Fluffy, on 2010-November-29, 09:41, said:
I don't find this too strong for 2♣ specially with a void.
what responses you have to 2♣ doesn't change the meaning of 2♣ if 2♣ is GF then 2♠ is foricng, if 2♣ is not, then it is not.
I agree with most of this, but not the last part.
One can play that 2
♣ is not gf, and still can and imo should play that 2
♠ is a one round force.
In fact, a moment's reflection will show why: change the hand by making it AKJxx AKQ AKJxx and this is everyone's gf, yet what is one to bid over a negative 2
♦?
One can hardly jump in spades, since we may belong in diamonds, or even hearts....we need the room to show the second suit.
Even with just the hand we have, playing in 2
♠ opposite xx Jxxx Qxxx xxxx is not going to be a lot of fun on a club lead, at least not when compared to playing in diamonds.
I would suggest to the OP that he rethink his response structure....it sounds as if he is playing step responses based on hcp, and that is a terrible method (altho a lot of advancing players find it attractive because the initial concept is so simple): the problem is that 2
♣ auctions are more about where one has one's strength and what kind of strength one has, and not merely how many 4321 points one has. One Ace is often worth more, for game purposes, opposite a 2
♣ opener than are 4 jacks.
And one simply doesn't need the higher steps: if I hold 10 hcp and partner opens 2
♣, the last thing I want to do is to preempt our slam auction by responding, for example, 2N.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari