antonylee

Pretty sure I'm not getting out below the 5-level playing Polish after 1C-1H; 1S[18+ 5S or 15-17 4S-5C]-2H; 3H[usually Hx fit]-3N[frivolous]; 4C-4H; keycard-signoff, as awm's hand is still possible.

I'd like to play too.

I like the suggestion. In my old WJ partnership we also canapé with 4M5D, ~18-20 (which is relatively safe as partner should not pass with 5HCP). To be honest I wouldn't have thought about 1M on 3 but given that 1♣-1♦-1♥-1any-2♦ shows 4♥5♦, 18-20 (with 5♥-4♦, bid 2♥ then 3♦), perhaps being a full level lower compensates the mis-description...

Yes, strong hands with 5♣ were either treated as 6-carders or balanced hands. Otherwise close to what Rainer suggests: 2M=weak, 2♦=art. F, 2N~7-8 bal. I don't think we really ever discussed the non-weak options as they are exceedingly rare anyways but I guess a better (although still very simple) structure could be: 2♦=Staymanish signoff, or 13+; 2M=weak 5(6)M; 2N=7-8 bal with 2♣; 3♣ 7-8, fit; 3♦=nat, 7-11; higher=♣, 7-11.

I also think 15-22 is just too wide... What about just 15-18 (this is what I used to play)? You can jump to 3C with 19-less than GF, possibly keeping responder's 3D over that as looking for a 4-4 major fit. Not great but at least it is not worse than "standard".

You can squeeze in another hand type. I play: 1S-3N=mini-splinter (or whatever you want to call it) 1S-4C=C or D splinter, 4D asks 1S-4D=semi-good raise to 4 (say Axxxx x Kxxx xxx), 4H=last train 1S-4H=H splinter 1S-4S=purely preemptive raise

[hv=pc=n&s=sk98654hat92dt5ca&n=sat3h53daqj72c753&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1sp2dp2hp2sp3sp4sppp]266|200[/hv] A slightly aggressive sequence gets you to 4♠ in a Swiss teams (yes, 2♦ was GF); you get the ♣K lead.

A nice writeup of the usefulness of Puppet for balanced slam tries (and for other stuff) by Justin Lall here: http://justinlall.com/2011/09/07/puppet-stayman-after-a-1n-opener/ Also, while 1N-3♣-3♦-3M-3N reveals responder's 4cM, if you were not playing Puppet you'd likely have bid something like 1N-2♣-2♦ or 2oM-3N, so the opponents still had a lead-director available for clubs (although it's marginally riskier for them to double 2♣ rather than 3♣), and instead of having the opportunity of doubling 3M for the lead, they have a bit more information about opener's hand (whether he has 4 cards in the other major or not - this assumes you play that 3♦ does not say anything about the possession of a 4cM). It's easy to be unhappy when a lead director against 3M costs us the contract or some overtricks but sometimes you don't even notice that the info leakage via regular Stayman actually cost you something.

Nobody seems very interested so here is the actual hand. While I was happy to have found a nice line to make the contract (... with a little help from the defense), I wonder whether I shouldn't just immediately play a second round of diamonds after the first one holds, banking on ♦J9 stiff or the ♠K and ♥A well placed?

[hv=pc=n&s=sa7hqj863d7ckj653&n=sq854hktdkqt862cq&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1hp1sp2np3nppp]266|200[/hv] You're just filling in so didn't discuss what 3♣ would be, but anyways, you get the ♣4 lead (4th best) to the ace (you follow with the 5) and the ♣9 back to the king, 2 and a spade pitch. I continued with a diamond to the 9, king and 3. Now what? Would you play differently if the ♣2 didn't appear?

http://www.hegerm.ch/textes/4ecoul.html Interesting reading, but in French: Alain Lévy suggests to play 4SF as promising a rebid; this rebid is then GF if at the 3-level but NF if at the 2-level.

