All News

                   Just waiting….

  Nearly Positive.

Bidding styles continue to change with bidding after a strong Game-Forcing 2 opening no exception. While the requirements for a positive response stay at roughly an ace and a king, or the equivalent, many do not give a positive response when they have a balanced hand and moderate (say 7-10) high card points. A 2 negative or “waiting” bid has become quite popular.

There may be other reasons why only one out of ten pairs reached the top 6 spot in the recent Hamilton Labour Weekend Teams finals but it is interesting to look at how our experts would have continued bidding today’s hand which would not quite have fitted into anyone’s description of a positive response.  

2 was game-forcing. What now?

We asked the Panel whether they agreed with 2 on this hand. Most agreed with no more than one word. With a little more to say were:

Nigel Kearney “Agree with 2: I don't mind a style where a positive can be this weak, but not with such a poor suit.”

Pam Livingston “Agree with 2: (waiting). This doesn't deny points but does deny a 5+ card suit with two honours and 8+ hcp.

However, there were dissenters:

Bruce Anderson “Disagree with 2: the hand has two kings and should partner fit hearts or clubs, a slam is likely. I would borrow a point and bid 2NT, showing a balanced or semi-balanced hand in the 7-10 point range.”

If you do find a fit, then finding it lower enables you to cue-bid, and a responder to a 2 opening should always be allowed to cue kings with aces first time, no matter what one’s feeling about cue bids is. It is a little harder to slow partner down when you have "borrowed a point"  and there is no fit.

Offering a different style of responding to 2 is:

Stephen Blackstock “I don’t like 2 if a negative. 2 or 2 (showing balanced positive) would be better. 2 to show any positive is best of all and least space consuming I suspect, using all other calls to show various less than positive shapes.”

For now, whether 2 showed a negative or maybe " a negative and a little extra if balanced”, it seems to have won majority support. However, our next move is interesting. For the traditionalists:

Kris Wooles: 3: given it is a game forcing situation we can develop slowly. My two kings will likely be very useful and our final strain might well be spades but I don’t see the need to immediately raise spades and avoid mentioning hearts albeit on a weak suit. 

Pam Livingston “3: Partner is unbalanced so either has 6+ spades or has a second suit.   It's not that I particularly want to bid 3. It’s just that I don't really have anything else to bid.  A common agreement is that 2NT is a second negative and this hand is too good for that.  If I chose to bid 3, partner may bid 3NT holding four hearts and a diamond stop as they cannot rely on me to bid 3NT with my weak hand if I don’t have four hearts. 

Partner can bid 3 with 6 and I can raise or I can correct 4 to 4 or raise 4 or pass 3NT.  Having not bid 2NT as second negative, partner will deduce I have some hcp. “

Pam highlights an important issue. If 2NT is a second negative, then we should not bid it here. But is that what 2NT need mean?

Nigel Kearney “2NT: I don't want to pre-empt the auction and the hearts are still too weak to introduce on my own. It's unlikely we have an eight-card heart fit and only a seven-card spade fit. So, I'm giving up on that possibility.”

Making the same bid with very different levels of enthusiasm are:

Michael Cornell “2NT: All very simple. After 2 is positive or waiting, I now bid 2NT, either second negative or waiting. It is important for the weak hand not to get in the way. 3 here would be a disastrous bid.

If partner has a club suit, I want to hear about it at the 3 level and I will raise to 4, stronger than 5 of course. I can then cue my K over partner’s cue and would expect him to use Key-Card.

If partner has diamonds, I will bid 3, stronger than 4 but obviously a doubleton."

Matt Brown “2NT: 3 swallows up way too much room for partner to do anything sensible about showing his points or shape. I can bid 2NT; if partner bids 3, I can raise, 3 I can correct to 3 to show a doubleton, 3 I can raise (maybe strongly somehow) and 3 I can raise. I see no downside."

But seeing no “up-side” is:

Stephen Blackstock “2NT: but I hate the whole business because your 2 call has now condemned you to go at least as high as 4NT or the five level in partner’s suit, simply to show the signs of life that your hand warrants. And it may not end well….”

What about bidding our suits up the line? If 2NT is a second negative, then 3 would seem to be at least a 5-card suit. Michael Ware does not seem to think so:

Michael Ware “3: Can't bid 3 with that suit. 3 leaves lots of space for partner to rebid 3/3/3NT.”

I can live with that, though if one accepts Michael Cornell’s dual meaning to 2NT, then that looks a very good option. Our last panellist seems to rush to agree spades and this time, would regret doing so:

Bruce Anderson “3: I am not bidding 3 with such a weak suit and 3NT does not get across what could well be key cards when partner has a game forcing hand with spade length (2NT would be a second negative).

Partner should not play me for a near positive with 3 or 4 spades as I would then have bid 4. If partner is very strong, I will be able to show my 2 kings by responses to Roman Key Card, or my K by cue bidding."

So,in conclusion, you have an alternative approach to responding to 2 opening and an alternative, very practical use of 2NT, the second negative. Identifying the club fit on this deal was key as these were the four hands:

 

4 sets the suit with 4 and 4 being cue-bids and 5 one key-card. There is, of course, one snag. Once East knows their partner has K (almost certainly a doubleton) and K, then 7 seems like a huge contract..until the 4-1 trump break is discovered!

However, those in 6 will be no better off as their diamond loser would be going nowhere!

 

Indeed, better to be in game on this day than in 6 but best of all if you could have found 6. (not grand slam!). A “nearly positive” hand which deserved a large positive score.

 

Can we use the words in yellow once more? Partner will say “good lead” if you find one.

1 promised 3+ clubs. 2 asked for more information, particularly about the spade suit. What would you lead? You are playing Teams.

The answer will be on Monday.

Richard Solomon

 

Go Back View All News Items