[nullve]

rmnka447, on 2018-December-14, 03:42, said:

1 NT Forcing is vital to 2/1 to provide a way to bid hands that used to be 2 level responses but weren't game forcing hands. .

smerriman, on 2018-December-14, 20:57, said:

1NT forcing is not something you "want" to play - it's the major weakness in 2/1. The point is that you're forced to play it as a consequence of your other 2 level bids being game forcing.

2/1 GF and semi-forcing 1N are incompatible?

[dsLawsd]

This result was entirely normal, even if playing semi-forcing by a passed hand. The robot had a hand that needed to bid (but a human would well consider passing 2H at matchpoints).

For a look into the theory of 2/1 and 5 card majors, I would highly recommend the classic book "Morehead on Bidding" as republished by Richard L. Frey. That shows that systems have trade-offs and is the reason that The Polish Club has become so popular where 1Nt responses show about 8 to 12- high card points.

In a high level event I might expect 2S down 1 to score above 50%.
If not, unlucky...

[rmnka447]

nullve, on 2018-December-15, 05:09, said:

2/1 GF and semi-forcing 1N are incompatible?

1 NT semi-forcing is really a variant of 1 NT forcing -- wide ranging 5-11/12, virtually any distribution. The difference is opener can pass with a hand that would not go to game opposite the 1 NT response 10-12 invitational hand.

But consider that opener has zero information as to what responder's hand is, so is, at best, guessing what to do. If responder has a fairly balanced 6-9, 1NT may be a decent spot.

1 NT forcing does have some sequences where it's hard to get to a good spot. But it also provides the chance over opener's rebid to settle in a better spot than passing 1 NT. On some hands where 1 NT makes, 2 ♠ on a 5-2 fit also makes and is a better result. If you as responder hold something like ♠ x ♥ Kx ♦ Qxxxx ♣ Qxxxx, 1 NT passed out can be a terrible place to play after a 1 ♠ opener. But after a forcing 1 NT, a 2 of a minor rebid by opener even on a 3 card suit gets you to a better place. Or, with ♠ x ♥ KJxxxx ♦ Kxx ♣ xxx, 2 ♥ may well be the premier spot and you'll have a chance to get there if opener rebids anything under 2 ♠.

[pescetom]

smerriman, on 2018-December-14, 20:57, said:

1NT forcing is not something you "want" to play - it's the major weakness in 2/1. The point is that you're forced to play it as a consequence of your other 2 level bids being game forcing. As a passed hand, your 2 over 1 bids aren't / can't be game forcing, because you can't be strong enough; so there's no longer a need for 1NT to be forcing.

1NT forcing is arguably a strength, not a weakness. Especially if you play that it can exceptionally be passed with a minimal 5332, as the majority today do.

[thepossum]

hrothgar, on 2018-December-15, 04:43, said:

I am confused about your implication that there is a relationship between the strength of opener's hand and your willingness to show a heart suit...

You seem to have some strange beliefs about simple rebids.

Maybe I just play bridge differently to you. I dont have strange beliefs. The way I learned and play bridge is that I take account of the strength of my hand when deciding on how to rebid. Maybe you dont takeaccount of the strength of your hand. That seems strange to me

I also dont understand this constant and unnecessary hostility fro people

[hrothgar]

thepossum, on 2018-December-15, 18:53, said:

Maybe I just play bridge differently to you. I dont have strange beliefs. The way I learned and play bridge is that I take account of the strength of my hand when deciding on how to rebid. Maybe you dont takeaccount of the strength of your hand. That seems strange to me

Given how badly you bid and play, I wouldn't go around using phrases like the way "I learned and play bridge" as support

With this said and done, lets assume the following auction

1♠ - (P) - 1NT

you stated that you had a "had a strong enough hand to show my hearts and not revert back to two spades"...

Please show me examples of the weak hands where you would prefer to rebid 2♠ rather than bid 2♥ with your 5=4=1=3 shape...

For that matters, show me the strong hands where you prefer rebidding in spades rather than showing your heart suit.

My guess is that if you come up with any examples, they will probably look like

♠ AKQJT
♥ 5432
♦ x
♣ Kxx

Where you are deciding that you really have a six card spade suit...
(However, this has nothing to do with the overall strength of your hand)

[hrothgar]

thepossum, on 2018-December-15, 18:53, said:

Maybe I just play bridge differently to you. I dont have strange beliefs. The way I learned and play bridge is that I take account of the strength of my hand when deciding on how to rebid. Maybe you dont takeaccount of the strength of your hand. That seems strange to me

I also dont understand this constant and unnecessary hostility fro people

In your case, you exhibit a combination of

1. Rank ignorance about elementary bidding and play
2. Grandiose claims about decades of bridge experience
3. Remarkably poor reading comprehension

and, of course, you seem far more interested in playing the victim than actually engaging in discussion

[smerriman]

thepossum, on 2018-December-15, 18:53, said:

Maybe I just play bridge differently to you. I dont have strange beliefs. The way I learned and play bridge is that I take account of the strength of my hand when deciding on how to rebid. Maybe you dont takeaccount of the strength of your hand. That seems strange to me

2♠ shows 6 spades and a minimum hand. 2♥ shows 4 hearts and can be made with a complete minimum hand - you don't need any strength.

