Club News Sheet – No. 251 www.pattayabridge.com 26^th Aug 2007

My home phone is 038 422924 and my mobile number is 083 6066880

It is best to use my home number to contact me unless I am at the bridge club.

My e-mail is terry@pattayabridge.com or pattayabridge@yahoo.com

My MSN messenger ID is tj_quested@hotmail.com

	to news-sheet main page
	to Pattaya Bridge home page
		to bridge conventions	to No Trump bidding

Mon 20^th 1^st Phil & Tomas 60% 2^nd Bengt & Jan 59%

Wed 22^nd 1^st Phil & Tomas 642^nd 2^nd Lewis & Terry 60%

Fri 24^th 1^st Bob & Dave 57% 2^nd Lewis & Alan 55%

Bidding Quiz Standard American is assumed unless otherwise stated.

Hand A Hand B With Hand A partner bids 1NT, what do you bid?

♠ KQ7 ♠ J2 With Hand B you are in 2^nd seat, love all, what do you open?

♥ A953 ♥ 4

♦ K3 ♦ AK10876532

♣ AQJ6 ♣ Q

Hand C Hand D With Hand C you are dealer at favourable vulnerability. What,

if anything, do you open?

♠ 9 ♠ 76

♥ J108642 ♥ A108 With Hand D partner opens 1♣ and you bid 1♦. Partner then

♦ A1054 ♦ AQ632 bids 1♥, what do you bid?

♣ 52 ♣ KQ9

Hand E Hand F With Hand E RHO opens 1♥. (a) What do you bid, and

(b) What do you intend to do later?

♠ J10942 ♠ AKJ4

♥ - ♥ J763 With Hand F you open 1♣ and partner bids 1♦. You bid 1♥

♦ AQJ1062 ♦ 94 and partner jumps to 2♠ - what do you bid?

♣ J2 ♣ A76

Bidding Sequences Quiz All of these sequences occurred this week

G 1♣ pass 1♦ pass What is 1♠ - natural or 4^th suit forcing?

1♥ pass 1♠

H 1♣ pass 1♦ pass What is 2♠ - natural or 4^th suit forcing?

1♥ pass 2♠

The Club Championships The current standings are: -

Gold Cup = Best 30 Silver plate = Best 10 Bronze medal = Best 5

1816.8 Janne Roos 666.8 Janne Roos 350.4 Janne Roos

1815.9 Jan v Koss 654.4 Jan v Koss 340.2 Jan v Koss

1794.9 Dave Cutler 640.0 Dave Cutler 336.2 Bengt Malmgren

1736.1 Bob Pelletier 634.9 Paul Savelkral 332.9 Paul Savelkral

634.5 Lars Gustaffson 328.0 Dave Cutler

Walking the dog? Board 1 from Monday 20^th

An American term for making a seemingly silly bid in the hope of being doubled there.

Dealer: ♠ AQ43 Table A

North ♥ K9652 West North East(B) South

Love all ♦ - - pass 1♦ (1) 1♥

♣ 9654 pass 4♥ pass (2) pass

pass

♠ 875 N ♠ J2

♥ 103 W E ♥ 4 Table B

♦ J4 S ♦ AK10876532 West North East(B) South

♣ AJ10832 ♣ Q - pass pass (1) 1♥

♠ K1096 pass 2♦ (3) 5♦ (4) dbl (5)

♥ AQJ87 pass 5♥ (6) all pass

♦ Q9

♣ K7

Table A: (1) What did you open with this East hand B in this week’s quiz? 1♦? 2♦? 3♦? 4♦? 5♦ or a gambling 3NT? I don’t like 4♦ or 5♦ as that rules out 3NT if partner has a few bits and pieces. It’s a bit good for 3♦ and much too good for 2♦. A gambling 3NT is reasonable but the suit is not really solid. So it appears that only 1♦ is left; the hand is 21 for the rule of 20 and so this East opened a very reasonable 1♦.

(2) But with probably 9 tricks in offence and likely zero in defence this is a very poor pass, 5♦ is called for.

Table B: (1) This East took a very interesting view with hand B, and I certainly would not argue with this initial pass and come in later!

(3) 2-way reverse Drury – showing a sound raise to 3♥ (or better) with 4 ♥’s.

(4) And now East shows his hand, interesting bidding Bob. Walking the dog?

