[tomco1982]

Hi,

I'd like to ask what is considered standard in SAYC in these sequencies.


1M-2m-2M-3M
we play that 2M is either minimum or natural. 2/1 F2NT and promise rebid
1M-3M invitational not needed 4 trumps

1♥-1♠-1N-3♥

1♣-1♦/♥-1♥/♠-3♣

1m-1M-1N-3M

My question is which of these seq is invitational and which F.

Thanks

Jan

[awm]

1M-2m-2M-3M should be game forcing. This is something a lot of people who aren't overly familiar with SAYC get wrong. The reason is that a 3-card limit raise would've bid 1M-3M directly (ruling out that hand type) and a hand with only two in the major wouldn't raise here since 2M does not at all promise six (could be any minimum). So 3M here is a game-forcing raise of the major.

1♥-1♠-1NT-3♥ is invitational. Rebidding three of a previously bid suit is the way to invite game in that suit. See for example this document.

Similarly 1♣-1X-1Y-3♣ is invitational to game, as is 1m-1M-1NT-3M. While these exact examples are not in the document, on page 4 there are many very similar examples.

Basically the rule is that normally rebidding an already-named suit at the three-level is an invite. The exception is the 2/1 auction you gave where an invite is not really possible (since a limit raise hand bids 1M-3M).

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

The seq.

1M - 2m
2M - 3M

is usually played as forcing, if you play that a 2/1 bid promises
another bid.
The point is, that you need a way to set the major as trump below
game level to investigate, if slam is possible, and you only give up
playing 3M.
But if you would have liked to play only 3M, you could have raised
direct, espessially if the direct raise does not show 4 card support.

The seq.

1m - 1M
1NT - 3M

is usually played as NF, but this depends on other agreements, if you
happen to play weak jump shifts, than it is possible to play 3M as
forcing.
Usually people play NMF or something simiilar after openers 1NT rebid,
which allowes responder to show multiple hand types, one is a strong
1-suiter.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[peachy]

P_Marlowe, on Jun 19 2009, 03:02 AM, said:

[snipped some]
Usually people play NMF or something
[snipped rest]

This is true. However, OP asked a question about SAYC and there is no "NMF or something" in SAYC.

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

1M-2m-2M-3M should be game forcing. This is something a lot of people who aren't overly familiar with SAYC get wrong

I am going to disagree with Adam on this subject forever. He wants it to be this way because it arguably makes more sense logically, and his position is based on SAYC being a logically constructed system, and that this interpretation should fall out from that. My position is that SAYC is an illogical hodgepodge of popular treatments so that no such conclusion should be reached. (Based on massive system holes like no forcing minor raise, 2nt after a 2/1 being "minimum" yet still forcing).

I am going to assert that this sequence should be NF, because SAYC is based on SA where this sequence was always considered NF, a main distinction vs. the "2/1 GF" family of systems.

As for P_Marlowe, the "2/1 promises a rebid" means that the *2M* is forcing, not necessarily the 3M.

[jdonn]

I have long agreed with Stephen on this. What Adam describes is certainly the logical conclusion to be drawn from the rules outlined in SAYC, but to my understanding is not explicitely part of SAYC. The fact that a strict interpretation is illogical (in that multiple auctions can show the same hand) is not relevant to the answer IMO.

[matmat]

so the answer is, that there is no answer?

[benlessard]

The quite old sayc say that

1S----2C
2S----2Nt & 3S aint forcing.

What is imo the best system to teach to beginners is 2/1 except if responder suit is repeated (and opener didnt show extras)

1S-----2C
2Y----- 3C is NF the rest is game forcing.

No need to play 1 Nt forcing and 1NT is 6-10 maybe a bad 11.

It give you 90% of the tools of 2/1 without 1Nt forcing.

[gnasher]

Sorry if I'm restarting in an old argument, but it seems to me that 1M-2m-2M-3M is defined in SAYC.

ACBL SAYC System Booklet said:

SUBSEQUENT BIDDING BY RESPONDER
If responder has bid a suit at the one level
...
Bids available for inviting game: 2NT, 3 of a previously bid suit
...
If responder initially bids a new suit at the two level, the same rules apply EXCEPT that a subsequent jump raise of opener’s first suit to the THREE LEVEL is game forcing — responder should make a limit raise directly over the opening with 10–11 points and at least three-card support

1M-2m-2M-3M isn't a jump, so it isn't forcing. 2m denied a 3-card limit raise, so it doesn't have three cards. Therefore 3M is non-forcing with two-card support.

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

2m denied a 3-card limit raise, so it doesn't have three cards. Therefore 3M is non-forcing with two-card support.

Disagree with this. Although immediate jump limit raise allowed with 3 cd support (1M-3M), nowhere in the document does it say this is required. So I don't see why 2m has to deny a 3 cd limit raise. It's not necessarily bad to have multiple ways to show a limit raise; if you have a decent suit that could use some help (AQT9x) it's good to be able to show it so that partner can know the K of that suit is a really good card to have.

Raising a possibly bad 5 cd suit on 2 cards routinely doesn't sound like a great idea to me.

