Chamaco

I Like Anderson/Zenkel's suggestion of Jumps being CABs (control asking bids)

Hi all, I have a questions for you all <_< After struggling for a while (without succes) with using 1C Precision opener with shape-first responses and asking bids, I and my pard have turned to control-show responses. The scheme is very similar to Blue Club: 1D = negative 1H = GF, max 2 controls, at least a 5 bagger, opener rebids naturally (1NT is generic balanced, indepenently from range) 1S = GF, 3 controls, at least a 5 bagger, opener rebids naturally (1NT is generic balanced, indepenently from range) 1NT = GF, 4 controls, at least a 5 bagger; 2C by opener asks for 4 and/or 5 card majors, other bids natural; 2C= GF, 5+ controls, at least a 5 bagger; 2D by opener asks for 4 and/or 5 card majors, other bids natural; (here I will skip higher responses, which include balanced and 4441 GF hands) THE QUESTIONS My questions is on how to raise opener's major in uncontested sequences such as: Sequence a 1C:1H 1S/2H Sequence b 1C:1S 2H/S Sequence c 1C:1NT/2C 2H/S We want a system to raise pard that should be: 1. EASY !!! We gave up asking bids to make the system easier not more complicated :) If we have to use a relay, there should be only 1 round of bidding to remember (after which bidding becomes natural again), not starting a sequence where each subsequent bid is linked to give distribution and /or other features. 2. EFFECTIVE Ideally, raises should discriminate a. good support/bad support (honors) b. 3 card raises vs 4+ card raises c. good side suit d. shortness e. extra values besides the controls already bid. For the latter point we use "Serious 3NT", and we have used it without troubles so far in the pship. As for the other issues (quality of support and shortness), I have tentatively proposed to use the following: 1- single raise: good trumps (at least Hxx) 2- 2NT is artificial (because when responder bids a positive control response he is not balanced; so holding NO support he can simply bid his 5 bagger) and shows a bad raise (xxx, occasionally Hx) 3- jump shift is splinter: one more question here: should the splinter show extras (QJ) besides the controls promised by first bid ? Or should it deny it ? 4 - jump raise (when available at the 3 level: this will happen only for spades): good trumps, extras 5- raise to game: UNDFINED YET I would appreciate feedback from you folks, espcially in sequences (the majority) where opener starts showing his major at the 2 level (so that there is no jump available below game). Thanks !!!

Sometimes perhaps, but it would be nice to have the feature available in teaching tables :-)

No need to be sorry for a bridge bid :D Anyway, just to make my point clearer, I think that : 1) if you splinter, you have to accept pard's signoff; 2) it is entirely understable to see a slam here; but if you think the hand is slammish, splinter is the wrong bid, because: - a. it takes away so much room - b. you do not get additional info on pard's hand: it is almost certain that pard will have no other bid but 4S over our 4H bid. Hence, my point is NOT that the hand is too weak for a slam. I am only saying that: if we were planning to bid on pard's 4S after a splinter, there is something wrong. Splinters must be used to describe you shape+strength to pard, and accept hgis choice, not to simply show shape and either 1. start cuebidding above game level, or 2. ask for RKCB after haveing given away valuable info to the defense. In both cases, pard will signoff anyway and will rarely make use of the info of our shortnes , whereas the defense will. This is foolish in my opinion, to say the least. With the given hand, much better than a splinter is to use a Neanderthal bid like 4NT RKCB right away or 5S right away asking to bid a slam with good trumps. :-) After all Neanderthal men did survive in conditions where I myself would have many troubles (what about you, my Sloth friend ? :lol: ), why shouldn't I trust them ? :)

Hi all, this one is not a high priority, but I suppose the implementation should be relatively easy. Here it goes: with my reg pard (who lives away from my town), some times I'd like to do a bidding session (much like the Pship bidding room), with all 4 hands in view. Just for the record, the main topic would be strong club sequences , with/without opps interference (but - for instance - 1NT opening sequences could be as well one of the many possible topics). I suppose this can be don by opening a teaching table and letting pard kibitz, but the teaching table does not have available the same constraints (hand dealer facilities: hcp, shape , etc.) available in the pship bidding room. Hence, my wish is that the same features available for the Pship bidding room could become available for the "Teaching table". Thanks for attention !! :) Mauro

If pard does have his double, more likely than not the eventual save would be a phantom. If I had one more spade, I would seriously consider bidding, but with 4432, I doubt 4S would be a rewarding choice. BTW, if we bid 4S, I doubt serious opps will bid 5H: 4H was a clear preemptive, "shutout" bid.

