[awm]

Here's something that's always seemed weird to me about 2/1 GF. Am I way off base here?

Holding four-card support for partner's five-card major and 10-11 points, most 2/1 players will make a limit raise (1M-3M or bergen). With three-card support and 10-11 points, most 2/1 players will bid 1NT, but then raise 2M from opener to 4M. So how come 10-11 points and a 9-card fit is worth game when it's 6-3 but only an invite when it's 5-4? This is especially weird since a lot of 2/1 players will open lighter when holding a six-card suit (so the minimum opening bid from partner that includes 6M is an inferior hand to the minimum opening containing a 5M).

Also, a lot of 2/1 players seem to feel that there's a huge difference between an eight and a nine card fit, to the degree that they will force to the three-level on a nine-card fit (i.e. bergen raises) even without a lot of values. Yet the same people will often temporize with a forcing notrump on some hands with three-card support, leaving opener to guess whether partner has two trumps or three. Here it seems like the 5-4 is worth the three level, but with a 6-3 or 6-2 opener is left to guess how many trumps there are?

Similarly, say we have five hearts and 10-11 points, and partner opens 1♠. Most 2/1 players will respond 1NT (forcing) planning to raise a 2♥ rebid from opener to game. I guess a 5-4 fit and 10-11 points opposite an opening bid is pretty good. But how come opener's four hearts opposite my five and 22-23 combined hcp is game, but if partner had just opened 1♥ and I had four (so opener's five hearts opposite my four and again 22-23 combined hcp) the hands are no longer worth game? Again keep in mind that the minimum opening bid with 5♠+4♥ is probably weaker than the minimum (for example) 3532 opening hand.

Anyways, my feeling has always been that these issues are "system deficiencies" -- that they are cases where there are "not enough bids" to fully describe all the hand types and the "least of evils" is to just force game on some hands that aren't quite worth it in order to give the lower bids a tighter definition. If that's so, it's fine (although one might suggest that an alternative system would handle some of these hands better than 2/1). But I see a lot of die-hard 2/1 players argue that somehow bidding this way is "right" and not just a system issue. I'm confused.

[jtfanclub]

awm, on Feb 8 2008, 04:44 PM, said:

So how come 10-11 points and a 9-card fit is worth game when it's 6-3 but only an invite when it's 5-4?

I have always said that they should just make the stronger Bergen raise (3♦ in old style) game forcing, because I've never actually seen anybody stop below game in it.

For the weaker one, we're talking a big HCP difference, usually 6-9 Begen vs. 10-12 3 card invite.

[matmat]

you could simply resolve this issue, like a large fraction of the players on BBO, by not ever raising P.

[gwnn]

Adam, you raise interesting issues. I think many people will force to game with 5 goodish hearts and 11 hcp because of the extreme difficulties 1NT will cause (which is, in fact, another weirdness of 2/1's). I think people are a little conservative as to forcing to game with 4c support... There are many 10 counts (almost half of them I think) which are worth game if partner opens reasonably. That said, if opener likes to open on garbage (good 10.5 counts) and responder likes to forcing NT on garbage, the lack of definition (which can be productive vs. 4th hand) will inherently lead to bad spots.

Mat, my nickname is spelled "gwnn".

[helene_t]

The system does not impose inconsistent hand evaluation. You don't have to raise 2♠ to 4 all the time and you may sometimes bid 4 over 2m if you have cooperating values in p's second suit.

But I agree that 2/1 is ambivalent with respect to the LOTT. I don't see that as a problem, except when teaching the system to beginners. Then you would like some unifying principles.

Sorry I just don't see the problem, must be missing something.

[han]

Jeez, is this a serious post Adam?

Is an extra trump worth a lot? Yes.

A limit raise with 4-card support might be lighter in high cards than a limit raise with 3-card support. Phrased differently, with 4-card support we might sooner force to game than with 3-card support.

If we open lighter when we have a 6-card suit, that means we may have fewer HCP. This does not mean the playing strength opposite a hand with support is less. You are abusing HCP to make your point.

When we raise 1M-3M showing a limit raise with 4 trumps, opener will almost always bid game with a 6-card suit. The knowledge of the 10th trump increases the value of their hand.

The auction 1M-1NT-2M-3M does not show 3-card support. When we decided that we'd make a 3-card limit raise we didn't know about the 9-card fit. Now that we do have a 9-card fit the combined value of our hands has increased so bidding game is not a terrible system weakness. It's not so different from the auction 1S-1NT-2D-4S when we have Qxx xx KQx Axxxx (making up a hand on the fly, hope you get the point).

With 3-card support everybody prefers to raise immediately. But if we bid 2M with 5 HCP as well as with 9/10 then it becomes very hard for opener to judge accurately. By bidding 1NT first and then 2M (preferably playing BART) we sell our hand as a poorer hand so that opener will be less tempted to go to game. In the other thread you said that you basically get to the same games which is obviously false. A 14-count 5-1-2-5 will often move over 1S-2S and often pass over 1S-1NT-2C-2S.

