[pescetom]

You are playing 2/1 GF, 15-17 1NT, your favourite conventions.
No question that you are in slam here, but which slams are on your radar and would your priorities differ at IMPs?

MP

---

For now it's your bid.



[P.S. I gave this hand to our teacher for use as litmus paper, hope he makes good use of it ]

[mikeh]

I’d start very simply. The first choice should be almost unanimous amongst good players,imo. Although predicting unanimity or close to it usually ends badly, lol. But I’d start with 2C.

I’d be interested to learn why any other call is more attractive. For me, I want more information and 2C, showing 3+ and establishing a game force is obvious.

I play an unorthodox structure over this, in my main partnership, but I’d do this with any partner playing 2/1.

[HardVector]

mikeh, on 2025-October-08, 16:26, said:

I’d start very simply. The first choice should be almost unanimous amongst good players,imo. Although predicting unanimity or close to it usually ends badly, lol. But I’d start with 2C.

I’d be interested to learn why any other call is more attractive. For me, I want more information and 2C, showing 3+ and establishing a game force is obvious.

I play an unorthodox structure over this, in my main partnership, but I’d do this with any partner playing 2/1.

I would pick 2d since that is where I live. I'm thinking if partner is short in diamonds, then I'll be leaning toward 6/7nt. I may get a 2d-3d raise, however, and now I will be leaning towards 6/7h.

[mike777]

2C pretty standard in 2025, even with 4d
And 3c

Now for me partner can rebid
2d, natural unlimited
2h, exactly 5, minimum
2S, natural, nonmininum
2nt 6+h

[DavidKok]

2♣, showing 0+ for me and establishing a game force. Without specialised agreements I prefer 'shape first' over this start.

[DavidKok]

 HardVector, on 2025-October-08, 21:17, said:

I would pick 2d since that is where I live. I'm thinking if partner is short in diamonds, then I'll be leaning toward 6/7nt. I may get a 2d-3d raise, however, and now I will be leaning towards 6/7h.

You will also learn whether or not partner has diamonds by bidding 2♣. I find that it is common for different 2/1 bids to be different roads to exchange the same information, which in my opinion is wasteful.

[mikeh]

DavidKok, on 2025-October-08, 23:41, said:

You will also learn whether or not partner has diamonds by bidding 2♣. I find that it is common for different 2/1 bids to be different roads to exchange the same information, which in my opinion is wasteful.

Does your 0+ 2C response initiate relays? I played such a method with some success many years ago….the partnership took a 16 year break after the 2000 BB and when we got back together we decided that we’re now too old to relearn relay…plus we now have methods which, though simpler than relay, are reasonably complex.

I’d be interested in a brief description (recognizing that it may be difficult to encapsulate everything in a brief description) of how a non relay (if it is non relay) works. We play quite different rebids by opener after 1M 2C and 1M 2D: indeed, our structure after 1S 2D is different than after 1H 2D. So I agree in general with your comment about waste. However, one needs to be in a serious partnership to be able to play complex methods…unless one is part of a group that pretty much all play the same complex methods.

As for responding 2D, it’s almost expert standard in NA for 2D to promise 5, whereas it’s equally or more common for 1S 2C to promise 2+ and 1H 2C to be 3+…the difference due to permissible hand types after 1S being different from those after 1H. In the former, one must cater to 3=4=4=2 while in the latter one can’t be less club oriented than 3=3=4=3.

[mikeh]

HardVector, on 2025-October-08, 21:17, said:

I would pick 2d since that is where I live. I'm thinking if partner is short in diamonds, then I'll be leaning toward 6/7nt. I may get a 2d-3d raise, however, and now I will be leaning towards 6/7h.

With this hand, you live everywhere. David’s already made this point but I’ll elaborate. I don’t intend to play in diamonds absent at least 4 card support. Maybe you require 4 card support for a raise to 3D, but that’s not a universal agreement. So the best…and maybe the only…way to know whether partner has 4+ diamonds is to bid 2C and await his rebid.

I want to find out as much as I can about his shape. By bidding 2C I find out useful info about both minors. If I bid 2D I may have trouble finding out about his clubs.

[DavidKok]

Yes, I also play and prefer that 2♦ promises 5. That way we get different information: partner may (later, not directly) raise us with 3 cards.

My 1M-2♣ is not relay. I've played relay, both here and on a lot of other auctions. It loses far too many IMPs for my taste. I strongly prefer dialogue bidding.
I do think there's room to play artificial followups to this 2♣ response, and this is better than natural. However, currently I play natural shape first.

It is worth pointing out that my 1M-2♣ is one of

• Unbalanced primary clubs (5+ or some 4441's).
  
