Hi,
1♣ - 2♣ (invit+, fit) - 2♥ - ?
you play inverted minors (2♣ is invit or better with fit)
and partners then bids 2♥ showing extras.
Is there any agreement about which responder rebids show extras (e.g. 3rd suit)?
Should 2NT and 3♣ still show a minimum?
Thanks
Page 1 of 1
responder rebids after inverted minor
#2
Posted 2013-April-25, 21:34
bilu, on 2013-April-25, 18:06, said:
Hi,
1♣ - 2♣ (invit+, fit) - 2♥ - ?
you play inverted minors (2♣ is invit or better with fit)
and partners then bids 2♥ showing extras.
Is there any agreement about which responder rebids show extras (e.g. 3rd suit)?
Should 2NT and 3♣ still show a minimum?
Thanks
1♣ - 2♣ (invit+, fit) - 2♥ - ?
you play inverted minors (2♣ is invit or better with fit)
and partners then bids 2♥ showing extras.
Is there any agreement about which responder rebids show extras (e.g. 3rd suit)?
Should 2NT and 3♣ still show a minimum?
Thanks
I am not a fan of inverted minors, but on my equiv auctions I'm a big fan of playing the equiv of the inverted minor raise is forcing to 3m. It's an active argument locally, but shockingly, I'm pretty sure that's right (compared with 2nt being NF).
Brian Zaugg
"I suggest a chapter on "strongest dummy opposite my free bids." For example, someone might wonder how I once put this hand down as dummy in a spade contract: AQ10xxx void AKQxx KQ. Did I start with Michaels? Did I cuebid until partner was forced to pick one of my suits? No, I was just playing with Brian (6S made when the trump king dropped singleton)." David Wright
#3
Posted 2013-April-27, 03:33
I actually play 2♦ as artificial better than minimum and asking responder to describe hand with 2♥ by opener nat and minimum.
Wasn't clear, was 2♥ nat with extras or just extras and do your inverted raises deny 4M ? (ours don't)
Wasn't clear, was 2♥ nat with extras or just extras and do your inverted raises deny 4M ? (ours don't)
#4
Posted 2013-April-27, 07:02
Basic logic:
2 ♣ is inv.+ and 2 ♥ shows extras- > aynthing should be GF now.
2 ♣ is inv.+ and 2 ♥ shows extras- > aynthing should be GF now.
Kind Regards
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
#5
Posted 2013-April-27, 08:56
bilu, on 2013-April-25, 18:06, said:
Hi,
1♣ - 2♣ (invit+, fit) - 2♥ - ?
you play inverted minors (2♣ is invit or better with fit)
and partners then bids 2♥ showing extras.
Is there any agreement about which responder rebids show extras (e.g. 3rd suit)?
Should 2NT and 3♣ still show a minimum?
Thanks
1♣ - 2♣ (invit+, fit) - 2♥ - ?
you play inverted minors (2♣ is invit or better with fit)
and partners then bids 2♥ showing extras.
Is there any agreement about which responder rebids show extras (e.g. 3rd suit)?
Should 2NT and 3♣ still show a minimum?
Thanks
I play inverted minors, but not your methods. I would think something like the following would fit your methods
2NT should show EXTRAS, not minimum, as you are in game force, so the principle of fast arrival should apply. i would, with your methods, use 2♠ to also show extras but uncertain direction (i have to assume you do not have 4♠'s). A likely hand is one you want to play in notrump but don't want to play it from yourside of the table.
3♣ should show minimum, but no desire or inability to bid 3NT from your side of the table.
3NT should show balanced minimum and you feel like notrump would be right-sided from your side of the table (else see 3♣).
--Ben--
#6
Posted 2013-April-27, 09:58
With the current agreements, 2♥ makes the auction GF. A 3rd suit doesn't necessarily show extras but can be looking for stoppers in the 4th suit. If anything, 3NT should be weaker than 2NT (principle of fast arrival).
"It may be rude to leave to go to the bathroom, but it's downright stupid to sit there and piss yourself" - blackshoe
#7
Posted 2013-April-28, 18:34
trevahound, on 2013-April-25, 21:34, said:
I am not a fan of inverted minors, but on my equiv auctions I'm a big fan of playing the equiv of the inverted minor raise is forcing to 3m. It's an active argument locally, but shockingly, I'm pretty sure that's right (compared with 2nt being NF).
I am unfamiliar with issues relating to playing a strong NT, but if you are playing one, don't you want the option of playing 2NT when opener has a weak NT and responder doesn't have game-going values? At least at matchpoints?
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
#8
Posted 2013-April-28, 20:40
Vampyr, on 2013-April-28, 18:34, said:
I am unfamiliar with issues relating to playing a strong NT, but if you are playing one, don't you want the option of playing 2NT when opener has a weak NT and responder doesn't have game-going values? At least at matchpoints?
If "you" is me, the answer is yes. But, the 2NT rebid by opener for us shows a good 13-14 creating the game force, while stopper bids below 2NT are unclear as to overall strength. They are hands with only 3 or 4 diamonds and 11-12 HCP or really huge unbalanced hands intending to bid out pattern. Similar if the opened suit is clubs.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
Page 1 of 1