[el mister]

Played this one recently and the wheels came off:

---

Partner didn't have anything special and did well to go 2 off. Is 2!s manifestly wrong here, esp as opps aren't competing? Wondering what is the threshold of hand strength for showing the fit, and when do you put the brakes on (pass, 1NT maybe?)

[trevahound]

I prefer a bit of artificiality here (some form of xyz), which takes much of the pressure off of 2♠. However, even without that I'd think 2♠ was automatic. You can't afford to miss your spade fit on average, and you can't expect to get to play this in 1♠. I can't imagine anything but 2♠ at your rebid. You don't supply partner's hand, or form of scoring, but your partner made a slam try along the way and went two off in game.

[el mister]

Thks - it was a club matchpoint game, but no hand records unfortunately. I don't have a good recollection of what partner had except it was undistinguished.

Seems like neither of us really limited our hands - I thought 3♠ would at least right side the contract and pard might drop anchor, having no extras. Maybe pass is better - I guess from his POV I could have a much stronger hand.

[helene_t]

You did limit your hand . 2s is 6-9.

[whereagles]

2♠ is correct.

Pard must have overbid.

[jallerton]

Whilst I would normally raise to 2♠ whenever holding 4-card support, this hand is so poor with only 1 point in partner's suits that I would probably just pass 1♠. If I raise to 2♠, there is a real danger that partner will make a game try and then find he can't make 3♠. When you don't want partner to bid on, the most effective way to achieve this is to pass. If partner wants to game force opposite a minimum response then he can bid 2♠ over 1♥.

I'm intrigued by the topic title: is 2♠ over 1♠ what you call a '2/1'?

[the hog]

2s is correct. This limits the hand as has been pointed out. I would not dream of passing 1s.

[whereagles]

jallerton, on 2014-July-19, 16:18, said:

If I raise to 2♠, there is a real danger that partner will make a game try and then find he can't make 3♠.

Why do you think that? This may look like a bad hand, and I agree it's certainly nothing to write home about, but it could be worse, say same cards with 4432: xxxx KTxx Qx Jxx. This one has a full 1 LTC loser more than the actual one. That's a big difference.

[jallerton]

whereagles, on 2014-July-20, 02:45, said:

Why do you think that? This may look like a bad hand, and I agree it's certainly nothing to write home about, but it could be worse, say same cards with 4432: xxxx KTxx Qx Jxx. This one has a full 1 LTC loser more than the actual one. That's a big difference.

Probably because I don't believe in blindly following the losing trick count.

You consider that there is a big difference between xxxx K10xxx Qx Jx and xxxx K10xx Qx Jxx because the former is a 9 loser hand and the latter is a 10 loser hand.

(Opposite some hands the latter will actually be more useful to partner as the 3rd club will make it easier for him to establish his long suit).

I consider that there is a far bigger difference between xxxx K10xxx Qx Jx and J10xx AJxxx Qx Jx. Although both are 9 loser hands, the latter is far more likely to make game should partner hold a near maximum 1♠ bid.

[whereagles]

LTC is not the point. The point is that the hand could be worse, that's all.

[rmnka447]

2 ♠ in this auction should show 4 ♠ and 5-9 value. Isn't that what you have?

1 ♠ can be bid on everything up to just shy of a jump shift hand -- about 17-18 max. Partner can invite game or make a game try when holding a near max hand, but with anything else pard should pass.

It's important to raise to show a fit and also to make it more difficult for the opponents to compete. Over 2 ♠, the opponents have to bid at the 3 level in order to compete. That may be just high enough to deter them from bidding and let you buy the contract at 2 ♠.

A jump to 3 ♠ would be invitational. FSF and a jump in ♠ would be a game forcing raise.

[helene_t]

rmnka447, on 2014-July-21, 22:14, said:

1 ♠ can be bid on everything up to just shy of a jump shift hand -- about 17-18 max.

1 ♠ could be made with 20 points. You don't jumpshift with balanced hands or with two unbid suits for example
lol @me, I was thinking of responder's jump shift. Thanks rhm for pointing this out.

This post has been edited by helene_t: 2014-July-22, 04:34

[rhm]

jallerton, on 2014-July-21, 13:07, said:

Probably because I don't believe in blindly following the losing trick count.

You consider that there is a big difference between xxxx K10xxx Qx Jx and xxxx K10xx Qx Jxx because the former is a 9 loser hand and the latter is a 10 loser hand.

(Opposite some hands the latter will actually be more useful to partner as the 3rd club will make it easier for him to establish his long suit).

I consider that there is a far bigger difference between xxxx K10xxx Qx Jx and J10xx AJxxx Qx Jx. Although both are 9 loser hands, the latter is far more likely to make game should partner hold a near maximum 1♠ bid.