(5) South really has to do something with his 15 points – he cannot imagine that North has such a superb fit (or East such great ♦’s) and dbl is clearly called for.

(6) But luckily for South, North (me) did not like to defend and I thought that there was something fishy (doggy?) about East’s bid – I’ve played against Bob before.

And what happened? 4♥ made +1 and 5♥ was bid twice and made exactly; these three thus shared the N-S top. One East was allowed to play in 5♦ and went just one down. One East went on to 6♦ doubled which should go just two down for a good score – but he actually got a top for making 6♦ when South covered the ♣Q when it was led!

The bottom lines: -

- Only cover an honour with an honour if you are likely to promote a trick in your hand or in partner’s.

- If there seems to be no satisfactory opening – then pass?

- If anybody need the exercise, I have a Great Dane that need regular walking.

Dave’s Column Board 19 from Wednesday 22^nd

Dave’s input this week is a bidding question rather than the usual play problem. What was your answer to question A this week? With points to spare – play in 6NT rather than 6 of a suit (so simply bid 6NT) is the book’s answer. I disagree. Here’s what Dave’s book says: -

Dealer: ♠ KQ7 Book Auction

South ♥ A953 West North(A) East South

E-W vul ♦ K3 - - - 1NT

♣ AQJ6 pass 6NT (1) all pass

♠ J9542 N ♠ 83 “This is a typical deal where you have upwards of

♥ 10 W E ♥ QJ84 34 points. With two balanced hands facing each other

♦ 10852 S ♦ J964 you will have a good chance of making 12 tricks in

♣ 942 ♣ 1087 No Trumps. It will be an unnecessary risk to play in

♠ A106 a 4-4 fit, where a bad trump split may cost you

♥ K762 the slam.

♦ AQ7

♣ K53

So how should North bid this hand opposite a strong 1NT from partner? North has a possible ruffing value in ♦’s but there are two reasons why he might shy away from a 4-4♥ fit.

1.- He holds 19 points, so a slam might be cold in no trumps on sheer power while a bad trump break may defeat the ♥ slam.

2.- His own ♥’s are not so brilliant. ♥A953 opposite a random 4-card holding might easily produce two trump losers, even when twelve tricks are cold in NoTrumps.”

The above is all from Dave’s book which then goes on to repeat how much better 6NT is than 6♥.

Terry’s comments. This article is totally typical of writers and players who think that if 6♥/♠ or 7♥/♠ is a poor prospect, then bid 6NT. Does nobody know that 7♣/♦ scores more than 6NT? The book’s recommended auction (correctly) dismissed looking for a ♥ slam – but why not a ♣ slam?

♠ A106 Give South this hand (just two spot cards changed) and 7♣ - the golden 4-4 fit,

♥ K7 is cold! Why is it that virtually every bidding book ignores minor suit slams?

♦ AQ72 This author correctly points out that ♥A953 is not a suit to go looking for

♣ K532 slam – but ♣AQJ6 most certainly is!

An ‘expert’ pair who have read the No trump bidding book would start off with SARS and then easily find the cold 7♣ had South held this hand – see next page. Dave’s book’s pathetic 6NT is absolutely typical (of people who do not know how to find minor suit slams after a 1NT opening). I only changed the South hand by two spot cards – but south could easily have 5 ♣’s and then it would be really silly to miss the ♣ grand. SARS enables responder to establish the 1NT opener’s shape.

And just as an aside – for non experts. North has a decent 19 count opposite 15-17. If opener has 17 then 7NT should be there – so he could try 4♣ Gerber and, assuming there is no ace missing, then 5NT (quantitative inviting 7NT). Giving up straight away with 6NT seem feeble to me.

And what happened at the Pattaya bridge club? 6NT=, 7NT-1 (twice) and 6♥-1.

My recommended (basic) auction . 1NT - 4♣ - 4♠ - 5NT - 6NT .

Where 4♣ is Gerber, 4♠ shows two aces, 5NT invites the grand and opener bids just 6NT with a miserable 16 and the totally flat 4333 type shape. This was (pretty close) to the auction to 6NT by Lewis/myself.

The Expert Auction.

So how do an expert pair bid to 7♣ assuming South had this hand?

