[Robertn]

A few questions on inverted minors (i.e. 1♣ - 2♣ shows a forcing raise, 1♣ - 3♣ a preemptive raise)

1) After 1♣ - 2♣, opener should try to show stoppers for NT. How good a stopper should this be? Is QJx enough? Is AJ enough despite the short suit?

2) Should 1♣ - 2♣ still be a forcing raise in competition? (Over double and/or overcall)

3) If 1♣ - (1♠) - 2♣ is still a forcing raise in competition, does it make sense to play 1♣ - (1♠) - 2♠ as asking directly whether opener has a spade stop?

Thanks

Robert

[JRG]

Robertn, on May 15 2004, 12:34 PM, said:

A few questions on inverted minors (i.e. 1♣ - 2♣ shows a forcing raise, 1♣ - 3♣ a preemptive raise)

1) After 1♣ - 2♣, opener should try to show stoppers for NT. How good a stopper should this be? Is QJx enough? Is AJ enough despite the short suit?

2) Should 1♣ - 2♣ still be a forcing raise in competition? (Over double and/or overcall)

3) If 1♣ - (1♠) - 2♣ is still a forcing raise in competition, does it make sense to play 1♣ - (1♠) - 2♠ as asking directly whether opener has a spade stop?

Thanks

Robert

Before you can get meaningful answers to your questions, I think you need to define a bit more what you mean by Inverted Minors (more later).

I play Inverted Minors with two steady partners (and a couple of casual partners). With none of them do we play that:

1♣ - 1♠ - 2♣

is strong. Essentially, inverted minors are "off" in competition (in this sequence I would bid 2♠ to show a Limit Raise or better, not 2♣.

What I suggest you clarify, so that you get more meaningful input is:

What range of hands does 1m - Pass - 2m show? Many people play that it shows a Limit Raise or better. If this is the case, what do opener's and responder's rebids show? How does responder show that he has better than a Limit Raise? Does opener's showing a stopper for NT promise extra values, or is it forced?

I personally consider both the examples you gave (QJx and AJ) as perfectly good stoppers. In fact, excellent ones (I'd be happy with Q-10-x).

Getting back to the values for an inverted minor suit raise, with one partner (my friend for many, many years), we play what some people call "Criss-Cross". This is the scheme:

1m - Pass - ?

2m - shows a FORCING raise (denies holding a 4-card major)
Jump-shift in the other minor shows exactly a Limit Raise (denies holding a 4-card major)
3m - preemptive

So over 1m - Pass - 2m, bidding NT or showing stoppers is mandatory. Over 1♣ - Pass - 2♦, showing a stopper for NT promises extra values (and clearly after a limit raise in ♦, which is 3♣, showing a stopper logically must have extra values).

Now where the competition is a Double, I play the same scheme with both steady partners (it is the reverse of what many people play, but I'll give the reasoning):

1m - Dbl - ?

3m = Limit Raise
2NT = Preemptive raise

I mentioned that many people play this the other way round (which is what we do in the Majors). We have switched the meanings because it is quite possible for opener to have enough extra as to want to play in 3NT opposite a Limit Raise. If that is the case, we want opener to be the declarer (both for the lead and to avoid tabling the stronger hand).

This convention (without our modification) is known as Dormer or Jordan (I think one only uses the 2NT = Limit Raise for the majors and the other for all suits, but I'm not 100% sure).

[Flame]

most people dont play inv after interfirence, so 1c (1s) 2c is not inv for most
The most importent thing to understand about your question is the principle of alternatives, its has no point to check for stopers if you're only chance is 3nt (not strong enough for 5c or 4M)
you always should keep this in mind.
now when you ask if Aj is a stoper or not, its also a matter of alternatives, if you dont see many alternatives then even 10xxx is a great stoper, but if there is a good alternative its not.
After 1c-2c it is wrong to just bid you're stopers with any hand, either build a better structure (search the site the were some suggestings including fred's)
or just bid stopers when you see a good alternative.
1c (1s) 2s
Is not a pure spade stoper ask, partner only care for the stoper if he got an alternative contract so this is usually a club fit, its not forcing you to show a stoper, but if you got one you most likely would bid nt.

[Trpltrbl]

1 ) Yes
2 ) No
3 ) Yes

Mike

[Robertn]

Thanks for your replies. To answer John's questions:

I'm treating 1♣ - 2♣ as limit raise or better, 10+ hcp with 4+ ♣ and no 4-card major. Opener should rebid
2NT with balanced minimum (12-14, may not have all suits stopped)
3♣ with minimum and main strength in clubs (usually 5+ ♣)
2♦ / 2♥ / 2♠ with 15+ showing stoppers
3NT with 15+ and all suits stopped

I guess it's possible opener has e.g. 5-1-6-1 shape, so maybe 3♥/3♠ should show a good 2-suiter.

With a minimum (10-11pts), responder can pass (over 2NT or 3♣) or rebid 3♣. Otherwise responder also tries to bid stops towards 3NT.

Over interference, if inv minors are off then 1♣ (dbl) 2NT can be Jordan and 1♣ (1♠) 2♠ can be limit+, as you describe and as I've used previously. But if 2♣ is still inverted, then it makes sense to redefine them. Maybe there's a case for playing 2♣ as the game forcing raise and Jordan/CueBid as the limit raise? (Helping to keep 2nd opp out of the auction in the latter case, while he's less likely to bid in the former?)

Will try to locate Fred's suggestions

Robert

[Flame]

your structure is just fine, unlike what i understood you do bid 2nt with minimum, this in other words mean , i dont see much alternative because im weak and therfore no point in showing my stopers.

[Fluffy]

Direct cuebid doesn´t specifically ask for stopper in their suit, it is just to shwo values, but since one of the cheapest voices avaible and often the most useful is NT it will become in practice like it.

But when you have a strong hand with stopper you will also bid direct cue bid.

Hands that only lack of stopper in their suit and want to specifically ask for stopper are often with singleton -> use splinter (cue at level 3)

[mishovnbg]

Trpltrbl, on May 16 2004, 01:18 AM, said:

1 ) Yes
2 ) No
3 ) Yes

Mike

Agree
Misho