newchemist

good point there.

I suggest x = any balanced 2NT = both majors, 5/4 or better and all other bids natural, point ranges to taste. In my opinion the important thing when defending against a weak-only multi2D is to be able to overcall 2H naturally. multi2D seems to lose when multi2D opener has a weak2 in spades and opps are allowed to overcall 2H while the rest of the field is shut out with 2S.

I think the invi+ relay is a good idea. Another discussion for another thread :) But here I am more interested in how the 2-level responses should work assuming 1NT is a 100% GF. Whether or not a 100% GF 1NT is a good idea is another problem altogether. Logically speaking it seems that unlike standard 2/1, here you only have 1 gme-forcing response and everything else is free for weak/invi hands so you ought to have better definition on weak/invi hands if only a sensible response scheme can be found. On an unrelated note, I was under the impression that a 2C relay is mathematicaly too high for full shape relays. Also I think having 1M-1NT as a 100% game force does allow you more freedom with relay-breaks, run-on sequences etc etc so dont underestimate it!

I like this set of continuations alot. I assume responses are similiar after 1H-2C, i.e. 2D shows most min hands while max hands make a natural rebid. But what would the sequence 1H-2C-2D-2S show? My suggestion is that to make the system exactly the same after 1H or 1S (so as to reduce memory load) after 1H/S - 2C - 2D, 2H: Balanced/Semibalanced 8-9 HCP 2S: Balanced/Semibalanced 10-11 HCP

Assume that you are playing symmetric relay or similiar where 1M - 1NT is an artificial gameforcing relay, and 1M is limited to (11)12-15pts 1. What are the possible schemes for 2-level responses, and what are the advantages/disadvantages of each? For example i think viking club uses 1M-2C as artificial, game-invite while other bids are presumably natural. 2. Since weak-ish or mildly invitational hands can no longer bid a waiting 1NT in response to the opening bid, wouldn't there be a large risk of partnership missing some <25HCP distributional games or failing to find good partscores on misfit hands? What can be done about this? Of course one could shift the game-forcing relay to 2C and keep the 1NT response as a waiting bid, but the loss of a step really hurts the relay.

oh. found it: http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/48144-1c-1n-in-precision/page__p__576152__hl__precision__fromsearch__1#entry576152

This is my idea: after 1♣: 16+ Unbal/17+ Bal you have: 1♦: 0-7 HCP or 13+ HCP unusual negative 1♥: 8-14 HCP, Balanced or any (4441), (5440), (5431) without 5cM 1♠: Relay 1NT: 12-14 HCP, balanced. Use standard NT methods. 2♣: 8-11 HCP, balanced. Use standard NT methods one step up. 2♦,♥,♠: 3-suited with singleton in higher-ranking suit, 8-14HCP. Opener relays by bidding singleton suit or 2NT after 2♠ 2NT and higher: 3-suited with singleton in diamonds, showing additional features. 1♠: 8+ HCP, 5+ Hearts 1NT/2♣/2♦: Same responses as after 2/1GF (1NT: Kaplan inversion, spades) 2H and higher: Sets Hearts as trumps, modified J2NT/slam tries/splinters/etc to taste. 1NT: 8+ HCP, 5+ Spades 2♣/2♦/2♥: Same responses as after 2/1GF 2S and higher: Sets Spades as trumps, modified J2NT/slam tries/splinters/etc to taste. 2♣: 6+ clubs or 5+/5+ in clubs and diamonds 2♦: 6+ diamonds 2♥,♠; 3♣,♦: Weak 4-7, long suit. 2NT: 15+ HCP, Balanced The main idea is that after a positive hearts or spades response to a 1♣ opener, a (Semi)forcing NT is no longer neccesary since a positive response is already gameforcing, so why not just remove it and open hearts and spades hands one step up, freeing a 1♥ response to 1♣ as a catchall positive with enough space to unwind, thus simplifying other sequences? Using 1♠ for ♥ and 1NT for ♠ also allows for right-siding of ♥ and ♠ contracts respectively while the 1♥ catchall positive response limits the hand nicely while offering ample opportunities for penalty doubles if opps interfere. 2♣ and 2♦ also now promise 6+ (or 5+/5+) in the suit which is a marked improvement over standard. Overall this is similiar to simplified meckwell (1♥= 8-11 HCP, any while 1♠ and above = 12+ HCP) just that we limit by shape rather than HCP. Any thoughts? :rolleyes:

Bridgefiles' version of Matchpoint Precision enjoy :)

Hi. The "standard" solution in this particular case is to play a 1NT rebid by opener as 12-16, then use an artificial 2C relay to sort out the hand types, i.e. Crowhurst I think the main problem is not 1H (possibly only 4, bal) - 1S or 1H (possibly only 4, bal) - 1NT but 1H (possibly only 4- bal) - 2 m, after which neither a rebid of 2H or 2NT is attractive to show the weak balanced hand type.