• Balanced GF at most 2-card support (therefore 3+ clubs, even over 1♠. 4=2=4=3 is included over 1♥).
  
• Slam interest or stronger raise (starting at approx unbal 14 or bal 15), 3+ cards in partner's major. This can be 0 clubs, too strong for a splinter, but usually it's not.

The continuations are simple: opener bids their suits, responder either shows the hand type (new suit or club repeat = unbal, 2NT = temporising no fit, pulling to the major = SI raise. There is some ambiguity on certain raises).
I think this is pretty much standard, except that I put the Jacoby 2NT hands through 2♣ as I play Maas 2NT. In particular, my other 2/1 bids are still natural, 5+ cards, forcing to game.

[mw64ahw]

2♣ as natural or balanced, not 2/1 GF
Opener will bid 2♦ if minimum without 4♠.
2♠ then forces game asking opener to describe their hand further and in the process denies certain hand shapes.
Any other reply by opener suggests 14+hcp, excluding most balanced 12-14.

After 1♥-2♣-2♦-2♠
2N 6♥ unbalanced, may have 4m
3♣ x5(4x)
3♦ BD 12-14 or 6♥ SB
3♥ self-sustaining
3♠ SB 2623
3N BD 3532

I have also played a version where 1♥-2♦ promises 5♦ or GF/Bust with 3♥

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I would make a GF raise for hearts, setting the trump suit as fast as possible,
which simplifies the later auctions.
How this is done, depends on agreement, if I had only 2NT Jacoby av. I would use it,
..., obv. peoble who play more than once with me know, that I dont care a lot about
the 4 card trump req.
Playing in my reg. partnerships this would be 2D a xfer to 2H, assuming opener has
less than 16/17, he will simply execute the xfer, followed by 2S, which would show
the gf raise, slam interest and the A/K in spade.

Will we reach the best slam? Maybe not.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Cyberyeti]

P_Marlowe, on 2025-October-09, 01:45, said:

Hi,

I would make a GF raise for hearts, setting the trump suit as fast as possible,
which simplifies the later auctions.
How this is done, depends on agreement, if I had only 2NT Jacoby av. I would use it,
..., obv. peoble who play more than once with me know, that I dont care a lot about
the 4 card trump req.
Playing in my reg. partnerships this would be 2D a xfer to 2H, assuming opener has
less than 16/17, he will simply execute the xfer, followed by 2S, which would show
the gf raise, slam interest and the A/K in spade.

Will we reach the best slam? Maybe not.

With kind regards
Marlowe

If partner has 5♥4m you may well belong in the minor, I would bid 2♣ (nat 4+)

[pescetom]

 DavidKok, on 2025-October-09, 00:09, said:

Yes, I also play and prefer that 2♦ promises 5. That way we get different information: partner may (later, not directly) raise us with 3 cards.

My 1M-2♣ is not relay. I've played relay, both here and on a lot of other auctions. It loses far too many IMPs for my taste. I strongly prefer dialogue bidding.
I do think there's room to play artificial followups to this 2♣ response, and this is better than natural. However, currently I play natural shape first.

It is worth pointing out that my 1M-2♣ is one of

• Unbalanced primary clubs (5+ or some 4441's).
  
• Balanced GF at most 2-card support (therefore 3+ clubs, even over 1♠. 4=2=4=3 is included over 1♥).
  
• Slam interest or stronger raise (starting at approx unbal 14 or bal 15), 3+ cards in partner's major. This can be 0 clubs, too strong for a splinter, but usually it's not.

The continuations are simple: opener bids their suits, responder either shows the hand type (new suit or club repeat = unbal, 2NT = temporising no fit, pulling to the major = SI raise. There is some ambiguity on certain raises).
I think this is pretty much standard, except that I put the Jacoby 2NT hands through 2♣ as I play Maas 2NT. In particular, my other 2/1 bids are still natural, 5+ cards, forcing to game.

My structure is identical (pretty much standard in Italy).
FWIW we play not only that a 2♦ response promises 5+ but that 3♦ now by Opener promises 4, not 3+.
[I am glad to hear that US bidding has converged on not faking 5 card diamonds. One if my few strong disagreements with Larry Cohen was always his endorsement of bidding 2♦ on 4+ cards. ]

So it's an automatic 2♣ for me. Like Davidkok, I am happy not to play the relays some of my competitors trot out here.

[awm]

Contrary to what others have said, this hand seems virtually tailor-made for 1nt GF relay. It seems like certain honors (like ♦Q) will be quite difficult to find in a method without relays.

Of course, playing “standard” 2/1, a 2♣ bid seems normal.