Add to the list the meaning of double showing a 5 card major: this is the concept of "Multi vs Multi" and of Granovetter defense. Advancer will bid just as if pard opened a Multi 2D, keeping in mind the doubler has an opening hand and not a weak 2. This is mentioned in "Preempts from A to Z" by Anderson/Zenkel as "Forrester defense".

Sorry I do not understand the bidding. I assume west is dealer. I would assume a reasonable bidding could be: 2D-pass-2S*-pass 3H- X** - 4H - 4S pass-pass-?*** *good hand for H but not for spades **Here North MUST make a prebalancing double, even with marginal values, because he knows East has a god hand for H but not spades. ***here, at least NV, East should probably take an insurance and bid 5H, but I am influenced by seeing all 4 hands -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- More difficult for NS is if East slightly overbids with 2NT, which in most partnerships show game interest regardless of opener's major: 2D-pass-2NT(*)-pass 3C(**)- pass(***)- 4H - all pass *Relay with game interest **3C = goodish hand with hearts *** Now, with marginal values, and with East having showed substantial values, the likelihood pard is broke is greater. NS will be stolen. It happens.

In this case, I'd play takeout dbls in all situations.

Unusual 2NT then jump to 6 of pard's suit (probably clubs).

I pass. If pard does have his double, it is very likely we are going to set them. Moreover pard doubled again, so we should infer that he does not have lots of distribution: this means that with our balanced hand we'll hardly have a distributional game on, and bidding 4S would turn a plus into a minus. If they do make 4H, probably pard overbid (e.g. his second double should show substantially more than simply 16/17 hcp with shortness in opps suit)

Depends from the meaning of 2/3H - 2/3S . A common scheme for responding to Multi uses: - 2H as including: negative hand OR good/bad hands with tolerance for spades but not hearts (this response is quite common) - 2S: pass/correct with good/bad hands with tolerance for hearts (can stop in 3H) but not spades - 3H = pass or correct in a major (but this one is far from universally adopted). - 3S: it is a much less standardized bid. I play it as xfer to 3NT ehereas the response of 3NT shows a pass/correct to 4M, but I doubt this is standard. In both cases I'd play the double of a 2H/S as takeout of the suit bid by responder. Double of 3H = also takeout of the suit bid by responder. Instead, the double over 3S depends from the meaning of 3S. Meckstroth Rodwell play it as "pass or correct", which is simply a sort of negative double, with strength adjusted according to the fact that pard is weak. This sequence depends on the meaning of the first double: this is also played in various manners by many pairs. According to the defense chosen vs Multi, it may show: - hearts - spades - a generic balanced hand - a 5 card major - probably many more choices Obviously the meaning of the second double depends on the info delivered by the first double.

This time I read the bidding right :) , and, after making sure that it is opps who preempted and NOT our side :D , I can safely say that a 2S overcall is NOT forcing, and pard is allowed to pass with a bad hand :D

Responder did not show a suit, but he doubled (negative I suppose). Do you use support doubles opposite pard's negative double ?

In my opinion the final double is cooperative and more often than not it will show a balanced 18-19 hand. (However, I am not knowledgeable in Acol, so this might be different) Assuming this is true , responder should leave the double in unless his hand is quite distributional.

Ben, after 1♠-(2♥)-2NT*-(4♥) *= LIMIT+, 4+ TRUMPS ? Is opener's pass forcing ? I expect the answer is straightforward if we are ar Red vs White, but what at other vulnerabilities ? And what about: 1♠-(2♥)-2NT*-(5♥) ?

Oops I misread. ;) :blink: I thought OPPONENTS HAD PREEMPTED, not partner. Ia pologize for the lack of attention. I agree with you and Free, of course. :)

Ok, that's what I mean: *if you choose to splinter, you must accept pard's signoff*. If, instead, you intend to "proceed at your own risk" even knowing of par's wastage, better off not splitering altogether but asking for keycards and blast into the high level contract. As I said, when one splinters and then pulls after pard's signoff, 95% of the times he has already decided to bid the slam, so better do it immediately after checking the trump honors. So all this boils down to deciding BEFORE splintering whether you would accept pard's signoff. In this case, all is fine, whereas in the opposite cases, IMO more often than not there is a better alternative. Is this true ? I would think that opener has 3 options based on the agreements on forcing pass: 1. pass: forcing, either a hand with *something wasted* or a slam invitational hand (pass then pull) 2. double: here opener has for sure heart wastage and/or a minimum 3. 4S: an offensive hand without slam interest, and probably not heart wastage In either of the 3 situations, responder - if he evaluates the hand worth a slam try - will be able to make a forward move. :)

