The most complicated 2/1 GF auctions are the ones that start 1♦ – 2♣.  Actually, these can be some of the most difficult auctions in all of bridge.  These auctions can lead to lots of complexity and confusion about the meaning of bids on the second and third round of the bidding.   Many pairs have played in 3-3 Major suit fits after the auction began with 1♦ - 2♣, thinking they were headed to a much better fit.  Let’s look at what agreements we need to make with partner and then see how these affect our follow-up bidding.

When we play the version of 2/1 GF that uses “2-Major Waiting” (meaning that Opener can rebid their suit without promising a 6th card), then we gain the ability to “right side” a NT contract when we have a balanced hand without a stopper in one of the suits. But, by having 2-Major be a waiting bid we make it harder for us to show our 6-card suit. Let’s see how we can add a gadget to help give us better rebid options to describe our hand.

When we choose to adopt the alternative approach to our 2/1 GF responses, 2♦ showing a 5+card suit, 2♣ being “could be short as 2 cards”, then this changes our reasonable options for rebids by the Opener. It is important that we have good agreements with partner about how this approach changes our rebid agreements.  Let’s look at the hands that are simplified by these agreements and problems that are created.

There is not just one version of a 2/1 Game Forcing bidding system.  There are a variety of conventional rebids that are additions to a fundamental 2/1 GF system, but there are also some fundamental response agreements that can be adjusted.  One of these is the length that we promise when we respond in a minor suit at the 2-level.  In the standard 2/1 system, a 2♥ response shows at least a 5-card suit, a 2♦ response shows at least a 4-card suit, and 2♣ usually shows a 4+card suit (occasionally it could be a 3-card suit).