If partner opens 1H and I have 10-11 points and 4 hearts then I can bid 3H and I have described my hand. It is quite rare that partner won't bid game, especially if partner has shape. If partner opens 1S and rebid 2H and I have 10-11 points and 5 hearts then not only do we have a 9-card fit, I also know that partner is unbalanced (at least 5422 and often 5431). So now I'm again happy to be in game. The fact that I am not able to show this strong a hand below game does not bother me.

Yes, there are minusses to 2/1, but I think you did a very poor job assessing them.

[awm]

My point is just that the following two statements are inconsistent.

(1) If partner has five hearts and I have four hearts, and we have 22-23 hcp we should probably not be in game.

(2) If partner has four hearts and I have five hearts, and we have 22-23 hcp then we should definitely be in game.

The following two statements are less obviously inconsistent, but I still think they are suspicious:

(1) If partner has five spades and I have four spades, and we have 22-23 hcp we should probably not be in game.

(2) If partner has six spades and I have three spades, and we have 22-23 hcp, we should definitely be in game.

Yet it seems as though 2/1 players bid as if they see no issue with these pairs of statements at all. Obviously this could be a "system weakness" but that's not how they see it. They claim that it makes perfect sense that if we swap a trump from one hand to the other (keeping all else the same) then the combined value of the hands changes in a radical way. If anything I would think that 5-4 fits play better than 6-3 fits (for the same reason 4-4 fits play better than 5-3 fits) yet the actions taken imply exactly the opposite.

In fact it's even more extreme, because opener is often already counting points for shape when he opens. I'm sure a lot of people open lighter with 5♠+4♥ than with 5332, or open lighter with 6♠-322 than with 5♠-332.

[han]

awm, on Feb 8 2008, 07:23 PM, said:

My point is just that the following two statements are inconsistent.

(1) If partner has five hearts and I have four hearts, and we have 22-23 hcp we should probably not be in game.

(2) If partner has four hearts and I have five hearts, and we have 22-23 hcp then we should definitely be in game.

In the auction 1S-1NT-2H, we know more about partner's hand. He is unbalanced. And we have a 9-card fit. And we have 22-23 points.

After 1H, if I am unbalanced with 10-11 points, I probably splinter. If partner is unbalanced, he will bid game over 1H-3H. We only avoid game when we are both balanced and partner is quite minimal.

Sorry for repeating, this was also in my post above.

[mikeh]

I may well be in the minority (again) but I don't accept (all of) adam's starting premise: that with '10-11' hcp and 3 card support I will always raise a rebid major to game in 1♠ 1N 2♠ or 1♥ 1N 2♥.

The fact is: I don't automatically raise to game. Why would I?

Now, if I hold a GOOD 10-11, I will even when I would have shown a limit raise originally, and there is a sound reason for this.

Firstly, when responder is balanced or semi-balanced, and opener has no long suit opposite responder's presumed doubleton on the semi-balanced hands, responder's 4th trump will not usually score an offensive trick. It often has value in the sense that, for instance, we have a chance of no loser on Axxxx opposite Kxx and no such chance missing QJ10xx. But the 4th trump may not add to our chance of covering a loser in opener's hand.


However, make opener's hand Axxxxx opposite Kxx, and not only does our possession of 9 trumps enhance our chances of losing a trump trick but opener has ONE LESS LOSER for responder to cover.

Put another way, a 6322 opposite a 3334 will usually play better than a 5332 opposite a 4333, with the same honours, and will (rarely) play worse.

Obviously this is not an edge that applies to every hand, but I think it does with sufficient frequency as to warrant an upgrade with good limit raises once partner shows 6 cards in the trump suit.

[jdonn]

awm, on Feb 8 2008, 04:44 PM, said:

Holding four-card support for partner's five-card major and 10-11 points, most 2/1 players will make a limit raise (1M-3M or bergen). With three-card support and 10-11 points, most 2/1 players will bid 1NT, but then raise 2M from opener to 4M.

If you are suggesting that the people you know make 3 card and 4 card limit raises on the exact same high card point range, I think your friends need to work on their judgment!

[sceptic]

ignore

[sceptic]

1major 3 major ( playing bergen is 0-6hcp) so is preemptive

1 Major 3 clubs (playing bergen is descriptive) so it is a judgement call based on fact for the opener to manage (responder having completed thier task unless forced to bid again

I have never seen 1 major 1NT 2 of that major played as a game force bid, with 3 card support and 9-11 hcp if you have a good 10 or 11 hcp then it could be worth an invite or if you have the agreement to only splinter with 4 card support, then you can bid 4 of that major with a judgement call, I just dont see it as automatic

I play reverse bergen so I am quite interested in this thread