[mike777]

1H=2C
2D=2H
?

Your rebid in your style of 2/1 shows?

[kenrexford]

Rebids in this auction for me depend upon denomination. Leaving out jumps, my non-jump rebids would be as wollows:

2♠ = spade control (A/K/stiff/void) -- unbid suit
2NT = no spade control, poor trumps (at most one of top three honors)
3♣ = no spade control, good trumps (two of top three honors), one of the top three clubs (partner's suit)
3♦ = no spade control, good trumps, not one of the top three clubs (but possibly a "control" in the form of stiff or void on some hands), two of the top three diamonds (my suit)
3♥ = no spade control, good trumps, no top club, one or fewer top diamonds.

All of the preceding also are limited by "not suitable for a picture jump."
Anything above 3♥, including 3NT and 4♥, would be a Picture Jump with a specific hand type.

[cherdano]

Shape, of course.

[mikeh]

The problem is compounded by the need to know what the 2♥ bid shows. I suspect that the majority uses this sequence to show preference rather than primary support, altho primary support may exist.

This is to be contrasted with 1♠ 2♣ 2♦ 2♠, since it is possible (by agreement) to play that 2♥ by responder is a noise, denying the ability to make a more tightly-defined bid.

If 2♥ could be mere preference, then it is imperative for opener to continue to make descriptive shape/pattern bids.

If 2♥ firmly agrees trump, then there is some plausibility to using cues, but (as I posted on another current thread) I strongly believe that opener needs to continue with a general description... and that the level is sufficiently low that this can be done without impairing the ability to cue efficiently.

This is where Ken's methods seem completely out-of-step with mainstream expert thinking: that doesn't mean he is necessarily theoretically wrong, since if no-one had ever challenged conventional wisdom, we'd all be playing Royal Auction Bridge or some such game. But to use 2♥ as always fixing trump and then have his specific artifical follow-up seems too restrictive and will often convey information that is of limited use at that stage... while preventing opener from conveying other (shape, concentration of values) information that is not so easily conveyed later, once we start showing/denying controls with no real knowledge of 'tricks'.

[kenrexford]

I've never really commented on the "why not shape" question. However, the recent "of course" suggests that it may be worthwhile.

Opener is expected to normally have 5♥/4♦. If he lacks ability to make a jump that shows a specific hand, cuebidding first will nonetheless often answer shape when shape is important anyway.

As simple examples of how shape is "known" although not bid, consider that if Opener bypasses 2♠, denying a spade control, then he must have two spades. Hence, he has at most two clubs.

If Opener cuebids a spade control, and Responder has AK, Opener is known to have a stiff spade. Repeated cuebids, or bypasses, similarly "clarify" shape.

As an example of how shape is often not necessary. Suppose Responder has five diamonds, perhaps AKJxx. Will he be more interested in Opener having three diamonds (without without the Queen), or in Opener having the diamond Queen, even if stiff?

The tendency seems to be that you must show that you have a five-card suit. As one person noted to me, "Why do I need to show you that I have a five-card suit? I'm looking at it." This may sound like masterminding and poor partnership bidding. Rather, it is based upon an idea that the person with the most relevant shape is presumed captain, and he need to know honor fit rather than distributional fit.

That's at least the thinking.

[kenrexford]

mikeh, on Feb 27 2007, 04:33 PM, said:

... while preventing opener from conveying other (shape, concentration of values) information that is not so easily conveyed later, once we start showing/denying controls with no real knowledge of 'tricks'.

Actually, Picture Jumps are COV bids. You will only initiate cuebidding when a COV bid is not systemically allowed.

An example again. After the proposed start, Opener would bid 3♠ with a COV in diamonds and hearts, stiff spade, and no club control. Opener would bid 3NT with a stiff spade, no diamond Ace or King, and a COV in hearts and clubs. Opener would bid 4♣ with a COV in diamonds and trumps, no spade control, and a stiff club. Opener would bid 4♦ with 2542 pattern, no spade or club control, and a COV in hearts and diamonds. Opener would bid 4♥ with two stiffs and a COV in diamonds and hearts.

So, COV's are largely covered.

If Opener bids 2♠, and Responder bids 2NT, Opener can make all of the COV bids described above, except the "two stiffs" COV, to show lesser trump contribution and a spade control.

If Opener bids 2NT and Responder bids 3♣, Opener can make COV bids with the same trump contribution but the additional spade control. If the jump would have shown a spade control anyway, more definition occurs.

You can even have 2♠-P-2NT-P-3♣-P-3♦-P-4♥ as yet another layer of COVs.

