32519

Big ♣ systems open 1♣ to show 16+ HCP. Big ♦ systems do the same. Then you have Gazzilli which uses an artificial 2♣ over 1M-1NT to show extras. Serious / Non-Serious 3NT in a 2/1 auction also tends to show 16+. A normal reverse bid also shows 16+ HCP. So why was 16 HCP chosen as the magical number? Just curious!

I have heard many experts say they believe Non-Serious 3NT to be superior to Serious 3NT. So in the auction posted in the OP: Possible Auction 1: 1♦-2♣ (Establishing a GF but not denying a 4-card major) 2♠ (Patterning out, not a reverse) 3♠ (4-card support) 3NT (Non-Serious, no extra values) ? Signing off or keeping the auction alive will now depend on whether responder has extra values or not. With extra values, cue-bidding will begin. Possible Auction 2: 1♦-2♣-2♠-3♠ ? Opener with extra values now starts cue-bidding, bypassing 3NT which would be Non-Serious.

My understanding of 2/1 in the auction posted 1♦-2♣, 2♣ doesn’t deny a 4-card major. All you are doing is establishing a 2/1 100% GF sequence – no exceptions. Wouldn’t it make more sense to first bid out your shape? Once that is known, either partner with extra values will already have a fairly good idea where the final contract belongs. To show slam interest, the partner with extra values can continue with Serious/Non-Serious 3NT? Where no 4-4 or 5-3 trump fit can be found, you are headed for a NT contract. That should become evident during the auction.

Playing 2/1, in the following sequence e.g. 1♦-2♣-2♠, does the 2♠ bid constitute a reverse bid or is opener merely bidding out his shape now in search of the best spot?

You have another problem which I identified when doing a search in the forums for threads related to Gazzilli. I found 18 threads with Gazzilli spelt correctly. I found another 6 that were spelt incorrectly as Gazilli (1 z instead of 2).

Gazzilli doesn’t always guarantee you success. I’ve been digging up some Gazzilli hands to see what I could find. These come from the 2011 Italian Club Team Championships. Just as the USA has plenty of Flannery hands in their big tournaments, the Italians seem to have plenty of Gazzilli hands, pre-dealt ensuring awkward continuation sequences. Here are just three examples (there are others): Hand 1: The final contract was 3NT, down 2 after a ♥ lead, on a combined 26 HCP. Seems like a ♣ contract was the one with the best chance of making, but how do you find it? Hand 2: The final contract was 4♠ on a 5-2 fit and a combined 26 HCP. This time the contract made. Hand 3: Transferring the final contract to responder’s suit. If anybody is interested in seeing what the unbalanced 1-of-a-suit hands continuation bidding structure looks like, look up the 2011 Italian Club Team Championships. Gazzilli appears to have been designed specifically for the Italian bidding style (those with a system similar to Fantoni-Nunes). I don’t know how effective it will be when used in a different system.

This guy believes that Gazzilli may not be allowed in all ACBL events since the convention is virtually unknown in North America. He is also of the opinion that Gazzilli is superior to both BART and the Meckstroth adjunct. If Gazzilli isn't allowed, BART probably wouldn't be allowed either. So guess what's left that will be allowed. :P This is his assessment of Gazzilli. Check out his last sentence. "Since the convention is virtually unknown in North America, it may also not be allowed in all ACBL events." Assessment of Gazzilli Overall Gazzilli handles more hand types more precisely than other methods including those involving a combination of Bart and the Mecksroth adjunct. The rebids showing 64 and 55 hands are inherently aggressive, it is not clear whether some of those hands might be bought at a lower level. Responder needs to exercise caution and not stretch to rebid 3NT over these bids, openers hand is likely to require losing the lead several times before all the tricks are established. In addition, since the defenders knows openers exact shape, the defence may be better. However the Gazzilli approach does allow confident bidding of some low point count slams and games, it seems therefore better suited to imps than matchpoints. The relay auctions do involve a lot of alerting and perhaps allow the defenders opportunities to make lead directing bids or even enter auctions they might not otherwise come into. Going slow on the strong 54 hands however has some real advantages, and the method of sorting out the best minor part score is clearly superior to Bart or standard (using the artificial 2♠ and 2nt rebids over 2♣. The only hand types where Bart seems to have the edge are hands where responder has a weak hand with 4 hearts or 5 bad hearts. These hands could end up playing in 2♠ in Gazzilli where there is a superior 34 or 35 fit in hearts detectable via Bart. Since the convention is virtually unknown in North America, it may also not be allowed in all ACBL events. You can read the full article here.

Here's another idea. How about 2 of the same major as a 3-suited takeout bid? Or if you want to keep 2 of the same major as Michael's, how about X of RHO 1NT bid as a 3-suited takeout bid of the suit opened?

Richard I apologise if it appears as though I was trying to be clever in my post. That was never the intention. The point I was trying to make is this: If you have limited opportunities for playing a relay system, why expend all the energy to develop one? If the players in the USBC didn’t believe that there was anything to gain in doing so, why would lesser mortals think differently? In a different thread someone else posted, “It is better to play a poor system well than what it is to play a good system badly.” Apologies for a second time.