North South North South

♠ KQ7 ♠ A106 - 1NT

♥ A953 ♥ K7 2♣ (1) 2♦ (2)

♦ K3 ♦ AQ72 3♣ (3) 3NT (4)

♣ AQJ6 ♣ K532 4♣ (5) 4♦ (6)

7♣ pass

(1) In principle Stayman, but it could be a raise to 2NT (with or without a 4-card major) as our experts play 4-way transfers or it could simply be the start of a SARS sequence to ascertain opener’s shape.

(2) No 4-card major

(3) SARS (Shape Asking Relays after Stayman) – asking about partner’s shape.

(4) 4-4 in the minors.

(5) RKCB and setting ♣’s as the trump suit. North has uncovered the 4-4 ♣ fit and also knows that partner has 4 ♦’s – so only 5 cards in the major suits and thus no loser there (assuming partner has the ♥K); the hand is surely making 13 tricks if there is no keycard missing. A more pessimistic bid would be 4♥ - showing a quantitative raise with a 4-4 ♣ fit. South would assume that North is looking for a small slam and should bid 6♣ with these top cards and a great hand for ♣’s (get an extra trick with a ♥ ruff); North then bids 7♣.

(6) 3 keycards – there is no advantage in playing 1430 when you are using 4 of the trump suit as RKCB.

The bottom lines: -

- I’ve met this sort of thing before in bidding books and magazines – bidding 3NT or 6NT when there is no good 4-4 major suit fit but totally ignoring a possible minor suit fit for slam.

- Bidding a minor suit slam after a 1NT opening is not as easy as a major suit slam as it takes a step more to establish the fit. SARS does it fine but is perhaps a bit of a strain on the memory.

- SARS is far superior to minor suit Stayman as it allows you to locate both major suit fits and minor suit fits. It is fully described in the NoTrump bidding book. Note that for North to confidently bid the grand he needed to know about South’s shape, in particular the 4 card ♦ suit, and SARS does that.

- SARS is obviously excellent if you play over the internet and can quickly refer to the SARS sequences in the NoTrump bidding book index – but would that be considered cheating?

- This deal again illustrates the power of the good 4-4 fit; 7♣ is easy (even with a bad 4-1 trump break) but 12 tricks is the limit in NoTrumps. Note that this South hand is fairly minimal for a 1NT opener, it could easily have another point, giving up immediately with 6NT is simply chicken.

- Don’t always believe everything you read in the books/articles (except mine).
Who needs Blackwood? – cue bidding to slam - 1 Board 25 from Monday 20^th

Our dynamic cue bidding duo from last week are at it again, an excellent 6♠ – and not a mention of Blackwood!

Dealer: ♠ 9 Table A

North ♥ J108642 West North(C) East South

E-W vul ♦ A1054 - pass (1) pass pass

♣ 52 2♣ pass 2♦ (2) pass

2♠ (3) pass 3♠ (4) pass

♠ AQJ7652 N ♠ K843 4♣ (5) pass 4♥ (6) pass

♥ Q3 W E ♥ A7 5♣ (7) pass 6♠ (8) pass

♦ - S ♦ Q982 pass (9) all pass

♣ AKQJ ♣ 843

♠ 10 Table B

♥ K95 West North(C) East South

♦ KJ763 - 2♥ (1) dbl (10) 3♥

♣ 10976 6♠ (11) all pass

Table A: (1) I would open 2♥, especially at this vulnerability. Some purists may say that you need points in the suit – I think that intermediates are more important; this is a robust 6-card suit with a 4-card side suit. In fact, I would not even argue with a 3♥ opening – I’m sure that’s what Marty Bergen would open.

(2) Waiting.

(3) Game forcing

(4) Agreeing trumps and showing slam interest (playing 3♣ negative and 4♠ fast arrival).

(5) A cue bid (the ♣A). This is an excellent example of why you should not always use 4♣ as ace-asking – O.K. Sally W?

(6) A cue bid (the ♥A and denying the ♦A)

(7) A cue bid (the ♣K)

(8) Denying the ♥K but showing the ♠K.

(9) Unfortunately this pair’s bidding technique is not quite sophisticated enough for West to ascertain if East has 5 or 6 card in the rounded suits – with just the 5 rounded cards 7♠ is cold.

Table N: (1) This North opened the obvious 2♥.

(10) A rather light double.

(11) West simply bid what he thought he could make - so this E-W pair took 4 less rounds of bidding to reach the same contract.

