2 way NMF question
#1 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2006-March-12, 02:22
1C p 1H p 1N p 2C (forces 2D) p 2D p 2H p 2S.
What is 2S? Assume a style with no rigid rules, we bypass spades if it "feels" right. Usually it would be 4333, but not always.
#2
Posted 2006-March-12, 03:32
Assuming the puppet was an attempt to signoff: Then I think opener's 2♠ call must mean, "Sorry, pard, but I rebid 1NT on a hand which is actually 4=1=4=4, and now I strongly suggest you pick another suit to play in".
If the puppet was an attempt to show the light invite type hand: I think that here, the 2♠ call must be a natural-ish move, to see if we can manage to bid a game in ♥s, maybe NTs in some rare cases, but in any case willing to risk playing 3♥, if no other meaningful information can be be brought forth from responder's and opener's next calls.
#3
Posted 2006-March-12, 08:52
#4
Posted 2006-March-12, 11:03
- hrothgar
#5 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2006-March-12, 11:28
It is typical for responder to bid this way with 4 spades and 5 hearts (2C-2D-2H). Is that a normal interpretation or just mine? If that is normal, how does one go about finding a 4-4 spade fit after that when A) they don't have values for game and B ) they do. Perhaps in some schemes A is impossible, but what about B? Or do people bid 2C-2D-2S with 4-5 in the majors and risk getting to 3H?
#6
Posted 2006-March-12, 11:34
If you frequently bid 1NT with 4 spades then as responder I'd still bid 2H with 5-4 iin the majors, and 2S with 4-4 in the majors.
I frequently bid 1NT over 1C-1D with one or both majors. However, now as responder I won't have 4 diamonds and a 4-card major, so 1C-1D-1NT-2C-2D-2M is invitational with at least 4-5.
- hrothgar
#7 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2006-March-12, 11:37
Hannie, on Mar 12 2006, 12:34 PM, said:
If you frequently bid 1NT with 4 spades then as responder I'd still bid 2H with 5-4 iin the majors, and 2S with 4-4 in the majors.
I frequently bid 1NT over 1C-1D with one or both majors. However, now as responder I won't have 4 diamonds and a 4-card major, so 1C-1D-1NT-2C-2D-2M is invitational with at least 4-5.
Jlall said:
#8
Posted 2006-March-12, 11:50
1♣-1♥-1NT-2♣-2♦-2♥...
Pass = minimum
2♠ = minimum with 4♠, 2♥ (trying to get to the best spot)
2NT = minimum, really doesn't want to play 2♥
3♣/♦ = stopper-showing, max, only 2♥, suggests weakness in some suit
3♥ = three-card hearts, kind of a punt ("good minimum")
3♠ = maximum with 4♠, may have 3♥ also (will correct 3NT to 4♥ in this case)
3NT = to play, usually 3244 or 3235, not particularly scared of any suit
4♥ = maximum, three hearts, to play
Of course it's also reasonable to treat 2♠ as forcing one round (most of the time it's best to pass 2♥ with a minimum and doubleton anyway)... but in any case I think it should show four spades.
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#9
Posted 2006-March-12, 11:52
Jlall, on Mar 12 2006, 07:28 PM, said:
It is typical for responder to bid this way with 4 spades and 5 hearts (2C-2D-2H). Is that a normal interpretation or just mine? If that is normal, how does one go about finding a 4-4 spade fit after that when A) they don't have values for game and B ) they do. Perhaps in some schemes A is impossible, but what about B? Or do people bid 2C-2D-2S with 4-5 in the majors and risk getting to 3H?
I would think 4=5 is possible for that sequence. This could be confirmed by raising 2♠ to 3♠. 2♠ accepts game and searches for the right strain, I think all of 4H, 4S and 3N are in the picture.
Arend
#10
Posted 2006-March-12, 12:54
Jlall, on Mar 12 2006, 12:37 PM, said:
Hannie, on Mar 12 2006, 12:34 PM, said:
If you frequently bid 1NT with 4 spades then as responder I'd still bid 2H with 5-4 iin the majors, and 2S with 4-4 in the majors.
I frequently bid 1NT over 1C-1D with one or both majors. However, now as responder I won't have 4 diamonds and a 4-card major, so 1C-1D-1NT-2C-2D-2M is invitational with at least 4-5.
Jlall said:
Quote
- hrothgar
#11
Posted 2006-March-12, 12:55
1c : 1h
1nt : 2c
2d : now 2s (for me) would show 4 spades and 5 hearts, invitational
there's another possibility
1c : 1h
1nt : 2s
playing 2 way, this can't be game forcing so it seems that it can be treated as invitational 4/5 majors, eh? if that's true, there's no need in 2h after 2d showing spades (invitational strength)
#12
Posted 2006-March-12, 16:40
2♠ should be a non-minimum hand, with values in spades, and possibly even 4 cards. It is quite likely that it includes a fit in hearts (at least Hx).
Advancer obviously raises spades with 4 cards, and opener will place the contract.
It makes sense to have also 3♦ as fit in hearts with a feature in diamonds
#13
Posted 2006-March-12, 21:01
This style forces to 2N or 3♥ when opener is minimum, but that seems a minor risk given that responder was looking for game.
