phoenix214

Zel, i have a question for you. Do you feel its bad to pass balanced 11 counts?

The system you described sounds like the system most new Latvian junior pairs are playing. The system goes like this: 1♣:16+ strong, use what you like after. We have mostly natural afterwards 1♦:11-15 4441 with 4♦, 4♦5♣ or 5+♦, unbal 1M - Unbalanced 1NT 12-15(Some pairs do not open bad 12 counts), systematically includes 4414 hands(singleton diamond) 2♣ 5-4 or 6 Rest up to you. Normal 2♦ - majors, 5-4 or better, 2NT - minors After 1 diamond opening, depends on what gadgets you want and how advanced. I am currently making an improvement over our 1♦, but basically after 1♦-1♥, 1NT shows 5♣-4♦, and after 1♦-1♠, 1NT = 4♥. A better idea maybe to use transfers, or you can always just look at this topic http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/64499-responding-to-limited-unbalanced-natural-1d/

Well maybe then i do not know what standard it, but it does not change the fact that responder is able to show his shape, and so it should not matter much in that there is no huge problems bidding after 1NT. And the 1♣-1♦, 1NT follows pretty much like a classical precision 2♣. 2♣ is weak so you can stop, and 2♦ is INV+ as after a normal 2♣, but responder has already showed that he does not have a weak hand with one 5 card major or 4-4 majors, so that is a +

Well maybe then i do not know what standard it, but it does not change the fact that responder is able to show his shape, and so it should not matter much in that there is no huge problems bidding after 1NT. And the 1♣-1♦, 1NT follows pretty much like a classical precision 2♣. 2♣ is weak so you can stop, and 2♦ is INV+ as after a normal 2♣, but responder has already showed that he does not have a weak hand with one 5 card major or 4-4 majors, so that is a +

Well the biggest problems finding something is after a 2NT opening as the "Slam killer" because then you might miss some 19-opposite 9 slams. After 1NT, they have a very good system IMO which i really liked playing. They have a way for responder to show almost any hand type you would want to show. Although doing so, they sacrifice inviting with flat hands. The author says, pass with 7, blast with 8.Although this forces you to exercise your judgment a bit, because you sometimes want to blast with good 7 counts. After 1 club and 1 diamond and X from opener, you basically get the same bidding as if after a normal opening, with some tweaks, namely openers promises 16-to Not FG hand, and your system stays almost the same for the opening and some tweaks for hands that are not possible. An interesting sequence goes 1♣-1♦, 2NT-Now if you transfer to 3M, then you show at least 8 HCP, so if responder has a hand he thinks is good, finding slams might be easier. The main difference although is that it is more of natural than relay system, although you can do some tweaks to add relays.

Well ok, so from what i get - Direct 4S:4Losers, X->4S:3Losers, Direct 5S-ASK for help in spades, X->5S:2Losers?

Well yeah, i got that 4S is an underbid, but what is the difference between, Direct 4spades over 3diamonds, and double then 4 spades. I guess in these kind of situations i have ~ different bids. 4M 5D 5M X->4M X->5D X->5M Im actually interested how do these bids differ. I suppose a direct 5M is something like:raise me if you have a fitting honor? 4M is to play 5D could be a strong major hand? but what does the X->4M bid show? Is it simply partner I have OM tolerance as well? or please make a move if your not a complete bust?

There was a trick in revision where you had a semi-automatic 1♦ response, that they used a delayed roman 2♦. Technically you can try that in normal prec after a negative as well: 1♣-1♦: 1♥:Hearts or Bal 1♠:Nat 1NT♣:Clubs 2♣:Diamonds 2♦:4441 shape The transfers where in a book from the 90ies, and inspired this idea

Good point, i forgot to mention it is imps, pairs, Swiss tournament. I usually do not like the idea of just blasting, but i think with these types of hands it has cost me a few hundred imps or so. Partner had a hand of xx JTx xxx(do not recall, but nothing relevant, maybe a queen) KQxxx 7 was making on either clubs 3-3, HQ onside or H-C squeeze. I took 12 because did not try to squeeze, but in 4 it did not matter much

Your holding these 13 good cards: AKQxxxx AKxx - Ax All green, bidding goes (p)-p-(3♦) to you. You decide to double, other opp raises to 4, partner pass, opp pass. Is 4S an underbid here and i should bid 5D/5S or is my partner supposed to make a move if he has something in his hand, due to the fact that i bid this way, instead of just going 4S directly over 3D? Thanks in advance

Today we had a small misunderstanding about how to show a strong one-suited minor after opps bid over our strong club. The bidding goes 1♣-(1♥), 1♠(5-7 with 5 spades)-(3♥). The problem we had misunderstanding was, which bids are for spades, NF, and own suit. My idea was that 4m-Natural,not too strong(inviting perhaps), 4♥Something like Choice of Game, 4NT-Good old RCKB, onesuited slam hands bid via X and then their suit. My partner thought that 4m(same), 4H as cue for spades, 4NT as minors, and X and then something, dont remeber :( Anyhow the bidding went on: 4NT-5♣, 5♦, 5♥-6♦-6♠-(X)-6NT down 2 6 Diamonds was making because partner was with a strong diamond suit. From what i though he was probing for a spade grand(good that i had diamond support i guess) Anyhow the question i have is how do most people play these situations?

