|
By Fred Gitelman
I was hoping my last article would get you thinking:
"What a great concept it is to make the 2/1 response to a major suit opening as forcing to game!"
Indeed, it is a great concept. As a consequence, when playing 2/1 GF, auctions that involve a 2/1 are easier and more accurate than the corresponding sequences in Goren or SAYC (where the 2/1 response can be made with weaker hands).
The bad news is that auctions that start*
Opener
1 Major
|
|
Opponent
Pass
|
|
Responder
1 NT
|
|
Opponent
Pass
|
are more complicated (and often less accurate) than auctions that start this way in Goren or SAYC.
The reason for this has to do with how these systems handle responder's invitational strength hands (that is, hands in the 10- to 12-point range). In Goren and SAYC, responder starts with a 2/1 on these hands. In 2/1 GF, however, responder must start with 1 NT on most invitational hands.
Thus, in 2/1 GF, the 1 NT response could contain up to 12 points. Also, the responder could often have a distributional hand for his 1 NT response. For these reasons, most experts that play 2/1 GF also play that the 1 NT response to a major suit opening is forcing. This convention is known as 1 NT forcing or the forcing Notrump.
The opening bidder is not always happy to be forced to rebid when his partner responds 1 NT. For example:
Q 9 8 6 5
A 7 6
K 4
A 3 2
You open the bidding with 1 Spade and your partner responds 1 NT. Playing SAYC or Goren, you would be delighted to pass your partner here. Playing 2/1 GF with 1 NT forcing, however, you cannot do so. Partner might have a hand like:
7
K Q J 9 8 2
A 8 7
9 8 6
Which is not strong enough to make a game-forcing 2/1. 1 NT is not in any danger with these hands -- in fact, you make 3 NT. You also make 4 Hearts. That's why it makes sense to play 1 NT as forcing when a 2/1 is game forcing. Responder can have such a wide range of hand types for his forcing 1 NT. On some of these it is quite unlikely that 1 NT is the best final contract -- game may even be possible when opener is minimum, as responder might have a well-fitting invitational strength hand (as the above example illustrates).
So what is the opener supposed to do in response to a forcing Notrump with the following?
Q 9 8 6 5
A 7 6
K 4
A 3 2
He has to bid 2 Clubs. A 2 Spade rebid would show a 6-card or longer suit, and 2 Hearts would promise at least 4 cards in Hearts (because Hearts is a major suit). The 2 NT rebid shows a much stronger hand -- somewhere in the neighborhood of 17 - 19 points. All that is left is to bid a 3-card minor -- Clubs in this case. With 3-3 in the minors, you should also rebid 2 Clubs on most hands. With 3 Hearts, 3 Diamonds, and 2 Clubs, your correct rebid is 2 Diamonds on the 3-card suit.
I have mentioned in past articles (including the first article in this series) that it is never a good thing when your system sometimes forces you to bid a 3-card suit. Even in a system like SAYC, auctions like*
Opener
1
2 |
Responder
1 NT
?
|
are very difficult on the responder. The opener might be 5-4, 5-5, or even 6-4 in his two suits. His high-card strength is not very well defined either. Responder will often be in a quandary as to whether he should pass 2 Clubs, go back to 2 Spades, raise to 3 Clubs, or do something else.
It is even harder when 1 NT is forcing. Now the opener can still have all the distributions mentioned above. He can also have a balanced hand. The responder's hand is more wide-ranging as well, in terms of both strength and distribution.
To sum things up -- auctions that start like the above are often awkward and inaccurate when playing 1 NT forcing. Detractors of 2/1 GF are quick to jump on this flaw in the forcing Notrump (and on the problem of not being able to play in 1 NT) when they criticize this system.
In my view, the advantages of playing 2/1s as game-forcing far outweigh the difficulties that come with its corollary, the forcing Notrump. Also, the forcing Notrump is not all bad news. It does give you one nice thing: The ability for responder to distinguish between more kinds of raises for opener's major.
In Goren and SAYC, the auction*
Opener
1 Major
|
|
Responder
2 Major
|
has a wide range -- roughly 6 to 10 points. Opener is often left wondering whether to try for game or not.
Playing 2/1 GF and 1 NT forcing, you should play the single raise of a major suit opening as constructive, that is, showing roughly 8-10 points. If responder has a 6- or 7-point raise, he can start with 1 NT forcing, planning to pass if the opener rebids his suit, or take opener back to his major over any other response. Opener has a much easier time judging over an 8-10-point constructive raise than over a "standard" 6-10-point single raise.
The forcing Notrump also includes a nice way to distinguish between 3- and 4-card limit raises (10+ to 12 points) in support of opener's major. With a 4-card support, make a direct-limit raise:
Opener
1 Major
|
|
Responder
3 Major
|
With a 3-card-limit raise, responder responds with a forcing 1 NT and later gives a jump preference to opener's major. For example:
Opener
1
2 |
Responder
1 NT
3 = 3-card-limit raise
|
Knowing whether the responder has 3-card or 4-card trump support will often be critical information in opener's decision to play in a partial or a game (or whether to explore for a possible slam).
A persistent theme in these articles has been:
The wider the range of point count and distribution a bid shows, the harder the bidding will be after that bid is made.
There are several popular ways in which 2/1 GF has been modified in an attempt to narrow some of the ranges of some of the bids. One area of great concern is responder's invitational 1-suiters. A hand I discussed earlier in this article is a good example. Your partner opens 1 Spade and you hold:
7
K Q J 9 8 2
A 8 7
9 8 6
Some 2/1 players use the 3-level jump shifts to show these sorts of hands. That is, responder would bid an immediate 3 Hearts with this hand in order to describe invitational values and a strong 6-card (or longer) Heart suit. One of the advantages of this approach is that it is now much safer to play 1 NT as semi-forcing (as opposed to forcing). The semi-forcing 1 NT means that responder can still have up to 12 points, but that the opener is allowed to pass with a balanced minimum. In this way, it is sometimes possible to play in 1 NT when playing 2/1 GF (not that 1 NT will always be the best contract in this case). Other 2/1 players have special agreements about how to show various invitational-type hands after 1 NT forcing.
In Goren and SAYC, responder's jump shift is used to show a very strong hand -- one with slam interest. In 2/1 GF, the strong jump shift is not as important. It is usually fine to start with a 2/1 on these sorts of hands, secure in the knowledge that your partner will not stop bidding below game. As a consequence, many 2/1 players use responder's jump shift to show some other types of hand. The invitational jump shifts I just mentioned are an example. Other 2/1 players use weak jump shifts, or a convention like Bergen raises to make better use of these bids.
Some 2/1 players deal with responder's invitational 1-suiters by agreeing that a 2/1 is forcing to game unless responder rebids his suit. So with the above example playing these methods, responder could bid 2 Hearts and then 3 Hearts to show an invitational 1-suiter (thus canceling the original game-forcing message the 2 Heart response delivered). This variation of 2/1 GF is often abbreviated as 2/1 except rebid. 2/1 except rebid is another way of making the semi-forcing Notrump a more viable agreement.
I think that's quite enough of theory for now! My next two articles in this series will include several pairs of hands, with a discussion of how the bidding should go using 2/1 GF and 1 NT forcing.
If you have any questions about this article and would like to send mail to Fred Gitelman, please e-mail Zidea.
|