[nullve]

thepossum, on 2018-December-14, 01:21, said:

However I thought I had a reasonable hand with the singleton and went to the 2 level with a reverse

[...]

---

Me, reversing:

---

[wuudturner]

As others have said, 1NT by a passed hand is often no longer forcing. Definitely no so in BOT 2/1. I have some friends who insist it must still be so, and when I play with them, I am bound by agreement. But in general 1NT makes sense not to be forcing as a passed hand. Why not?

The main reason why 1NT may want to be forcing is that responder MAY include a 3 card limit raise in 1NT. But as a passed hand, those 3 card limit raise hands are described by a Drury response, and the bots play a version of Drury.

So look at your hand in context of a passed hand responder, one who has denied 3 card or longer spade support. You have 12 HCP, and no spade fit. Yes, you can pray, and hope to find a heart fit with 2♡, or a preference to 2♠. But with a relatively minimum hand, you may want to stay low. Is there a risk (or gain) in bidding 2♡? Yes, since your bot partner may bounce you into 4♡ with a great fit. Or, your partner may have shape 1255, and you will be a in a sad place after 2♡.

How many hearts does partner rate to hold? There are 9 missing hearts. If we ignore the evenly distributed case where they are 4333 around the table, then one of three people has heart length. Roughly 1/3 of the time, that is partner, and I would expect to see an average of roughly 3 hearts for partner. But when you do choose to bid 2♡ with a passed hand partner here, you are aiming at either a 5-2 spade fit, or a 4-3 heart fit as the most probable landing spots.

Likewise, if you pass 1NT, can they run a million diamonds against you? Perhaps. But that would require someone (who is not partner) to have diamond length, and for them to find the lead. How many diamonds does partner have? They have not preempted in diamonds, yet you know both of your opponents have limited hands. Using the same logic as before, there are 12 diamonds missing. Partner rates to have a few of them. I might even guess 4 cards, on average.

I'd suggest that passing 1NT was not a bad idea. Bidding 2♡ also has potential. Both have risks, and potential rewards. But passing 1NT seems to be a little safer when your hand is indeed moderately weak. Weak hands with no found fits want to get out of the auction.

[thepossum]

Deleted due to being so upset.

This post has been edited by diana_eva: 2018-December-16, 13:03
Reason for edit: removed off topic rant

[nullve]

thepossum, on 2018-December-16, 11:02, said:

<snip> rant

Wow, I didn't see this coming. I may be pathetic, but I'm definitely not a bully. Sorry if you found my post offensive!

I tend to enjoy your threads, btw.

This post has been edited by diana_eva: 2018-December-16, 13:03

[diana_eva]

Please calm down everyone and stop derailing the thread. And watch your tone, this is the novice forum.

Thepossum, people who are picking on your wording are not doing so to humiliate you. When you use certain bridge terms the wrong way it may mean you've got the fundamentals wrong, so we have to point out that it's not correct and why.

You can't have an entire conversation about whether to bid 2H or not while also ignoring the fact that you seemed to believe that was a reverse, for instance. That's all there is to various people pointing out why some words you used were not applicable to the problem you posted. They're not doing it to make themselves look clever - or to make you look stupid - they're doing it to clear the fog and help you figure out why and where you got confused.

[hrothgar]

thepossum, on 2018-December-16, 12:29, said:

I've been playing for 40 years and you think an error in a forum posts means I don't know how to play. I bid and played that hand correctly as agreed by all so you are just showing your ignorance and pettiness.

Possum,

Under the oft chance that you aren't a troll, I sincerely suggest that you take a look at various threads that have gone pear shaped and consider just when things started to deteriorate.

I think that you will soon find that people started by treating your individual posts and comments respectfully.
However, as you started making more and more outlandish claims, people started acting much more skeptical about your posts.

[thepossum]

Hrothgar

I am not a troll. If you read all the threads which went "pear shaped" as you put it I was simply responding to various forms of ad hominem attack, intended humiliating criticism and unpleasantness. I have not been the initiator of any trouble on any thread unless you count the one where I tried to point out people's unreasonable behaviour on a novice beginner forum.

I suggest there is a group blindness to the nature of posts based on people being accustomed to bad behaviour in bridge circles and more specifically this forum.

I can assure you that what is tolerated in bridge clubs and in here would not be acceptable in most civilised company or forums

P