I suppose i could ask my partner if he wants to play in the case if players are needed, i suppose he wont mind

Well you can try the Canadian version which was in Nightmare: X-4 or 5 ♠ 1♠- 0-3 spades 1NT-NAT 2♣, NF 2♦, NF 2♥, 6+♠ - 8+HCP(wants to be in game opposite good hand with support) 2♠, 6+ 0-7 2NT+ Up to you I tried playing this over the precision diamond. Although now we might find a better structure playing precision with an unbalanced diamond, where 1♦ is similar to yours, and at the moment we play X=4, and 1♠=5+, but i suppose i could try to market my partner one of these methods(Muhahaha) Today showed him Equality. About 2♥ overall, i think it should be used a forcing hand with a spade-onesuiter, as mentioned above

Thanks Zel, we bascially had a misunderstanding between your case 2 and 3 about pass =>Redouble and i just wanted to know what meta rules are good for this kind of a bid, because it is still something new. We do play some relays(Used to play Full Stayman over 1NT, which is basically the reverse thing of what you should be doing), so XX as just bid as normal might have seemed normal. I like the idea of reversing the bids of i have something, and i do not have anything in puppet variations, should suggest this to partner. In the actual match the bidding went: 1NT-2♣-(X), p-(p)-XX-2♥, X-(p)-3♦-(p), 3NT?-(p)-p-X-AP I had a weak NT, i had upgraded facing a 5 count.

Starting to play Heeman, we had a small misunderstanding in a tournament which led to a -800. The problem was: 1NT-2♣(Puppet to 2♦)-(X)-p(we agreed that, p=no stop, 2♦=club stop, and XX, good clubs)-(p)-XX? The question is what should redouble be here? The 2 club bid can have the following hands: SO in 2♦, Game going hands with 5M, GI with 5M-4m+, ST with 5M-4m+, weak with both minors, ST in a minor. He thought that XX was please bid 2♦, i thought it would be strong. The idea is that you can bid like normal, with any hand that has other meanings that is not SO in 2♦, so that means, that either XX should be: i have SO in ♦, or i have good clubs and want to play 2♣XX. Any recomandidations?:)

Well K.O is different, and sure you can complain about it. The reason for my post is actually, that during the last team tournament we had(12 teams, 6 rounds 1-4 Swiss, 5-6 Danish) We got blitzed by the winning team on round 3, and then by some "Miracle" we were 2nd after round 5 by some 0.XX VP, and got blitzed by them again. They got to play the same team in rounds 4 and 5, and won them 2 times. The teams in places 2 and 3 never even got to play that team as well. Well maybe the underdogs like it because it easier to get past the stronger teams, but i am not too convinced that it reflects the results better

I was wondering why in bridge, compared to chess tournaments, where both use Swiss, in chess you cannot get paired against the same player, while in bridge team events, there is the use of Danish/Italian systems in the last round, where you could face again the same opponent twice. Does this somehow make it the competition fairer or is it just a custom?

The bidding can continue 1♥-(2♦), 4♣, which should be with natural with heart support. This can make a better picture of your hand. The problem now is if partner has a good hand. He will usually bid 4H(4D if last train), or bid 4D with a diamond control. Now, if he denies a diamond control, things start to get a little bit interesting. You can count 11+10+13=34 points, =>34/3=11 tricks(3 suit balance). That means your hand is worth one more bid if he is nt a total bust with the diamond queen. Now lets say, you bid 4S, which is a spade control. Partner now should like his hand with the move you made, so his is worth a 5C bid. I suppose, now if you bid 5D, partner bids 5S, and you bid 6D, he should know what is happening. [hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1h2d4c(%21C%20suit%20+%20%21H%20support)p4h(No%20%21D%20values)p4s(I%20have%20%21S%201/2%20round%20control)p5c(1/2%20round%20control%20in%20clubs)p5d(Shows%20the%20diamond%20control)p5s(Shows%20spade%20control)p6d(1st%20round%20diamond%20control%3F)p7hppp]133|100|The 4♠ bid should imply a diamond value as well, because without one, you should not expect to make slam.[/hv] After the 6 diamond bid, its up to W to evaluate his hand. With the way E bid his hand, he can suspect a 6 card club suit. (With a 4-4-0-5 and a bad suit he would start 4D). This leaves him with 6 clubs. If he has a singleton spade. Then he is something like x-AQx-AKx-xxxxxx, (The 6D bid should show a well controled diamond suit, void or AK). 1-3-4-5 shape, is not real. Else he hase Kxx-AQx-A-xxxxxx, or Kxx-AQxx- -xxxxxx. With the last hand we can make 7. With the other we have good chances as well, with good breaks, although with the first of the last two hands he would not bid 6D(I think). With your action, i do not like W bidding, due to the fact, i like opening 1NT with 5332 hands, and blackwood is not my favorite convetion(I think the blackwood is bad with his hand anyway). With his hand, all he needs from you is a spade control(King/Singleton) and 4 hearts with one Ace. If he bids 5 clubs, and you bid 5 diamonds. Then with 5NT(Grand slam try), he might hit the grand again, knowing that you need to have some values for your bidding.