Fair enough, but how about the player sitting in fourth seat at favourable vulnerability? Partner was unable to do anything over 1M, RHO has bid 1NT and you see a possible Gazzilli sequence kicking in. This is your last chance to stick an oar into the opponents (thus far) uninterrupted bidding sequence. What do you do? You already know that opener is unbalanced. Some ideas – 1. 2♣ (stealing the bid which would kick in the Gazzilli sequence), showing length in ♣ and the other major, a competitive hand which can compete to the 3-level (4-level if necessary) 2. 2 of same major as Michaels, showing the other major and a 5-card ♦ suit, a competitive hand which can compete to the 3-level (4-level if necessary) 3. 2NT showing both minors and playable values, say 10+ HCP 4. 3 any = long suit which can afford to go down 1 doubled (maybe 2?)

Here is a (not so) hypothetical situation. You have just qualified to represent your country at the upcoming 2012 World Bridge Games later this year. Coming from one of the smaller less fancied countries, nobody expects you to progress beyond the Round Robin stage of the competition. You know that during the RR stage you will inevitably be playing against 6 Italians who all have Gazzilli on their CC’s (2 now playing for Monaco and another 4 from Italy). You also know that 1 of any suit from them promises an unbalanced hand and (normally) 14+ HCP. You are determined not to rollover without a decent fight. You and the rest of your teammates have started a blog, discussing an effective defensive strategy to counter Gazzilli. So what would be an effective defence against Gazzilli given what you know about the Italians bidding style?

If this is true.... Then this is an interesting theory...

This post and this thread contain some random thoughts on Gazzilli.

Another tennis star once said this, "Show me a good loser and I will show you a consistent loser." (Might have been Chris Evert-Lloyd who said this, can't remember who it was).

Here is another completely random thought on Gazzilli: Various partnerships have briefly flirted with Gazzilli before giving up on it. Why did they give up? The reason could possibly be one or a combination of the following – 1. They were trying to include it into a system that it wasn’t designed for. 2. They were trying to include it in a way that it wasn’t designed for. 3. They were unable to design an effective continuation bidding structure suitable for their system. Why would that be? Because of points 1 + 2 above.

I don't buy this for the USBC. These guys are going to represent the USA in the 2012 World Bridge Games later this year. Whatever you intend playing there, you have an excellent opportunity to put to the test now and patch up any holes or misunderstandings that may take place in this tournament.

I don't have much experience with relays, although I do believe they allow for more accurate description of hand distribution. In the USBC I don't recall too many players using relays. Why not? Perhaps it has something to do with mental fatigue in long matches. What I witnessed in the USBC are sound but not overly complicated continuation structures. USA's top players may be presenting a message to the rest of us here. Keep your system sound but not exotic.

I fully accept this and wasn’t trying to compare a system with a convention. I was merely sharing some random thoughts on the 16+ HCP 1♣ opener in Precision with Gazzilli. I had another look at some of the Italian CC’s. Unfortunately the ones I could find may not be the latest. Nonetheless, 1♣/1♦/1♥/1♠ tend to show an unbalanced hand with 14+ HCP. The 1NT opening bid shows (11) 12-14 HCP, balanced or semi-balanced. The 12-14 HCP range may contain any 5332 or 5422 holding, excluding 5-4 in the majors. For these guys to have Gazzilli in this sort of system actually starts making more and more sense to me. The first bid has already conveyed plenty of info, if a suit, then an unbalanced hand. The CC’s say 2/1 bidding style, which clarifies bluecalm's statement above that 1M-1NT may be passed out with 12-14 HCP. After 1M-1NT-2♣ Gazzilli kicks in announcing a bigger hand. 2♦ now from responder shows 8+ and you enter a GF auction. You already know that, a) responder doesn’t have 3-card support for the suit opened, and b) that opener’s hand is unbalanced. Yet you have chosen to go the Gazzilli route; why would that be? Some more random thoughts on this: 1. The 5332 hands 12-14 HCP fall into the 1NT range. Choosing the Gazzilli route, apart from the higher HCP range, opener may have a 6-card major. 2. The 1NT bids specifically exclude a 5-4 holding in the majors. So after 1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥, with 2♥ showing a 4-card suit and 5-7 HCP, you can still find the 4-4 ♥ fit and signoff if necessary. With a bigger hand, you can bid the ♥ game. 3. Similarly, after 1♠-1NT-2♣-2♦, with 2♦ showing 8+ HCP, opener can now show the ♥ suit. With 4-card support, the ♥ game is an easy find now. 4. Repeating what was said previously, bidding this way has plenty of advantages over the strong artificial 1♣. a. You get to show a real suit immediately b. You announce an unbalanced hand, a hand which may not be suitable for playing in NT c. You’ve shown the lower end of your HCP range, 14+ HCP d. You have sidestepped an immediate pre-empt from the opponents before you were able to show what your real suit is. Guys, I’m just thinking aloud here hoping that others with better information than myself can make some valuable contributions to this discussion. From what has already been said, it also starts making more sense to me why so many of the Italians use the 2♦ bid to show the 18-19 HCP balanced hand. It actually fits neatly into this structure.