And what happened? The 6♠ slam was bid at just these two tables. The other three tables stopped in 4♠. Everybody made the obvious 13 tricks.

The bottom lines: -

- Good slam bidding is not just using Blackwood to locate missing aces/kings. Here, as last week, a cold slam was reached missing two kings, and this time with an ace missing also.

- Do not use 4♣ as the ace-ask when it’s going to be a trump contract – it’s far more useful as a cue bid, a splinter or natural – depending upon the sequence.

- Note that if West asked for aces in this auction that would be a very poor bid (with a void) as West needs to know whether East’s ace is the ♦A or the ♥A – cue bidding solves this.

Who needs Blackwood? – cue bidding to slam - 2 Board 6 from Wednesday 22^nd

Here we go again, with our dynamic pair cue bidding to a good 6♥ slam, this time as E-W.

Dealer: ♠ 86 West North East South

East ♥ QJ85 - - 1♣ 3♠

E-W vul ♦ J1096 4♥ pass 4NT (1) pass

♣ K87 5♦ (2) pass 6♥ all pass

♠ 4 N ♠ AK6 (1) A cue bid showing 1^st round ♠ control - this

♥ K109763 W E ♥ A42 E-W pair play Kickback and so 4♠ would

♦ AK75 S ♦ Q43 have been Roman keycard Blackwood.

♣ 53 ♣ AQ104 RKCB may be a better choice as that would

♠ QJ109753 find the ♦A and the ♥K (and deny the ♥Q).

♥ - (2) A cue bid showing the ♦A and denying the ♣A

♦ 82

♣ J962

And what happened? This time the operation (the bidding) was a success but the patient died; because of the adverse 4-0 trump break offside the contract went one down. Nobody else bid slam.

The bottom lines: -

♠ - - I guess that 95% slams fail 5 % of the time!

♥ QJ8 - But is the slam really a failure? : -

♦ 1096

♣ - North leads the ♦J which is won in the East hand

with the ♦Q and the ♥A cashed. In order to achieve

♠ - N ♠ K the correct 3-card end-game West has to shorten

♥ K109 W E ♥ 42 his trumps. So ♠A and ruff a ♠. Take the ♣Q finesse

♦ AK7 S ♦ 43 and try the ♣A and a ♣ ruff. .

♣ - ♣ 10 Everything has gone very smoothly and you have

♠ QJ109 this 6-card ending.

♥ - ♦AK and a ♦ ruff leaves North and West with

♦ 8 only 3 trump each. Lead any card off dummy and

♣ J play the ♥9 and North is end-played.

I wish I had found this play at the table – sorry partner. Note that it is necessary to play the ♥A rather than the ♥K at trick two (as some at the table incorrectly suggested). It is correct to play the ♥A rather than the ♥K as declarer can pick up ♥QJ85 for just one loser with South (although that’s unlikely on the bidding) but cannot if North has all of the trumps.
Who needs Blackwood? – cue bidding to slam - 3 Board 27 from Wednesday 22^nd

Here we go again, a strange sequence with everybody bidding ♥’s :– 2♥ - 3♥ - 4♥ - 5♥!

Dealer: ♠ J96 West North East South

South ♥ Q6 - - - 1♦

Love all ♦ KJ763 2♥ 3♥ (1) 4♥ (2) 5♥ (3)

♣ AJ2 pass 6♣ (4) pass 6♦ (5)

all pass

♠ 85 N ♠ AQ76

♥ K109742 W E ♥ AJ853 (1) Showing a good (game forcing) hand.

♦ - S ♦ 94 (2) Not enough?

♣ 98653 ♣ Q7 (3) A cue bid, pretty obviously a void here.

♠ K1032 (4) A cue bid, showing the ♣A and denying the ♠A.

♥ - (5) Pretty obvious as South knows that there is a ♠ loser

♦ AQ10852

♣ K104

East enquired about the bidding and was told by our dynamic duo that 3♥ was forward going, 5♥ a cue bid and 6♣ forward going. At the end of play (6♦ made) East commented that N-S were lucky and did not know what they were doing. I leave it up to you if you think that N-S knew what they were doing (I am biased).