What i like is the Revison clubs scheme over 1NT(16-18). The main idea is that you give up on a hand type, which does not yield much gain, to improve other parts, which are more crucial. The hand type that is given up is the flat invitational hand. It goes something like that with 0-7 you pass. With 8 you blast(0-8 and 9 with 15-17), I think i have had one bad hand where this did not pay off. Although to do so, you need to know how good a hand is(I sometimes blast with good 7 counts). Anyhow the scheme: 2♣-2♦: 2NT-ST in a minor bal/semi-bal or 4M-6m hand s/o 3X - GF with a three-suited hand(no 5M) 2♣-2M: 2NT - the same, but 4OM-6m obviously 3♣ - Short clubs(No 4M) or short M 3M - Balanced ST with M fit 3X - Shortness GF 2♣-2NT(4-4M): 3♣-Any non-spade shortage, no 4M 3RED-Transfer 3♠-short spades, no hearts 2♦-2♥: 2♠-Forcing 2NT 3♣-short spades 3♦-short diamonds 3♥-short clubs 3♠-2-5-2-4 ST 3NT- 2-5-4-2 ST 4X - 6H-5x ST 2♥-2♠: 2NT-Forcing 3♣ 3♦ - short hearts 3♥ - short diamonds 3♠ - short spades 3NT - Puppet to 4♣(shows 5-2-(4-2)) 4X - 6M-5X

I know in Latvia people play somewhat like the Swedish, although those who do play Gazilli normally do it in a strong club system, with a semi-forcing/non-forcing 1NT response It goes like this 1♥-1NT: 2♣->2♥ 6+♥ 11-13 2♥-> 5♥-4+♣ 11-13 2♣->3♥- 6+♥ good 13-badish 14 3♥ -> 6+♥ goodish 14-15 2NT was 6-4 if i recall( have not played this myself) After 1♠ it goes quite similary

Playing transfer preempts what would be your use of a 3♠ opening bid. And as a side question, is playing 3♠ as a clasical gambling legal, if you look at brown sticker regulations

[hv=pc=n&w=sakt952hk982d2ca9&e=sj4haq64dat5ct875&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=1cp1sp1np2d(2WayNMF%5BGF%5D)p2h(4%21H)p4d(Splinter)p4hppp]266|200[/hv] During an match, where my friends were playing(me kibbing) this hand came along. Playing 2/1 with some basic gadgets they had the following auction. Seems quite reasonable to me, they though so as well, although the missed a slam. This led me to think, is it somehow possible to bid the slam using their methods. The only reasonable solution imagined is that now W has to imagine E with a perfect minimum to try slam, but it may get them overboard. After this, i tried in my head a little switch in bidding. Lets say e does not open 1C, but passes(It is possible to pass 11 counts :D). Now on third hand W opens 1S. E rebids forcing NT. Since they have agreed to play Gazzilli, they have a nice tool available here namely 2NT, which would be 6-4 with 14-16 or so. After E finds about hearts, for him imagining a perfect minimum is much easier(W hand is a perfect minimum). And when E shows a move to slam in H, W should like his hand due to 6 controls and 5 loosers. Anyhow, maybe you can suggest better natural methods for finding the slam after the 1C opening? Thanks in advance

I have lived with out bergen raises in 2/1 precision, do not think they are needed anyway :P, waste of good bids

This was a fun match actually, as i recall. Our team managed to win the Dutch team in the youngsters, quite the hype, not to mention other factors that were happening there. I think i recall this hand as well, Polak just driving to a grand slam. The boards i do recall were 7 and 13. On board 7, they pushed up to a grand slam, after 2♠-X(or hearts)-5♠, and were missing ace of diamonds which they didnt suspect. On board 13, we had misunderstanding with pard on 4th round of biding, where i thought my bid promised a spade fit, while he took it as a spade control. After a while we ended up in 6♥, doubled and i made it. Them being unhappy about our explanations called director, and i gave a weblink to Dan Neils system page for our system for him to check, turns out partner was right :D

Scoring is imps, if that is important.