Scoff all you want, but maybe there is more than meets the eye here. Show your shape, optimal use of available bidding space, sidestepping an immediate pre-empt, etc. Maybe, just maybe, others haven’t yet recognised the benefits of Gazzilli in a natural system and/or haven’t worked out an optimal continuation structure yet. There are currently 7 Italians ranked in the top 20 (including Fantoni-Nunes who now play for Monaco). Numbers 1-5 are all Italians. None play Precision anymore despite the phenomenal success of the Blue Team years ago.

There are already plenty of other threads discussing Gazzilli / BART / Riton 2♣ which can be thrown into the mix here for further discussion. And yes, there are plenty of different versions floating around. The issue is to optimise the one you are using. The Italians are 14 times Bermuda Bowl champions (only surpassed by the USA). Gazzilli originated with them, so they must have had a very good reason for doing so. For those interested, here are some of those older threads. Gazzilli 1. What’s standard Gazzilli? 2. Gazzilli and the 2NT rebid 3. One question about Gazzilli 4. A Gazzilli problem 5. An alternative to Gazzilli 6. Kaplan Inversion and Gazzilli BART 1. BART 2. Elementary question on BART convention

Shevek posted this thread on Puppet Stayman many moons ago: Complete this sentence: I don’t play Puppet over 1NT because … Seems like some of the posters who replied to this thread have since changed their opinions.

Have a look at what awm said in point 4 to this thread: Shape First! Comparing a Precision 1C opening to Natural Systems incorporating Gazzilli Precision………………........Gazzilli Opens 1C with 16+……......After 1M-1NT-2C = 16+ (normally, depending on version) Responds 1D with 0-7….....Allowed to pass with 0-4 (5) depending on agreements Anything else = 8+……......After 1M-1NT-2C-2D = 8+, anything else = 5-7 Advantages of a Precision 1C opener • You announce a big hand to partner • Initiates a GF auction after a positive response • Maximum room to explore for best spot Disadvantages • You haven’t shown a suit yet • Open to pre-emption from the opponents Advantages of a Natural System incorporating Gazzilli • You’ve shown a real suit with your first bid • You can still initiate a GF auction after 1M-1NT-2C, depending on a) responders second bid, b) openers actual HCP holding and distribution • The 5332 hands can be removed from your 1NT bids, no more PS sequences, freeing up bidding room for showing other hand types • You can signoff on level 2 when both opener and responder are minimum Disadvantages • In 2/1, 1NT over 1M is forcing for 1 round. You no longer have a natural 2C second bid with a minimum hand. May be forced to repeat the M with nothing else available • Opening a real suit allows cue-bidding of the suit opened e.g. Michaels, Unusual 2NT etc. • Responder often has a very awkward second bid, sometimes forced to bid 2 of the major opened, even with a singleton • A 2NT or 3NT contract gets played from the wrong side Have the Italians spotted an inherent weakness in strong club systems and have found a workaround? These are just a couple of random thoughts from myself. Others may see the issue entirely differently.

DON'T appears to be an extremely popular defence to 1NT by the players in the USBC. It keeps appearing. If these guys have figured out DON'T is effective, why bother with anything more exotic? What I have noticed as well, the lower ranking suit overcalled is usually 5-cards, while the higher ranking suit, only 4-cards. Or have the boards been rigged again in favour of DON'T? :unsure: :P :blink: :rolleyes: :) ;)

Who are we favouring here? The Precision players or the Naturalists? Many of the pairs in the USBC are playing a 14-16 HCP NT range. They will probably continue with Puppet. But what about the Naturalists? There are just as many (if not more) versions of PS as there are of Gazzilli. Every partnership that plays PS has bent and buckled there own version out of it to fit in with their system and bidding style. I’ll bet a Coke that one of our regular posters (e.g. Zelandakh, KenRexford, Blackshoe, etc), within 5 minutes, will come up with a version of Gazzilli that will convince the Naturalists to start migrating en masse away from PS towards Gazzilli. Include the benefits of how the bidding space can be used that has been freed up from your NT bids, who knows, maybe all the Naturalists will dump PS forever. The one area I often hear the Naturalists complain about is the 18-19 HCP balanced or semi-balanced hand. It fits neither into the 1NT nor the 2NT range. Semi-balanced with a 5-card major, bingo, Gazzilli comes to your rescue.

If you remove the 5332 hands from your 1NT or 2NT bids and move them into Gazzilli, you start taking the pressure off your NT bids. The USBC has already demonstrated that there certainly are times when the hand calls for signing off in a minor part score. The bidding space previously consumed by Puppet Stayman has now been freed for other purposes. Surely this has got to be beneficial for your overall agreements? (See post above).