antonylee

More necroing but... I teach 2/1 for beginners, simply because it makes the F/NF distinction much easier. Re 2/1 in competition, in fact I teach that 2/1 is GF even in competition. Is this optimal? No, of course, but it is consistent with the rest, and we can always add more sophistication later.

MPs, random sectional field (some very strong pairs, some very weak pairs). [hv=pc=n&s=sq2hk53d9765cq987&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=pp1dp1np2h(nat 16+)p2n(lebensohl)p3d(extras)p]133|200[/hv] What now? Or would you have bid 3♦ (GF) over 2♥?

Yes. Feedback would be very appreciated!

Time to advertise redeal :) Not sure what sim conditions you want, here I set the South hand and constrain the North hand to a 1S opening. $ python -mredeal -S'2 AJT32 2 QJT832' --init 'global T; T = {"3NN": 0, "4HS": 0, "5CS": 0}' --accept 'return max(deal.north.shape) == len(deal.north.spades) >= 5 and 12 <= deal.north.hcp <= 20' \ --do 'for k in T: T[k] += deal.dd_score(k) > 0' --final 'print(T)' -n1000 {'4HS': 478, '3NN': 224, '5CS': 407} For opening lead analysis, there is a "deal.dd_all_tricks(strain, leader)" (well, perhaps I should change it to "deal.dd_all_tricks(contract)") which returns a mapping of the number of DD tricks for each lead; you can easily extract the information from there.

To be clear, I didn't intend to teach 1D-2D-2H (I agree 1X-2X-3X is enough for invites)... the auction just came up spontaneously in semi-supervised play of random deals and I was asked "so what should that show"? My approach re GF raises is 1- just raise to 4M (before teaching slam bidding) and 2- make a delayed raise after a 2/1 (this is what I learnt first).

2H, what else?

Yes, I certainly don't intend to teach inverted minors to beginners... but I'd still rather teach a decent version of non-inverted minors.

We have a small informal club at the university where a lot of beginners play. Last time, the following uncontested auction came up: 1♦-2♦-2♥-? In a non-inverted minors context (so 2♦=6-9), should this be 1. a game try or 2. game forcing, and showing A. concentration of values or B. length (4♥-5♦)? As it turns out none of the "experienced" players had any idea as we're all playing inverted minors... As a side note, I guess that in the same context, 1♦-3♦ can only cover one of 1. invites and 2. GF raises, with the other one going through some sort of delayed raise. I believe it's "standard" to play it as a GF raise but would rather teach it as an invite raise (for similarity with 1M-3M); is there any strong reason one if preferable to the other?

My initial auction is similar the one suggested by others 1D[unbal]-1S 2C[D+H any strength]-3H[nat inv] (one can argue 2C should show 4=5 but 1444 doesn't exist in the system anyways) Now opener knows responder is at least 5=4 in the majors... it'll take a pretty unlucky case to be down at the 5-level (we expect one spade loser and one in the minors -- if partner doesn't have the HA he can surely cover another loser). Bidding 3S (cue) may induce responder to take a rosier view of his hand than warranted but indeed we just want to know if his hand is terrible or not. Heh, who knows.

It's actually awfully close (assuming nobody shows out on spades), 10K sims give 63% of 3-2 splits making it barely superior (I haven't bothered computing an error bar).

[hv=pc=n&s=sq764hk942dkq62c8&n=sa952h5daj5cj7642&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=ppp1hdp1s1n2sppp]266|200[/hv] Lefty leads the ♣A and K (after righty encourages). What now? Edit (following rhm's question): I didn't ask at the table but assume 1NT is 18-19.

Heh, sorry, thought too hard on that one :(

We won! 94-69, a lot of mistakes by both pairs at our table (thinking I was endplayed when dummy was: 10 away on #11) and a bit of luck (AJ9x=Qxx for no loser in a side suit: 14 in instead of 5 away on #9).

I think the plan is that I play with RunemPard and you with...?

A bit rusty too but interested in giving it a try. 2/1 etc.