Look, just a thought on this. A lot of folks are quite skeptical of my ideas without knowing what they are. However, as a completely unknown person who wrote this thing, do you really think that Master Point Press would publish a very strange book with wild theories of a madman without reviewing it and seeing some serious merits to what I have done? I mean, I jumped into a world of egos and attacked the establishment from a position of no recognized credentials, covering a topic that is very difficult, and yet MPP went for it. Maybe I actually thought through this stuff and have a coherent theory that works.

[mike777]

"The problem is compounded by the need to know what the 2♥ bid shows. I suspect that the majority uses this sequence to show preference rather than primary support, altho primary support may exist."

For this post 2H means whatever it means in your style of 2/1.

[pbleighton]

Shape.

Peter

[pclayton]

Shape thru 3♥; then controls.

[hrothgar]

Temporizing

[helene_t]

Shape, but must also show where my values are. I would not bid 2♠ on xxx.

[Chamaco]

helene_t, on Feb 27 2007, 10:19 PM, said:

Shape, but must also show where my values are. I would not bid 2♠ on xxx.

Ditto Helene.

Also, the way I like to play 2H here is not necessarily support, it can be a waiting bid saving space.

But if it came up undiscussed with an occasional pard I'd take it as support

[the hog]

Shape of course; shape is everything. Anyway the 2H bid by no means sets H - it is just a waiting bid.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

it also depends on the meaning
of 2S, which would be 4th suit
for me.

I guess, it simply shows preference,
but thinking of the options (2S,2NT),
I fail to come up with a suitable hand,
maybe Hx in hearts.
And opener can pass 2H, but I dont play
2/1, just a system similar to SAYC.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[inquiry]

Playing 2over1 with most partners, new suit would be shape/concentration value showing (in bid suit).

Playing my version of "2over1", the auction given is special...

1H-2C
2D-2H

where 2C was not "true 2over1" but rather a three way bid, one meaning of which was drury. 2D was not natural, but rather showed extra values and a willingness to go to game if responder held a limit raise of hearts with three card support (one of the support type bids). Here 2H bid can by responder can show the weaker of the hands, 8 to bad 10 hcp and three card support, or the better hand that will force now to game. Opener has to bid again (his 2D bid promised another bid).

Yes, yes, this is not traditional 2over1...so while i answered "other" in the poll, in fact playing 2over1 the shape/value thing is right.

[whereagles]

I don't have specific agreements about this situation, but, if I had to pick one, it would be a med hand or better (say 15-20 hcp) and at least 3 good cards.

[mike777]

Great responses, thanks. Wow I feel like the only person in the world who may play 2h here as a slam try, non dead minimum, 3 cards. I would cue an ace next, though I could understand and might raise clubs now with Kxx or something. I would not expect to show shape with say 2=5=4=2 unless I did not have an ace.

That means with say:

Ax....KQxxx....KTxx...QT

I would cuebid 2s and not rebid 2nt.

[keylime]

I play 2H here as shape, but with the additional element that the g/f is minimumish in nature since opener's rebid shows a good hand.

[mikeh]

mike777, on Feb 27 2007, 09:45 PM, said:

Great responses, thanks. Wow I feel like the only person in the world who may play 2h here as a slam try, non dead minimum, 3 cards. I would cue an ace next, though I could understand and might raise clubs now with Kxx or something. I would not expect  to show shape with say 2=5=4=2 unless I did not have an ace.

That means with say:

Ax....KQxxx....KTxx...QT

I would cuebid 2s and not rebid 2nt.

Mike, how would you bid, as responder, with xxx Kx KQx AJxxx, having responded 2♣ and hearing 2♦?

If you say '2♠ of course', how do you bid with AQJ10 x Kx AJxxxx after the 1♥ bidder rebid 2♦ over 2♥?

Bear in mind that partner may be 4=5=4=0 or that a 4-3 ♠ fit may be the best spot.

Bidding 2♠ on both hand types seems more dangerous than using 2♥ as preference or real support.. to be clarified next call.

While it is necessary to fudge, especially in wide-range-opening methods such as 2/1, the rule should be to fudge as little and as cheaply as possible. Reserving the 2♥ preference, which is the call that preserves the maximum bidding space, for ambiguous bids, leaving more-space-consuming bids as more tightly defined, is a logical approach to constructive bidding.

Furthermore, I believe it to be a huge mistake to use this sequence (responder bids 2♥ over 2♦)as a slam move... as absolutely promising some slam interest. Slams are great, and I am probably as big a fan of aggressive slam investigation as most, but game and choice of games are far more common. Plus, when we have slam interest, we have, by definition, more bidding space than when we are interested only in the correct game. It therefore makes sense to use low level bids to probe for the best game, while permitting either bidder to express, later, interest in higher things.