I find this funny, because I agree with you, but my version of LTC agrees with your assessment too:

xxxx K10xxx Qx Jx LTC=9.5
xxxx K10xx Qx Jxx LTC=10
J10xx AJxxx Qx Jx LTC=8.5 which would be a maximum for a raise to 2♠ and would accept any game try.
Make the hand J10xx AJxxx Kx xx and I would jump raise (assuming no XYZ).

Raising to 2♠ with the the first and second hand is wrong, since opener is limited by his failure to jump to 2♠.
There is now no realistic chance for game and the 4-4 fit is poor.
Raising is tactical wrong because both opponents have passed already, one of them twice, when both could have bid cheaply at the one level.
It is odds on that partner is the one with some extra and you will simply get too high if you raise immediately.

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

helene_t, on 2014-July-22, 01:30, said:

1 ♠ could be made with 20 points. You don't jumpshift with balanced hands or with two unbid suits for example

This is not standard.
You would be better off playing a 1♠ rebid as forcing.

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

rmnka447, on 2014-July-21, 22:14, said:

2 ♠ in this auction should show 4 ♠ and 5-9 value. Isn't that what you have?

I consider this hand worth about 5 HCP.
The quality of your trumps is poor and your dispersed secondary side suit honors are not likely all to pull weight.
Not all 5 HCP are created equal.
If I held JTxx Axxxx x xxx I would raise

Quote

1 ♠ can be bid on everything up to just shy of a jump shift hand -- about 17-18 max.

That's exactly why a raise is poor.
If partner is just short of a jump shift, about 17-18, he should jump to game over 2♠, which will be decidedly odds against.
If he is slightly weaker, say 15-16, he will make a game try and we go down in 3♠.
I can simulate that if you remain unconvinced.

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

whereagles, on 2014-July-21, 14:17, said:

LTC is not the point. The point is that the hand could be worse, that's all.

If that is your criteria, you will never be a reasonable Bridge player, because to almost any hand a worse one can be constructed, which still fits the bidding and making nonsense out of this argument.

Rainer Herrmann

[whereagles]

perhaps there was a point to "melancholia" after all..

[the hog]

Well I play 1S as forcing and 2S as a mini splinter, which is not uncommon in my part of the world. I am still curious to see the Nth hand.

[biggerclub]

the hog, on 2014-July-22, 22:12, said:

Well I play 1S as forcing and 2S as a mini splinter, which is not uncommon in my part of the world. I am still curious to see the Nth hand.

Our club is a bit unique in that about 60% of the members have been taught bidding from the same source. While they don't use your specific methods, they do agree that 1♠ is limited only by the failure to open 2♣. If 1♠ is limited (to 18HCP, for example) then some other suggestions (such as PASS) make sense. If it is limited on the upside only at something like 21-22 HCP and a bunch of losers, then 2♠ is mandatory (obviously). If you are not going to bid 2♠. start earlier and don't bid 1♥.

Here is where the auction likely went off the rails. Opener made a game try with 3♥, was rebuffed by Responder and then chose to bid on anyway. Given that 4♠ went down 2, we may safely conclude that 3♥ was not a slam try, rather a game try. Opener is either not a good partner or has been (in past hands) given reason not to trust Responder's judgment.

I have been in such partnerships. The more I overbid, the more my partner underbid, locking us in an endless spiral of mistrust and compensation. (I am older now and tend these days to err on the side of the underbid.)

[rhm]

biggerclub, on 2014-July-22, 22:47, said:

Our club is a bit unique in that about 60% of the members have been taught bidding from the same source. While they don't use your specific methods, they do agree that 1♠ is limited only by the failure to open 2♣. If 1♠ is limited (to 18HCP, for example) then some other suggestions (such as PASS) make sense. If it is limited on the upside only at something like 21-22 HCP and a bunch of losers, then 2♠ is mandatory (obviously). If you are not going to bid 2♠. start earlier and don't bid 1♥.

Here is where the auction likely went off the rails. Opener made a game try with 3♥, was rebuffed by Responder and then chose to bid on anyway. Given that 4♠ went down 2, we may safely conclude that 3♥ was not a slam try, rather a game try. Opener is either not a good partner or has been (in past hands) given reason not to trust Responder's judgment.

I have been in such partnerships. The more I overbid, the more my partner underbid, locking us in an endless spiral of mistrust and compensation. (I am older now and tend these days to err on the side of the underbid.)

I immediately believe that opener had no business bidding game.
But 3♠ was already hopeless and required good play to keep it to one down.
This does not surprise me.

Rainer Herrmann