This particular East thinks he’s a great player and is continually criticizing others or else saying that they were lucky when they get a good score. N-S may not have been so ‘lucky’ of course had East obeyed the Law and bid 5♥ at (2) – the 4♥ bid is feeble when partner is known to have 6 ♥’s and North shown a good hand opposite an opener. I guess that East thought that N-S were such poor players that they would not bid on over 4♥?

And what happened? Two pairs bid and made 6♦, the other two stopped in game.

The bottom lines: -

- I guess I’m somewhat different from this East. If the opponents bid or play well then I congratulate them and say ‘well bid’ or ‘well played’. It seems that this East does not use these words unless he is talking about himself.

- Obey the law. 6+5 =11 so compete to the 5 level immediately.

- 6♥ would be an excellent save, but then not if N-S ‘did not know what they were doing’.

- This is another good example of cue bidding rather than charging into Blackwood – reaching a decent slam when off two aces.

Doing a Chuck – part 1 Board 12 from Wednesday 24^th

If you had not yet realised is, the egotistic East from the last board was Bengt. I don’t usually mention names but his continual incorrect criticism of everybody in sight really is getting too much. In last week’s news-sheet it was he who criticised his partner when he missed slam because he opened 4♠ with a three loser hand (and just a 6-card ♠ suit

- ♠KQJ632 ♥A ♦10 ♣AK1054) and he also later passed partner’s reverse leaving him in a silly 4-2 fit when he has three cards in partner’s first bid suit. I played against him this Friday and he incorrectly criticised his partner twice (two separate boards) when it was he who had made the blunders. In this deal he was East and demonstrated his complete lack of knowledge about the order in which suits should be bid and also about simple preference: -

Dealer: ♠ K3 West North East(E) South

West ♥ KJ10863 pass 1♥ 1♠ (1) 2♣

N-S vul ♦ K7 pass 2♥ 3♦ (2) 4♥ (3)

♣ KQ6 pass (4) pass 5♦ (5) pass

5♠ (6) dbl all pass

♠ Q75 N ♠ J10942

♥ Q97542 W E ♥ - .

♦ 954 S ♦ AQJ1062

♣ 3 ♣ J2

♠ A86

♥ A

♦ 83

♣ A1098754

(1) What did you bid with this East hand E(a) in this week’s quiz? 2♥ (Michaels) – showing 5 ♠’s and a 5 card minor is a possibility but for me it’s a bit too good - but not strong enough for Michaels and then bid again – which I play as very strong. The ‘obvious’ bid is to show this great ♦ suit with a 2♦ overcall and then bid ♠’s once or twice later. This 1♠ overcall with a meager ♠ suit and a great 6-card ♦ suit is a poor bid.

(2) So promising 5 ♠’s and 4+ ♦’s.

(3) Rather silly - 3♣ must be better.

(4) West was later criticized by Bengt for not doubling – but then N-S would run to 5♣ which makes with an overtrick.

(5) So showing 5 or 6 ♠’s and 5 ♦’s.

(6) Obviously West gives preference back to partner’s first bid suit.

And what happened? 5♠ doubled went two down and when the hand was over East criticized West’s 5♠ bid – saying that he had bid ♦’s twice and so had more ♦’s than ♠’s and that West should have passed 5♦. It’s about time that somebody told Bengt that he does not have a clue – so I’m saying that now. The sequence, bidding ♠’s once and then ♦’s twice, shows equal length (5-5) or more ♠’s than ♦’s. Obviously Jan (West) bid perfectly throughout and correctly gave preference at (6).

Doing a Chuck – part 2 Board 9 from Friday 24^th

Here we have the same players as the last deal.

Dealer: ♠ Q9852 West(D) North East(F) South

North ♥ K - pass 1♣ pass

E-W vul ♦ K105 1♦ pass 1♥ pass

♣ 10842 2♠ (1) pass 4♠ (2) pass

5♦ all pass

♠ 76 N ♠ AKJ4

♥ A108 W E ♥ J763 .

♦ AQ632 S ♦ 94

♣ KQ9 ♣ A76

♠ 103

♥ Q9542

♦ J87

♣ J53

(1) What did you bid with this West hand D in this week’s quiz? 2♠ here is generally played as 4^th suit forcing (1♠ being natural and forcing). Assuming that you/partner play 4^th suit forcing then 2♠ is clearly the best bid – you want (partner) to play in 3NT if partner has the ♠’s stopped.