That 1D is unbalanced after a rebid in a new suit is not (IMO) the main advantage of unbalanced 1D (many "standard" players do that anyways), instead it's the fact that the now freed-up 1NT rebid opens up a lot of possibilities for opener (e.g. showing 5D4H less than reverse strength). Rebidding 1M with 3 cards works pretty well, although to be honest it works even better when your opponents are not used to it and do not know how to penalize you (... which is often the case in the US).

Yes. Fortunately, I don't think they will :-)

GCC exegesis is always a bit silly, but for me, the fact that conventional methods after "weak two-bids which by partnership agreement are not within a range of 7 HCP and do not show at least five cards in the suit" (item 7) are explicitly prohibited means that the openings themselves are not prohibited.

OK, so let's be clear: a smiley was intended after the previous post. I have played various "funny" methods and have always described the non-obvious inferences to the opps. Still, it doesn't mean that how you alert your methods can have an influence on its legality... For example, when I played in the district and the national finals of the GNTC two years ago, I was playing (NV only) 2C=8-11 bal with 4+ clubs -- essentially a mini-notrump. This is a GCC-legal method -- I have an official ruling for that (saying in essence "it's a (semi)constructive natural opening and would be illegal if weaker"), which was questioned by the opps, and upheld by the DIC. Over that, we played 2D~ NF stayman with 3+D, 3C&3D~ F stayman with 3+ of the minor (essentially we lose "only" on invitational hands with a 4cM and not 3D, and GF 5=4=2=2 hands (with 4=5=2=2 we can start with 3H)). Now if we alert these as "Stayman" this will certainly be ruled as illegal (as "conventions over weak twos with less than 5 cards"), so we alerted 2D as (if I remember well, wording not exact) "less than GF, 3+D (making it natural), usually 4+M" and 3m as "GF, 3+m, usually interested in opener's major holding". I believe these satisfy full disclosure, but also say something about the problem we are discussing...

OK, I'll alert 1D as "10+ not suitable for any other opening". If that's not catchall, I don't know what catchall means. It *just* turns out that the only hole in the system is the hands with 4 hearts...

I am looking for a partner for the NAPC in D21 (my regular partner failed to Q when the game he played in, that had been advertised as a club Q, turned out to be a STAC :-(). I have reasonable hopes of doing well in the event -- I was in the district team for the GNTs two years ago. Please send me a message if you're interested or know someone who would be.

I actually agree with rbfoster that except for the response scheme to 2M that needs to show "aces, kings, queens, singletons, voids or trump quality", this should be legal.

A reasonably simple scheme, that keeps 2N-3N as natural: 3S=C or C+D, 4C=D 2N-3S-... ... 3N: not interested ... ... 4C: C+D, not interested in cues ... ... ... 4D: still not interested ... ... ... ... 4H: RKC for D ... ... ... higher: interested, direct RKC response for D ... ... 4D: RKC for C ... ... 4M: (21)55, (30)55 splinter, interested in a cue in the other major ... 4C: interested ... ... 4D: RKC ... ... higher: cue ... higher: cue 2N-4C-... ... 4D: not interested ... ... 4H: RKC ... higher: direct RKC response for D (or cue, depending on your preferred style)

[hv=pc=n&s=sa8hkqj3dk6cqt982&n=sqj9h97542d53ca54&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1n(15-17)2s(S+m)2n(lebensohl)3sppd(T/O)p4hppp]266|200[/hv] Teams. You win the small spade lead with the queen. When you play a heart from either hand, the king wins but West shows out.

I play something very simple: 1N-2♦-2♥-2♠ forces 2N, then 3m=5♥5m inv, 3M=55Ms inv/GF, 3N=as 1N-2♦-2♥-3N but strongly suggests playing there even with a fit. (For unbalanced spade invites, which are also getting mentioned here, start with Stayman then bid 2♠ (NF) over 2red; opener can ask with 2N). I guess in both cases this could be made trivially better by having opener's 2N as to play and 3m as paradox pre-accepts. Or one could squeeze in the 5♥4♠ invite, as suggested by Zel, in 1N-1♦-2♥-2N (but then we can't play in 2N anymore after 1N-2♦-2♥-2♠-2N).