[Miron]

I encouraged this problem during bidding (partnership misunderstanding).
What should this sequence promise or how you play it?

1♥ - p - 1NT - p
2♥ - p - 2♠

(We play 2/1; 1NT forsing, without 4+♠).

[joker_gib]

Without too much thinking, I would take it as :

Max hand, Hx in ♥, something in ♠

As 2♥ promises 6 cards, we can still belong to 3NT

Alain

[Gerben42]

Maximum hand with both minors. It's called the impossible 2♠ bid.

[joker_gib]

Gerben42, on Mar 14 2006, 11:10 AM, said:

Maximum hand with both minors. It's called the impossible 2♠ bid.

Yes, this is probably better as I can still bid 2NT with the max hand and Hx in ♥

[Walddk]

Both minors, 5-5 and 0-1 hearts. 2155, 3055 ... with 1 heart even 1165 and 1156 possible because you may pass 2♥ with 2155.

Roland

[whereagles]

You can play it as a dozen things, but without specific agreements, the best is to use it naturally: a good 3 card spade suit with semi-fit in hearts. Kinda like what joker_gib said

Talk about it.. what would

1♥ 1NT
2♥ 3m

show? Invitational or sign-off with 6-7 cards and heart singleton/void.

[Walddk]

whereagles, on Mar 14 2006, 11:50 AM, said:

Talk about it.. what would

1♥ 1NT
2♥ 3m

show? Invitational or sign-off with 6-7 cards and heart singleton/void.

Sign off. 7-card suit with a singleton heart, 6 with a void (3064 and 3046).

Roland

[P_Marlowe]

whereagles, on Mar 14 2006, 05:50 AM, said:

Talk about it.. what would

1♥ 1NT
2♥ 3m

show? Invitational or sign-off with 6-7 cards and heart singleton/void.

what ever you have agreed to play,
depends on the meaning of the sequence
1H - 2D
2H - 3D
and on the meaning of
1H - 3D
...

In this regards the discussed seq. is
different, because spades cant be
natural in the sense, that you are trying
to play with spade as trumps.

Marlowe

[MickyB]

Roland, is that because you have a way to show a long minor with invitational values immediately opposite a major suit opening?

Both minors, weak, seems reasonable I think.

[Walddk]

MickyB, on Mar 14 2006, 12:19 PM, said:

Roland, is that because you have a way to show a long minor with invitational values immediately opposite a major suit opening?

Yes. 1MA - 3mi is natural, invitational in my methods.

Roland

[whereagles]

How would you take 1M-1NT-2M-3m if you're not playing 1M-3m as invitational?

[Walddk]

whereagles, on Mar 14 2006, 12:40 PM, said:

How would you take 1M-1NT-2M-3m if you're not playing 1M-3m as invitational?

I replied already, see above. Sign off.

Roland

[cherdano]

Walddk, on Mar 14 2006, 01:43 PM, said:

whereagles, on Mar 14 2006, 12:40 PM, said:

How would you take 1M-1NT-2M-3m if you're not playing 1M-3m as invitational?

I replied already, see above. Sign off.

I don't think you did.

[Walddk]

cherdano, on Mar 14 2006, 12:52 PM, said:

Walddk, on Mar 14 2006, 01:43 PM, said:

whereagles, on Mar 14 2006, 12:40 PM, said:

How would you take 1M-1NT-2M-3m if you're not playing 1M-3m as invitational?

I replied already, see above. Sign off.

I don't think you did.

What is this then?

QUOTE (whereagles @ Mar 14 2006, 11:50 AM)
Talk about it.. what would

1♥ 1NT
2♥ 3m

show? Invitational or sign-off with 6-7 cards and heart singleton/void.


Sign off. 7-card suit with a singleton heart, 6 with a void (3064 and 3046).

.....

If 1MA - 3mi is not invitational, I shall have to choose, but I don't have that problem. If you insist on playing 1MA - 3mi as something else, I would still go for sign off. I believe it's more frequent than an invitational hand.