[gwnn]

this is like bizarro world Stephen Tu is arguing SAYC in terms of "doesn't sound like a great idea to me"

anyway here is the relevant passage from gnasher's quote

ACBL said:

responder should make a limit raise directly over the opening with 10–11 points and at least three-card support

[Stephen Tu]

I guess I'm too influenced by trying to reconcile logically the SAYC document with historical SA treatments as described in references like Goren, Root, Encyclopedia of bridge, Truscott's bidding dictionary etc. Since the SAYC doc is far too incomplete to figure out what to do in many sequences, have to use the others to fill in the gaps.

I suppose this is impossible, why should anything written by the ACBL ever be expected to make logical sense? Their convention charts and alert charts are total inconsistent messes also.

There's reasons why I never played SAYC with any regular, serious partnerships. It's unfortunate that it's too late to remove it as the online default std.

[jdonn]

I didn't know that phrase was there either. I suppose if I was going to be wrong about something I'm both unsurprised and happy that it was SAYC.

[tomco1982]

gnasher, on Jun 20 2009, 02:08 AM, said:

2m denied a 3-card limit raise, so it doesn't have three cards. 

Idea why you should be able to introduce new suit before showing fit is to partner can make more intelligent decision.

If 1♥-2♦-2♥-3♥ is invitational, then opener has much better picture than after 1♥-3♥ which can show anything.

And if that sequence is invitational, is 1♥-1♠-1N-3♥ also invitational? If not, why could I show minor suit with fit for partner to evalute but not spades?

[Stephen Tu]

1h-1s-1nt-3h is ambiguous in SA. In SAYC you can argue that it's inv since the text says jumps in previous bid suits are inv except for the 1S-2d-2H-3S and similar sequence exception.

In traditional SA though, an argument is that with 3cd support and a non-inv hand, that one should not bid 1S, but rather raise to 2H directly. And that you would never pull the 1nt to 2H on a doubleton, therefore 2h should be inv, and 3h forcing. So basically it depends if you are in the camp that allows 1s with a min 3cd heart raise or not.

I think the conclusion from all this is try to form partnerships and make logical agreements, and don't try to play SAYC verbatim without accepting that it contains many suboptimal, vague, inconsistent sequences.

[foo]

tomco1982, on Jun 19 2009, 02:34 AM, said:

Hi,

I'd like to ask what is considered standard in SAYC in these sequencies.


1M-2m-2M-3M
we play that 2M is either minimum or natural. 2/1 F2NT and promise rebid
1M-3M invitational not needed 4 trumps

1♥-1♠;1N-3♥

1♣-1♦/♥;1♥/♠-3♣

1m-1M-1N-3M

My question is which of these seq is invitational and which F.

Thanks

Jan

Here's what I teach novices when teaching SA or SAYC.
Responder splits their hand into 1 of 9 different catagories based on the strength of their hand plus the degree of support they have for the 1M Opening and bids accordingly:


min 2-M
...1S or 1N
Inv 2-M
...foo-1S;any-3S
...1M-2m;foo-3m
...1S-2H;foo-3H
...1N (IOW, you downgrade some misfit hands)
GF 2-M
...any unlimited bid
...3N with 13-15 HCP and 3-S and no side suit good enough for a 2/1

min 3 M
...1M-2M
Inv 3 M
...1H-1S;foo-3H
...1M-2m;foo-MRaise
...1S-2H;foo-SRaise
...1M-1N;foo-3M
...(you initially downgrade flat hands with 3card support and no 5+ side suit)
GF 3 M
...1H-1S;foo-4H
...1M-2m;foo-MJumpRaise
...1S-2H;foo-SJumpRaise
...3N with 12-14 HCP and no side suit good enough for a 2/1

min 4+M
...1M-2M
Inv 4+M
...1M-3M
GF 4+M
...J2NT, Splinter, etc

Special notes
In a 2/1 auction, if Opener's 1st rebid is past their original suit they promise 15+ HCP and the auction becomes GF.

"min", "Inv", and "GF" are based on
...min= 6-9 HCP or Dummy Points
...Inv= 11-12 HCP or Dummy Points
...GF= 13+ HCP or Dummy Points
Dummy points are HCP +
...1 point for a doubleton,
...3 points for a stiff
...5 points for a void
Whenever Responder knows we have an 8+ card fit.

If you understand the above, you will realize any 2/1 promises one of
...a GF hand or
...an Inv hand with a 6+ card suit in it or
...an Inv hand with 3+ card support and a side 5+ card suit


So to answer your specific questions,
1M-2m;2M-3M
is an Invitational hand with 3 card support and a side suit source of tricks usually 5+ cards long.

1M-3M shows a Limit Raise and a Limit Raise promises 4+ card support.

1H-1S;1N-3H shows an Inv hand with 4+S and 3+H.

1m-foo;bar-3m shows an Inv hand. Usually shapely.
(else the auction would be 1m-foo;bar-2N)
(The auctions 1m-1N;foo-2M! or 1H-1N;foo-2S! are special since Responder has limited their hand and initially denied having 4+ in the Major they rebid)

2nd round jumps or 3 level rebids of their suit by Responder show an Inv hand with a 6+ card suit in it and deny support for Opener's 5cM opening.
(1m-1M;foo-3M or 1H-1S;foo-3S)