[antonylee]

We have a small informal club at the university where a lot of beginners play. Last time, the following uncontested auction came up: 1♦-2♦-2♥-?
In a non-inverted minors context (so 2♦=6-9), should this be 1. a game try or 2. game forcing, and showing A. concentration of values or B. length (4♥-5♦)? As it turns out none of the "experienced" players had any idea as we're all playing inverted minors...
As a side note, I guess that in the same context, 1♦-3♦ can only cover one of 1. invites and 2. GF raises, with the other one going through some sort of delayed raise. I believe it's "standard" to play it as a GF raise but would rather teach it as an invite raise (for similarity with 1M-3M); is there any strong reason one if preferable to the other?

[whereagles]

I think it doesn't matter much. Both show a stopper and an invite.

Inverted minors break the mnemonic 1x-3x as an invite, so I wouldn't recommend them to a beginner. The game is plagued with lots of rules and exceptions, so for starters the simpler the better.

[wank]

game try. you've got acres of space to investigate and get out.

[antonylee]

whereagles, on 2014-October-18, 00:33, said:

Inverted minors break the mnemonic 1x-3x as an invite, so I wouldn't recommend them to a beginner. The game is plagued with lots of rules and exceptions, so for starters the simpler the better.

Yes, I certainly don't intend to teach inverted minors to beginners... but I'd still rather teach a decent version of non-inverted minors.

[steve2005]

Assume it shows a stopper looking for the most likely contract of 3N. If opener goes past 3N and doesn't bid 4 or 5 of the minor it was a cuebid looking for slam.

either side bidding 3 of the minor is non-forcing

[fromageGB]

Neither A nor B. Just a stop inviting a NT game. KT3 would be enough for me.

[akwoo]

My opinions:

1) 1m-3m and 1M-3M should mean the same thing for beginners. But I'm leaning towards saying that Goren had it right and playing 1M-3M as game forcing, with invites going through a new suit, is easier for beginners. For one thing, I'm not sure playing 1M-3M as invitational really works without some sort of artificial game forcing raise, and I don't want to teach Jacoby 2N (or whatever substitute you want) to beginners.

2) 1♦-2♦-2♥ should not exist for beginners. For that matter, 1♠-2♠-3♣ should not exist for beginners. Beginners don't have enough judgement to go beyond some form of point count in deciding whether to bid game or not. If all you're going by is point count, one invitational bid (which for simplicity should be 3 of the suit) suffices.

[antonylee]

To be clear, I didn't intend to teach 1D-2D-2H (I agree 1X-2X-3X is enough for invites)... the auction just came up spontaneously in semi-supervised play of random deals and I was asked "so what should that show"?
My approach re GF raises is 1- just raise to 4M (before teaching slam bidding) and 2- make a delayed raise after a 2/1 (this is what I learnt first).

[akwoo]

antonylee, on 2014-October-18, 22:18, said:

To be clear, I didn't intend to teach 1D-2D-2H (I agree 1X-2X-3X is enough for invites)... the auction just came up spontaneously in semi-supervised play of random deals and I was asked "so what should that show"?

I would say "The 2D bid already denies 4 hearts, so it doesn't make sense for the 2H bid to show hearts since partner is known to not be interested. People usually assign some conventional meaning to this bid, and when you are experienced enough to make use of them, I'll teach you some of the possible conventional meanings." (Well, the phrasing would be less convoluted if the involved parties were at the table.)

What's important here is for them to know not to use the bid just to show a 4 card heart suit.

[blackshoe]

Logically, once you've found a fit in a non-forcing auction, any new bid below game must be looking for game. Just as logically, once you've found a fit in a game-forcing auction, any new bid below game must be looking for slam. I suppose you can make exceptions in either case, but for beginners - and maybe intermediates - that seems a bit counter-productive.

[helene_t]

2h shows a heart stopper and is invitational or better. This is standard and very natural and not very bad.

1d-3d is invitational. This sucks but it follows the logic of the rest of the system and the issue is not important enough to justify an exception.

[Trinidad]

Just teach the beginners that after a bid and raise to the two level, a new suit between two and three of the agreed suit is (at least) invitational showing values in the suit. After this start, one can pass it out in 3 of the agreed suit, or in 2NT if that suit was a minor.

This is true for:
1♦-2♦
2♥

but also for:
1♠-2♠
3♣

1♣-1♥
2♥-2♠

and even:
1♣-1♦
2♦-2♥

Then, you should extend it: When a major has been raised, we will not play in a minor (unless at slam level). This means that the same holds for an auction like:
1♣-1♥
2♥-3♣

Rik

[nige1]

antonylee, on 2014-October-17, 23:02, said:

We have a small informal club at the university where a lot of beginners play. Last time, the following uncontested auction came up: 1♦-2♦-2♥-?
In a non-inverted minors context (so 2♦=6-9), should this be 1. a game try or 2. game forcing, and showing A. concentration of values or B. length (4♥-5♦)? As it turns out none of the "experienced" players had any idea as we're all playing inverted minors...
As a side note, I guess that in the same context, 1♦-3♦ can only cover one of 1. invites and 2. GF raises, with the other one going through some sort of delayed raise. I believe it's "standard" to play it as a GF raise but would rather teach it as an invite raise (for similarity with 1M-3M); is there any strong reason one if preferable to the other?

IMO

• For beginners (and some experts), 2♦ is a simple limit bid that doesn't deny a 4-card M. e.g. ♠ x ♥ Q x x x ♦ K Q x x x ♣ x x x
• Then 2♥ is natural, forcing and invites game.
• Few beginners are familiar with showing stoppers, so, in practice, 2♥ is likely to be a 4+ card suit.
• 2m and 3m should be non-forcing limit raises (by analogy with 2M and 3M).
• With a game-forcing minor raise, I suppose that you have to improvise with a jump-shift or 3N.
• It might be better to bite the bullet and teach 2/1 and inverted minor raises from the start.

[whereagles]

nigel, while it is natural bidding, allowing 4 card majors in a single raise highly conflicts with the "first look for a major fit" lore... not sure I'd like to start with such an exception.

[barmar]

blackshoe, on 2014-October-19, 16:50, said:

Logically, once you've found a fit in a non-forcing auction, any new bid below game must be looking for game. Just as logically, once you've found a fit in a game-forcing auction, any new bid below game must be looking for slam. I suppose you can make exceptions in either case, but for beginners - and maybe intermediates - that seems a bit counter-productive.

The other general principle to impart is that when you've found a fit in a minor, you usually look for game in NT. Minor suit games require taking more tricks, and overtricks aren't worth as much. When you find a fit in a major, you usually look for game in that major.

There are exceptions, but as you say, this is a bit advanced for B/I.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

length is not relevant, responder denied a 4 card major, hence no 44 fit,
unless you want to go looking for the magic 43 fit to play 4H, you dont need
2H to show 4+.

It does not need to be GF, you can still stop in 3D, hence

Opener showes inv. strength and values (call it stopper) asking responder to
describe his hand further, min / max ... side values.
To a certain degree, it should also show values either in spades or in clubs,
facing a single raise opener cant expect responder to stop both.

With kind regards
Marlowe