My suggestion, however, is that you distinguish by letting 1MA - 3mi be invitational with that suit. I am not a strong believer in Bergen anyway.

Roland

[inquiry]

Impossible 2♠ --

If the auction had been 1H-1N-2m-2S it shows maximum and fit for openers major (stronger than direct 3m raise),

If you use 1M-3m as invite with six card minor (as I do), then this 2♠ is clearly both minors, no heart fit. I would say 5-5 or 6-5 in the minors (since 3m would be less than the original jump shift, and after this weakish 2H rebid, clearly signoff).

If you use 1M-3m for someother nebulous reason (fit jump, mini-splinter, bergen), then you have lots of choices what this 2♠ could mean. It seems a shame to let it have just one meaning, It could be minor two suiter weak, it could be general 3NT game try or minor two suiter weak, it could be general 3NT game try or minor one suiter strongish, etc.

For example,,, after 1H-1N-2m-2S

if you play it as weak minor two suiter or balanced 3NT game try the bidding would then be,
• 2NT - I would reject game try in NT,
  
• 3♣ or 3♦ I would accept game try in notrump, this is my better minor.


• If you decided to use 2♠ as "invitational" minor one suiter or balanced game try then
  • 2NT - would reject game try,
    
  • 3♣ or 3♦ would be accept game try if in this minor,
    
  • 3♥ - I want hearts,
    
  • Accept all game tries,
  
  
• Signoff in either minor or natural invite
  • 2NT - I reject balanced game try,
    
  • 3♣I accept game try,
  
  
• Obviously the meaning of 2NT/3♣/3♦ are changed on these agreements. 2NT is never to play.
  • If 2♠ includes minor two suiter, then 2NT must be transfer to 3♣ to play (or to correct to 3♦ to play).
    
  • If 2♠ can include signoff hands in 3 or minor, then 3 of minor by responder are to play (after he bids 2♠
    
  • direct 3♣ and 3♦ bids are more defined based upon what context the 2♠ and 2NT rebids have.

For me, I use 1M-3m as invite, so my 2♠ rebid is simply minor 2 suiter pickem.

[kenrexford]

I like this multi meaning. Personally, I'd suggest that it show one of several hand types, including a balanced game try with a heart doubleton, a weak minor two-suiter, a strong minor two-suiter (limit), or a strong minor one-suiter.

Opener would bid 2NT to decline the balanced game try, or select better minor to accept it.

After 2NT (decline), Responder would bid 3C as pass-or-correct, 3D with a strong diamond rebid, 3H with a strong club rebid, or something logical with a strong two-suited rebid. After a minor (accept), Responder could pass, could flag the minor if one suited (H=C, S=D), or bid 3NT/raise the minor.

I'm not sure if this is workable, but I like it.

[Miron]

---

1♥ - p - 1NT - p
2♥ - p - ?

As I read this forum I should say 2NT with this hand (we play 3♣♦ as weak here).
My idea was that 2♠ is forsing and therefore stronger then 2NT non-forsing. Is this completly dumb?

[whereagles]

Dunno.. but I'd recommend you pass 2♥ on that hand...

[Walddk]

Miron, on Mar 14 2006, 04:38 PM, said:

---

1♥ - p - 1NT - p
2♥ - p - ?

As I read this forum I should say 2NT with this hand (we play 3♣♦ as weak here).
My idea was that 2♠ is forsing and therefore stronger then 2NT non-forsing. Is this completly dumb?

It is very unlikely that you make game opposite a hand with 11-15 hcp and 6 hearts (could even be 4522). I think pass is a straightforward decision with responder's hand.

2♠ could of course be agreed on as a super max 1NT response, but I don't like it when you have 2NT available to show the same. A hand with less than 11 hcp and a singleton heart would never move over a 2♥ rebid.

Roland

[Miron]

Pass wasn't on my mind at this position, 11HCP agains (11)12-14. But I see am bit too agressive, well pass is also a bid (and now I am convinced, it is the right bid). It is true that 3NT are there just because opps ♥ are 3-3.