3♥ IS forcing... :rolleyes: Not in "normal" methods. :( If your pard is broke he is allowed to pass. Actually - playing normal methods - he will pass most hands in the 0-7 hcp trange without support or distributional features.(see for instance, the "Rule of Seven" suggested by Mike Lawrence : http://www.bridge-forum.com/Archives/Lawrence_lecture.html ) There may be good reasons to play it as forcing, winning in hands like the current one (but losing when pard is broke and LHO is sitting for penalties... :), or more simply when 3H would be the right contract.. or when it is already an overbid but undoubled ), but without agreements, 3H is not forcing, although strongly suggesting to pard to show any signs of life. :) But I know not everyone likes "standard" methods ! :)

I bid 4D followed by 6C unless pard shows hearts (in which cas i will use RKCB to find about the trump Q to bid 7). (BTW: 3H is NON forcing so a clear underbid).

Whereagles (BTW what's your real name ? :rolleyes: ) I understand your point :-) However, if the splinter in competition is intended to inform my pard of my shortness before they jump raise over my 2NT, I think it is redundant: - if my pard has cards to double, he will know anyway I am short in their suit (opps raised, he has cards in the suit), he will "read" my void. - if they do not jump raise, 2NT is a much better choice than splinter. However, I agree that bidding 2NT may not work well in some cases, but reopening after a splinter is not a solution either, and IMO is worse: then I just think that much better than splintering is blasting 6S with or without asking for keycards. Yes, so why go via a splinter raise if you are going to reopen ? In my experience, players who reopen over pard's signoff after a splinter, have already decided to bid the slam whatever happens, so better off blasting into it. As you said, just bid what you think you can make. :)

Pass, I have bid my hand. I did splinter, showing a good opening hand with controls and shortness in opps suit. Despite this, pard signed off. So he should have a pretty bad hand and you should respect his signoff, since I have nothing more than what I promised, except the fact that shortness in opps suit is a void instead of a singleton. But the real problem is the choice of a splinter raise at the previous round of bidding. If you evaluate this hand too strong for a signoff, then you have chosen the wrong bid by splintering, losing 2 bidding levels. I mean, if you are going to ask for Keycards or start cuebidding now, at the 5+ level, you might as well asked for keycards right away without splintering (perhaps using EKB). Splinter raises should be used for such hands where you want to describe your hand and where you will respct your pard's signoff; usually, when one splinters and reopens over pard's signoff, is a sign that the splinter was an unfortunate choice of raise.

Spiralscan, maybe in some cases suspects are justified. However, consider this: it has happened to me, even during a tourney, to have to run at the bathroom for some urgent need :rolleyes: When I went back, it may as well have appered as an "hesitation" to my opps (and probably in the 60 secs range). Other times, I had to checkout the coffee or other errands. I think that online bridge is simply different from live bridge, and so be it :(

Don't you show 5 (1st) -4 (2nd) -3 (raise) -1 hand by raising partner ? When the relay starts with 3C, things get a bit more awkward. This is because the system was not born to include Ingberman, so, in the origin, in the sequence u mention, 2NT would be a positive relay, and other suit rebid or preferences, would be to play. So you have choices: 1) remove 2NT Ingberman, and use 2NT (not 3C) as relay when the opener rebids 2S 2) use 2NT ingberman, use 3C as relay over 2S opener rebid , and use the 1m-1M-3m jump rebid to show single suited reverse with 3 card fit. 3) use 2NT Ingberman, use jump rebid to 3m as limited hand and good suit, and modify slightly the relay responses when the relay is 3C. I think you can use the option you are more comfortable with.

I'd play this as good semisolid diamonds, distributional hand (5-5.5 losers) but not more than 15 (or a bad 16) hcp. It is very useful to be able to jump to 3 with a suit of good quality with a limited hand: it is both obstructive to opps and descriptive for pard, who can count on a full pening and a source of tricks in NT. I would play the single suiter with 3 card fit as shown by simply raising partner's suit to 3 ("real reverse with fit"); if I had a 64xx hand, then I'd cue at 4 level to show 54xx/64xx or better hand. According to the notes this sequence shows a single suiter without 4 card-fit. However I would rather use it to deny 3 card fit, becaus I do nt want to lump the single suiter with 3 card support in the jump rebid to 3m. However I suppose it is just a matter of tastes.