This means that opener's 2♠ over 2♥ is as Richie suggested
#14
Posted 2006-March-13, 04:57
In my two most regular partnerships 2C is a puppet to 2D, but in one of them (which plays the closest to 'two way NMF')
1C - 1H - 1N - 2C - 2D
2H = weak 4-5 in the majors, pass or correct
2S = 4-5 in the majors Invitational
(immediate 2S over the 1NT rebid 4-4 invitational)
in the other (which plays 2C forces 2D and transfers)
1C - 1H - 1NT - 2C - 2D
2H = weak invite with 5 hearts, NF
2S = 4-4 invitational NF
1C - 1H - 1NT -
2H = weak 4-5 in the majors
2S= 4-4 FG
#15
Posted 2006-March-13, 11:29
Jlall, on Mar 12 2006, 03:22 AM, said:
1C p 1H p 1N p 2C (forces 2D) p 2D p 2H p 2S.
What is 2S? Assume a style with no rigid rules, we bypass spades if it "feels" right. Usually it would be 4333, but not always.
In many of my partnerships we rebid 1N on a balanced hand with 4 spades (in some partnerships its flexible, and some its not).
My comment is in the context of how I play the puppet then 2H sequence. I normaly play:
2C then rebid 2H: Light Invite, usually distributional
2C then 2N: 5 cards in major, sound invite
When playing in partnerships that bypass 1S (usually weak nt partnerships) we bid 2S here on 4 spades and 2 Hearts, since responder can be 4=5 in the majors. There is a case to be made that this should also show a max.
I don't think this bid should show 4333. But that comes mostly from my belief that after finding 1 major suit fit you don't look for a better one, since whatever that gains in sometimes finding the 4-4 fit, it loses in describing your hands to the defenders....
#16
Posted 2006-March-13, 12:17
Of course, as you have realized as well, this interpretation is not clear-cut and really depends on the player, so you better have this sequence agreed in advance or simply avoid it. Unless you like to live a dangerous life, that is
#18
Posted 2006-March-14, 15:19
A lot of people have suggested that opener should always pass with a minimum and two hearts, and I know Elianna and I are in a distinct minority when we frequently rebid 1NT with a singleton in partner's major. So does 2NT here show a maximum with interest in some other strain? Maybe a 4333 hand asking if partner really wants to play in hearts?
Seems simplest to me without further discussion to play that 2-level bids show minimums and are mostly trying to "improve the contract" whereas 3-level bids are forward-going but indicate uncertainty about the best strain. Obviously almost any agreements here are better than none, but that's what I'd assume. The idea that bidding 2NT shows a maximum (while it might have technical merit) seems strange to assume without further discussion, and I don't see any reason that a lower bid should necessarily show a stronger hand in the case of 2♠ (although I know plenty of people who play for example that 1♥-2♦-2♠ is a game-forcing reverse whereas 1♥-2♦-2NT shows a non-forcing minimum I personally find this weird).
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#19
Posted 2006-March-14, 17:02
awm, on Mar 14 2006, 04:19 PM, said:
A lot of people have suggested that opener should always pass with a minimum and two hearts, and I know Elianna and I are in a distinct minority when we frequently rebid 1NT with a singleton in partner's major. So does 2NT here show a maximum with interest in some other strain? Maybe a 4333 hand asking if partner really wants to play in hearts?
Seems simplest to me without further discussion to play that 2-level bids show minimums and are mostly trying to "improve the contract" whereas 3-level bids are forward-going but indicate uncertainty about the best strain. Obviously almost any agreements here are better than none, but that's what I'd assume. The idea that bidding 2NT shows a maximum (while it might have technical merit) seems strange to assume without further discussion, and I don't see any reason that a lower bid should necessarily show a stronger hand in the case of 2♠ (although I know plenty of people who play for example that 1♥-2♦-2♠ is a game-forcing reverse whereas 1♥-2♦-2NT shows a non-forcing minimum I personally find this weird).
As you know, this all depends a lot on
a. can 1N have a stiff
b. what exactly 2C then 2M showed
When playing my usual methods, 1N can't have a stiff (on rare occasion you might, but, we don't cater to it since it will be rare). 2C then 2M says I am only interested in game if you are max AND have a fit (relative to the class of hands that would rebid 1N instead of raising the first time). Yes its possible to play 2N as a correction, but opener is really not in much of a position to know if 2N will be a better contract. How would you feel as responder, after 1D-1H-1N-2C-2D-2H with Axx Qxxxxx x KJx if opener pulled 2H to 2N with Kxx xx KQxxx Axx? 2H requires a 3-2 trump break or the club Q on (or the diamond Ace on and they take it). 2N requires a lot.
The case for a 2N rebid showing a super-max is there are some hands that started as worth 14 but have gotten better on the auction, despite having only 2 card support. For instance, Axx Qx Axxx Axxx is now worth much more than 14 after responder shows a 5 card heart suit.
Again, if you frequently rebid 1N with a stiff, you have to change a lot of these things...

Help