Hi! Intermediate player looking for a partner for online play on BBO, playing a symmetric relay system as follows: Symmetric Relay and lavinthal/Reverse Att/Std Count Usually plays std acol/SAYC with regular p (who dosent BBO); looking for someone with a sense of fun :) & good appetite for risk and experimentation :( Local Singaporean would be much preferred but not neccesary. More information: Time Zone GMT +8.00, free from 10 pm to 12 pm (local time) on weekdays and whole day on weekends (sleeps in rather late-ish) Would suggest spending some time bidding practice hands first before jumping into main club.

Another interesting question - does anyone know of any top current partnerships that use some variant of a strong D system? It might be interesting to view some of their vugraphs/hand records to see if the issues raised really do crop up often in practice.

found something interesting online: infolab.stanford.edu/~qsun/bridge/mellon.pdf In general, what is the supposed advantage of such strong diamond systems as opposed to strong club systems, or sttandard? It seems like a strong diamond system is nothing more than a standard precision 1C with a nebulous 1D but with 1D and 1C reversed and slightly different point ranges for the various opening bids. am I missing something here?

hi all! First post here. First off, an introduction: With my regular P we usually play an acol system as follows: 1C: 10+ HCP 4+ clubs 1D: 10+ HCP 4+ dimes 1H: 10+ HCP 4+ hearts (5+ unless 15+ HCP balanced) 1S: 10+ HCP 4+ spades (5+ unless 15+ HCP balanced) 1NT: (11)12-14 HCP 2C: multi, either 1. Ekrens 4+/4+ in hearts and spades, preemptive 2. usual GF 2D: multi, either 1. weak 2 in hearts/spades 2. acol minor 3. 20-22 balanced hand 2H/S: preemptive, dutch twos i.e. 5M/4+m(unknown) Rest standard. 2/1 sound but not GF. Recently we have been trying to figure out ways to combine a light preemptive/opening style with ample space for game/slam exploration opposite minimum hands, an aspect lacking in our current bidding system. Standard Precision seemed like a good choice, but 1) We dont like the nebulus 1D/2D openings 2) We arent comfortable with preemption over 1C 3) having two precision 2C/D openings at the 2-level limits us to only 2H/S/NT for preemptive openings Therefore we have been tinkering around with the opening bids and came up with the following possibilities: 2-way 1C, 5-card majors and strong NT 1C: (10)11-13HCP balanced or 16+ HCP 1D: (9)10-16HCP 4+ dimes (4 only when canape in clubs or 4441 with 4 dimes) 1H: (9)10-16HCP 4+ hearts (4 only when 4441 with singleton dime) 1S: (9)10-16HCP 5+ spades 1NT: 14-16HCP balanced 2C: 11-15HCP 5-4 in clubs and major or 6+ clubs 2D: Multi. weak 2 in heart/spade or acol minor or balanced 20-22. 2H/S: dutch twos Notice how every suit bid from 1D to 2C strongly implies 5+ except for relatively unusual distributions. Notice also how compared to our original acol structure, we lose the ekrens 2C but gain the ability to open lighter at the one-level and avoid having to open 1M with only 4 cards and a strong balanced hand. Any thoughts? Is a system like this feasible/workable? yet another question: is it viable to retain a weak NT for preemptive value, via the following set of opening bids 1C: (9)10-13HCP 5-4 in clubs + a major or (9)10-13HCP 6+ clubs, or 16+ HCP 1D: (9)10-16HCP 3+ dime (3 only with 15-17HCP balanced without 4cM) 1H: (9)10-16HCP 4+ heart (4 only when 15-17HCP with 4cM or 4441 with short dime) 1S: (9)10-16HCP 4+ spade (4 only when 15-17 HCP with 4cM without 4 hearts) 1NT: 12-14HCP balanced 2C: 14-16HCP 5-4 in clubs and major or 6+ clubs 2D: Multi. weak 2 in heart/spade or acol minor or balanced 20-22. 2H/S: dutch twos Once again the weak option in 1C discourages preemption by opponents. yes, the 1-level opening bids lose alot of definition but we retain a weak NT (yay!). A side benefit is that 2C is now slightly stronger than standard, so responder requires less HCPs to initiate relay for 4-cM.