks for all of the replies.

Peter

[Gerben42]

I just want to thank Frances for the term "gadget-space" and hope it's not copyrighted

[luke warm]

FrancesHinden, on Dec 12 2005, 09:48 AM, said:

I have seen some people playing limited openers go to a different extreme: play 2/1s as non-forcing, and put all strong hands through a forcing 1NT response.

i do this, frances... in one system, 1nt=10+, in the other it's 13+ (gf)... is this theoretically unsound? it allows bidding such as 1h : 2d to be non forcing

[hrothgar]

FrancesHinden, on Dec 12 2005, 05:48 PM, said:

I have seen some people playing limited openers go to a different extreme: play 2/1s as non-forcing, and put all strong hands through a forcing 1NT response.

Some flavors of MOSCITO treat 2/1s as natural and non-forcing and force (almost) all strong hands through the first step relay...

Paul Marston is currently using 2/1s as a 1 round force and places some strong single suited hands into the mix. I prefer the more "traditional" style...

[Cascade]

pbleighton, on Dec 10 2005, 11:29 PM, said:

Frances recently referred to a light 2/1 responding style (9+ hcp), with 1M-2x-2M showing a minimum hand with 5+ cards. I'd like her and any others who play this style to describe it, and describe how and why they play it

We play this style with a some of modifications ...

1. Our 2/1s are probably a bit stronger than Frances. We usually say 10+ but there would be some 9s that would qualify and maybe some hands with six or seven card suits with even less.

2. Our rebid of a Major at the two-level excludes 5-3-3-2 hands since we open all balanced minimum hands 1NT.

3. After 1M 2m 2M we cannot even bid 2NT invitational as for us 2NT is an artificial force. This means we tend to pass 2M with invitational misfits. There are swings and roundabouts here. Sometimes 2M is silly but sometimes bidding on results in a silly 3NT which we avoid. Sometimes you can scramble 8 tricks in the major etc.

Quote

a) Is 1M-2m-3m forcing

No.

With stronger hands we have the following options:

jump new suit - splinter

3NT 5-4-2-2 with support around 14-16

4m 17+ no singleton

Quote

What hands qualify for 1M-2x-3M

Six-card major and forcing to game. We might even jump to 3M with four-card support for responder's minor intending to pull 3NT to 4minor - forcing. In practice 3M is good 14+

Quote

c) What are your rebids after 1D-2C

This auction is unusual for us as we bundle invitational diamond hands in with natural 2C. However our rebids are fairly standard as if responder has clubs ...

2D any distributional minimum without club support

2Maj standard reverse

2NT 15-17 balance (we can't have more as we play Mexican 2D to show 18-20 Bal)

3C minimum raise 3+ Clubs

3D GF six diamonds

3Maj splinter for clubs (initially)

3NT 14-16 club raise

over all of these rebids responder shows diamonds with the next rebid as the first priority with the invitational diamond hand unless passing or raising NTs. There are some sequences where the ambiguity remains e.g.

1D 2C
2NT 3NT - responder could still have clubs or diamonds

Quote

d) What NT range do you play - is part of the reason to invite with 9 opposite what may be 15-17 balanced?

We play 11-14 NT (1st and 2nd seat)

3rd and 4th seat we play 15-17 NT but there are other changes in these seats notably our 2/1s are natural and NF around 6-9.

Quote

e) How light do you typically open

Pretty light.

We open some 11 hcp balanced but we open 1NT with these

We open almost all unbalanced 11 hcp

We open most 10 hcp with a six-card suit or two five-card suits

We open some hands with fewer than 10 hcp.

[MickyB]

Frances, a couple of comments -

If 1♦ could be a weak NT, it seems quite restrictive to play 1♦:2♣, 2♦ as NF - responder will usually be 11+, so opener lands up with a very narrow range. OTOH, you are probably better than me at judging when to stay out of a misfitting 3N on this auction

I do think that how light you open should affect 2/1 style, because -

The lighter you open, the less likely you are to have a GF hand as responder - as 2/1 GF sequences rate to gain IMPs over light 2/1s and 1NT responses rate to lose IMPs, the comparative frequency is important

The more wide ranging the 1NT response, the greater the losses from responding 1NT will be

[MickyB]

Hmm, two more thoughts...

It seems to me that it probably makes sense to 2/1 more aggressively with tolerance for pard's major - maybe a doubleton is worth about a point more than a singleton? In Acol you can't really do that, because you are making your 2/1 in order to reach 3N opposite 15-16 balanced.

Peter - As I said in my last post, if you are playing 2/1s as being within a couple of points of game, 1Y:2X, 2Y starts having a very narrow range. Maybe 2NT now should be GF? Either that or make your 2/1s another point or so lighter.

[pbleighton]

"Peter - As I said in my last post, if you are playing 2/1s as being within a couple of points of game, 1Y:2X, 2Y starts having a very narrow range. Maybe 2NT now should be GF? Either that or make your 2/1s another point or so lighter."

2NT is GF and balanced, as is anything except 1M-2X-2M, 1S-2H-3H (min, NF), and 1M-2X-2Y, where Y < M (any strength, F1).

Peter

[whereagles]

I once thought of "transfer 2/1s". Something like:

1♠ ..?
1NT = forcing. If 5+ in a suit then 5-7 hcp, except if suit is clubs, in which case it is unlimited.
2♣ = 5+ diamonds, 8+ hcp (good 7 also possible).
2♦ = 5+ hearts, 8+ hcp.
2♥ = 3-card spade raise, 8+ hcp.
2♠ = junk raise.

After the transf 2/1, opener would accept the transfer with 2+ cards and 11-14 or else bid naturally, as if responder had made a non-forcing 2/1.

The advantage was to bid suits straight away, with both strong and weakish hands. It would make some hands easier to bid, and it is more resistant to overcalls of 4th seat. The major problem was how to bid clubs. But then I gave up on the idea because it the pros aren't important enough to justify the memory work.