You probably don't even need the question mark in the title of the topic but here we go. In the World Youth Open BAM, against one of the top teams, you pick up AQxxxx Axx xx xx. Your partner opens: 2♣ (strong) (P) 2♦ (waiting, most non-extreme-shape hands) (2♠!) 3NT!! (probably 24+ bal) (P) ???

In one of my regular partnerships I play Polish club when red, but when white we swap to WNT and use 2♣ for some sort of preempt leaving 1♣=NAT/SNT/18+any. While not optimal, we just adapted as much as possible of the Polish club response structure to that white 1♣ and it worked reasonably well.

Here it is with Redeal (https://github.com/anntzer/redeal). $ python -mredeal --init 'self.nt_total = self.sp_total = 0' --accept 'return len(deal.north.spades) + len(deal.south.spades) == 8 and 20 <= deal.north.hcp + deal.south.hcp <= 22' \ --do 'nt = deal.dd_tricks("1NS"); sp = deal.dd_tricks("1SS"); print(deal, nt, sp); self.nt_total += nt; self.sp_total += sp' --final 'print(self.nt_total, self.sp_total)' ♠JT32♡KJ943♢♣K852 ♠94♡2♢KJ96543♣AT4 ♠AK65♡Q876♢Q872♣Q ♠Q87♡AT5♢AT♣J9763 5 9 ♠A953♡98532♢K9♣Q5 ♠K8♡KJ6♢T653♣KJT9 ♠QJT4♡AQT74♢A7♣83 ♠762♡♢QJ842♣A7642 8 8 ♠KQ72♡93♢AJ98♣A96 ♠84♡AKJT8♢K7432♣4 ♠A953♡Q76♢65♣8752 ♠JT6♡542♢QT♣KQJT3 8 9 ♠J653♡AQ654♢54♣KT ♠K7♡T73♢72♣AJ9654 ♠AT84♡♢KJT986♣Q83 ♠Q92♡KJ982♢AQ3♣72 6 8 ♠9764♡AQ53♢T53♣T8 ♠JT52♡92♢KQ9♣KJ54 ♠AKQ8♡864♢AJ74♣63 ♠3♡KJT7♢862♣AQ972 7 8 ♠A754♡A7♢J4♣AKJ84 ♠J98♡QJT8532♢T♣T5 ♠K632♡94♢985♣Q973 ♠QT♡K6♢AKQ7632♣62 6 9 ♠Q954♡AT92♢875♣J8 ♠A863♡J63♢K9♣T653 ♠JT72♡Q♢AQT632♣KQ ♠K♡K8754♢J4♣A9742 8 9 ♠974♡K862♢AQ954♣K ♠Q85♡JT9♢762♣AJ98 ♠KJT32♡A♢T3♣Q6542 ♠A6♡Q7543♢KJ8♣T73 9 11 ♠K82♡73♢AJ432♣JT9 ♠J♡QJT92♢KT96♣K53 ♠97654♡AK54♢5♣AQ6 ♠AQT3♡86♢Q87♣8742 7 9 ♠AKQ97♡8♢A865♣932 ♠J43♡J7543♢KJT7♣7 ♠T85♡AK962♢3♣QT84 ♠62♡QT♢Q942♣AKJ65 8 10 72 90

With Ax KJxx xx Axxxx I would not show even a quarter-stopper and would have anyways started with 2♥ over 2♦. Also 4N is clearly not RKC in our agreements, it is just a quantitative raise to 6. 2♦ denies a 4cM; while 2M not showing extras or shape works better on this hand how are you supposed to differentiate a random 4432 from, say, a random 4126?

[hv=pc=n&s=sq432hkt32dj2caj2&n=skj5haq4da3ckq543&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1c1d2d(inv+%20raise)p3cp3dp3hp3s(last%20train...)p3n(quarter-stopper%3F)p4np5c(making%20is%20better%20than%204N-1)p6c(I%20think%205c%20is%20a%20zero)]266|200[/hv] Today my partner and myself perpetrated this... strange... auction in the qualifiers of the World Youth Open pairs (the ♥J was doubleton so nothing in the play). Any suggestions on how to improve that?