(2) What did you bid with this East hand F in this week’s quiz? Apparently this East is just about the only player in the club who does not play 4^th suit forcing. Quite how somebody who is presumably well past the beginners stage does not play 4^th suit forcing baffles me.

If East indeed thought that 2♠ was natural and very strong then he should, in any case, bid 3♠ (forcing) with these great ♠’s rather than jumping to 4♠.

Unless you agree something to the contrary: -

(G) 1♣ - 1♦ - 1♥ - 1♠ is natural and forcing.

(H) 1♣ - 1♦ - 1♥ - 2♠ is 4^th suit forcing, I play it as game forcing.

And what happened? 5♦ went one down for a bottom as everybody else was making 3NT+1. Bengt then immediately ‘did a Chuck’ and criticized Jan’s 2♠ bid, saying that he did not play 4^th suit forcing. He then ranted on about ‘don’t you trust me to bid 3NT’ – ‘you should simply bid 3♦’. This is utter nonsense of course, the 4^th suit bid is obvious to anybody but a beginner and 3♦ would not be forcing in any case. This West hand cannot be sensibly bid unless you play 4^th suit forcing.

When we had finished the round including these two boards Bengt and myself were still ‘discussing’ the hands. He asked me ‘why are you always right?’. The answer is self-evident when my ‘adversary’ does not understand reverses, simple preference, 4^th suit forcing, 4♠ openings, the rule of 2-3-4 for pre-empts etc. I make mistakes, just like everybody else, and when I do I say ‘sorry partner’ – I most certainly do not ‘do a Chuck’. And, incidentally, I appreciate it when a good player like Lewis points out my deficiencies.

I put a lot of work into the news-sheets, conventions write-ups etc. and there is little doubt that a number of players (including Jan) have greatly improved over the last couple of years as a result. I don’t appreciate it when somebody wanders round the club ‘teaching’ things that are totally erroneous and attempting to undermine my good work.
Bidding Quiz Answers

Hand A: The answer to this one depends upon how sophisticated you partnership’s agreements are. If they are very basic (as Dave’s book assumes) then bid 6NT. If you are a bit more sophisticated then bid 4♣ Gerber and, assuming that there is no ace missing, then 5NT (invitational to the grand) - an immediate 4NT would have been invitational to the small slam. If you are an expert, then bid 2♣ followed by 3♣ – SARS – to establish partner’s shape and if there is a 4-4 or 4-5 ♣ fit for a grand slam.

Hand B: 1♦. Anything (1♦, 3♦, 4♦, 5♦ or a gambling 3NT) could turn out right. I personally do not like to pre-empt in a minor suit above 3NT, especially opposite a non-passed partner, as you may miss 3NT. I would like to have the ♦Q for a gambling 3NT but I guess that with a 9 card suit it’s a reasonable shot. But the hand is 21 for the rule of 20 and I would open 1♦ and be prepared to compete to the 5-level if necessary. Bob’s choice of pass (and then bidding 5♦ later) is a very interesting and perhaps better alternative to 1♦.

Hand C: 2♥. Don’t worry about ‘not having points in the suit’ when you have good intermediates. With a good 2^nd suit, this is a decent 2♥ pre-empt. Pass is far too feeble for me and the only other opening bid worth considering (because of the vulnerability) is 3♥.

Hand D: 2♠, fourth suit forcing. If partner has a ♠ stop he will bid 2NT and you can raise to 3NT. 3♦ is a poor bid as it’s not forcing – in fact I can see no other sensible option other than invoking the 4^th suit.

Hand E: (a) 2♦. This is a great ♦ suit so bid it. I don’t like 2♥ Michaels as the hand is too strong in my style.

(b) Having overcalled 2♦, subsequently bid the ♠’s (twice if you can) to show the shape.

Hand F: Obviously this depends upon what the jump to 2♠ is. If it’s 4^th suit forcing (standard) then bid 2NT so show the ♠ stop(s). If you think that 2♠ may be natural (and very strong) then bid 3♠ - slam may be there and 3♠ conserves bidding space. 4♠ is silly, especially if 2♠ was indeed 4^th suit forcing.

Bidding Sequences Answers

G 1♣ pass 1♦ pass Standard is that 1♠ here is natural and forcing …

1♥ pass 1♠

H 1♣ pass 1♦ pass … and the jump to 2♠ is 4^th suit forcing.

1♥ pass 2♠