That Mexican place was pretty good: http://www.alma-atlanta.com/

I'm here playing in the Collegiates and then the World Youth Open {Pairs, Teams, BAM}.

[hv=pc=n&w=skqt3hkdaqj982cj6&e=sa854haj93d6caq74&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1dp1hp1s(unbalanced)p2c(GF)p2d(default rebid)p2sp3dp3sp4sppp]399|300[/hv] MPs, club game. 1. Should 2S promise 4-card support, or could it be e.g. some 3532 (small doubleton) interested in a 4-3 fit? 2. You receive a trump lead to the jack and queen. What's your plan?

Can you elaborate on the relay breaks you use to ask for queens (using AK points)? Thanks.

Hi, In one of my current partnerships (playing some classic 2/1 structure) we play 1m-2M as an intermediate jump shift, ~good 8 to bad 12 with 6+M. While we were discussing continuations, which we play as natural for now, I realized it may be a good opportunity to play some shape asking relays here, with 2(M+1) as the GF relay, perhaps promising 2+ in the suit for some safety. I have never played any kind of shape relays but if I understand well, we are two steps above e.g. symmetric relayers after e.g. 1♣-2♠-2N!-... Yes, this means that if we end up playing in that suit (which is likely), declarer's shape and honor location will have been revealed; on the other hand probably most other scientific schemes here will also involve 2N as some sort of feature ask so they will suffer from the same problem. Any thoughts on whether this is playable?

Apparently not by Standard French which uses the same 5-step Stayman response scheme (as soon as you learn 4 suit transfers). Not that I think it's a good idea but well.

Using them to show (31)(54) GFs is a common treatment (if you don't need them for GF one suiters), I think, that gets you to some good moysians while avoiding no-play 3NTs. Whether you want to bid the fragment (wrong-siding the potential moysian) or the shortness (giving them a lead-directing double against 3N if this turns out to be your best spot) if probably by partnership choice.

I think a reasonable interpretation of GCC is - any meaning for 1D is allowed, - a 1M response must be either natural (4+) or GF (not a combination of both), - I think 1C-1D-1H(relay) is allowed, just as you are allowed to play a Kokish relay over a strong club. Polish club is GCC-legal and I really like it. I was just wondering if anyone ever came up with "less dramatic" changes to standard that also put 1D to a better use. By the way, I think that the 1D response, in, e.g., WJ2005, is somewhat less vulnerable to preemption that Montreal-relay styles 1D, as it shows either a weak hand (pass over interference), an invitational hand with one or both minors (bid the minor or 2N over whatever), or a balanced GF (check for a stopper, or double them, etc.) (not saying it's always easy, of course). Perhaps I should look more in depth at Zel's suggestion... The big issue with transfers is that I cannot play them in the US. Other than that I was just trying to find better uses for sequence starting with 1C-1D, such as 1C-1D-2D, or whatever-form-of-Checkback after 1C-1D-1N, that come up exetremely rarely.

Are you giving up on 12HCP balanced hands without 4 diamonds? I've never (OK, barely ever) played Precision so this may be downright stupid but if you're already there I would guess it's better to play 1D as *unbalanced* 4+ and just lump good balanced 12-counts into the 1N opening. After that... 1D-2C(GF)-2D/H/S=natural, 2N=4441 or 4450. Over 2N, responder can (e.g) transfer to set trumps and enter a cuebidding auction. You can put invitational club hands in 1D-3C. Still not sure if 1D-2D is best played as non-inverted or inverted in that context (you can actually raise quite aggressively with weakish hands when 1D is unbalanced) but in any case you can come up with some ways for opener to show his shape over a forcing diamond raise.