RunemPard

Hello, Not sure if this should go in natural or non-natural, but the openings are natural SAYC 5cM. The idea I am playing w/ is to use the other major at the 2 level to show one of 2 possibilities... 1♥-2♠* (Concealed splinter (not sure on strength) or a good 6 card ♠ suit (11-13ish) values.) 2N: Asking ---3♣: Splinter ♣ ---3♦: Splinter ♦ ---3♥: Splinter ♠ ---3♠: 6♠ 11-13 HCP 1♠-2♥* (Concealed splinter (not sure on strength) or any GF w/ 5♥.) 2N: Asking ---3♣: Splinter ♣ ---3♦: Splinter ♦ ---3♥: Splinter ♥ ---3♠: GF w/ 5♥ What are your thoughts? I am thinking that it may be slightly useful to have an option to keep the auction lower. It may however cause some bidding issues if there is a misfit. My main concern would be what point range to have with them if using standard splinters as well. I appreciate any responses, Don

Hello, Just a topic regarding 2245 or (13)45 distributions lacking values to reverse. In your partnership/opinion, what is the best way to handle rebidding issues with these? Do you prefer having 1♣-1M-2♣ promising 5/4 in minors or 6+♣, or adjusting the minor openings to allow for bidding 1♦ w/ 4♦+5♣? Do you have other methods to get this across? Which method(s) have you had the best experiences with? Personally I find it easiest to promise 5♣ playing a 2 carded ♣ opening.

If the bid promises no offsuit A or K, easy pass... Honestly, even if it promises the top 3 honors, no single, and maybe 1 offsuit K, slam really is not our goal either. But yea, expecting what the rest say, and I just want to pass.

Hello, I have been working on a system to try out in the future. I have come to the point where I am trying to decide which route would be the best to take regarding NT strength using it. The 1C/1D bids have been "hacked" away at to make them rather descriptive (at least IMO). Using this...the minor openings have the following possible holdings... 1C - possible opening hands - 0+C: ANY STR 2C opening (shown by rebidding 2C or bidding higher) - 3C: 12-14 (B) --¤(4423, 4333, 3433) - 4C: 12-14 (B), 12-19 (Marmic w/ singleton D) --¤(4324, 3424, 3334, 4414) - 5C: 12-14 (B), 12-19 (Marmic w/ void), (15)16+ (5C+4x) --¤(2335, 3235, 3325, 0445, 4045, 4405, [4]225, [4]315) - 6+C: rarely opened w/ 1C 1D - possible opening hands - 3D: 12-14 (B) --¤(4432) - 4D: 12-14 (B), 12-19 (Marmic w/ singleton) --¤(4342, 3442, 3244, 2344, 4441, 4144, 1444) - 5D: 12-14 (B), 12-19 (Marmic w/ void), (15)16+ (5D+4x), 12-19 (5C/5D) --¤(3352, 3253, 2353, 0454, 4054, 4450, [4]252, [4]351) -6+D: rarely opened w/ 1D Now, using a system where the minor openings are typically hands of this sort, do you feel it is more beneficial to play a 12-14 NT opening rather than a 15-17? I have limited experience playing a weak NT, so I really could use some advice. The club we play at typically plays 15-17 NT and not many use a special defense over NT openings. If you feel the rest of the system is important to making this decision, I can include it. It is a work in progress however. Thanks for the help, Don

I keep my hands under the table at most times at our club...just in case I got a peeping tom... :blink: Mostly during play, but sometimes during sorting.

Put me in as a single...I would love to try again with someone. If anyone is interested in playing, we can work on bid/play for the next 3 weeks. I am self rated as Advanced, but I do have some very great days. :P I live in Sweden and am typically not online past 6-7PM EST.

I live in Sweden, and the clubs I play at would probably allow the use of the artificial methods I am about to mention. I am looking to create artificial GF bids for 1M-2m sequences. We will be using a F1NT w/ Bergen as well. My main questions would be regarding which events this would typically be legal to play in and if you feel it is a good idea to use when allowed. Will put the ideas I have in my head below for critique. Thanks a lot! :) 1M-2m* = Multi GF (J2NT, some kind of balanced NT hands lacking trump (possibly single), natural (HCP range...not sure) (6+m), natural 5m+4x, or 3(4)+M w/ a void) My idea is to split the bids among the 2/1s to allow for accurate descriptions of holdings and strengths. 1M-2N will be open to use for another type of bid. What are your thoughts on playing something like this? Do you have any past experiences? How vulnerable would you consider this to preempts? I cannot imagine many hands where the opponents will preempt and we will have no clue which direction to go in.

Quantum

I agree...my main concern was them making 1NT. This was the same reason I ran from his 2NT. I fully expected partner to avoid playing spades. I was expecting either a 3(433) opening hand or the more obvious 10-11 HCP with short spades.

to billw55 when you wish to read...

Matchpoints... Opponents were playing 4 card openings, variant of J2NT w/ and w/o interference... We were sitting N/S... The auction went... East(Y) - South(O2) - West(P) - North(O1) 1♥ -------- 2♣ -------- 2N* ------- P 3♥* -------- P ------- 3♠* ------- P 4♦* ------- P -------- 4♥ -------- P 4N -------- P -------- 5♦ -------- P 6♥ -------- AP *2N - Asking bid 10+ *3♥ - single ♣ *3♠ - control *4♦ - control 0314 RKC A of ♣ is led by SOUTH followed by another ♣...plan the play. --------------------------WEST (DUMMY) --------------------------♠Q --------------------------♥K9843 --------------------------♦K43 --------------------------♣KJT2 SOUTH ----------------------------------------------------NORTH (bid 2♣ and leads A) ---------------------------------(passed all rounds) --------------------------EAST (DECLARER) --------------------------♠AT42 --------------------------♥AQ72 --------------------------♦AQT7 --------------------------♣8

MPs - V/NV - You are sitting East... Opponents are playing 4 card openings, standard...the bidding goes... We had no special agreements as to the meaning of a direct 2♠...it would be considered natural or whatever he decided it would have been so I passed in tempo. South(O1) - West(P) - North(O2) - East(Y) 1♠ ----------- P ----------- 1N ----------- ?? ♠AKQT75 ♥84 ♦652 ♣63 Continued... Our results...

Thanks for the post. You are absolutely right about the NT openings in the 2H/S openings. I will have to put them into the 1C opening or have only the 22-24 NT hands with 1♣ and 25+ another way. I am also debating how to have the minors in the C/D suit, and which would be better/more playable. Also debating if they will cause more issues than they are worth. One gain from the 2♣ opening is that it allows 1♣-1x-2♣ show a STR 2♣ opening. The 2♣ opening preempts all suits when clubs, but when hearts, it only really preempts spades/NT. The same goes with the 2♦ opening. The weak bids allow for opponents to double to show a natural suit, but many at our club would not have an agreement about double being natural. By TP I mean total points, typically counting overall strength of the hand (often excluding doubleton). The main reason I am trying to keep the 11-14 majors is that they are slightly preemptive, descriptive, and leave more room to bid stronger hands with a long major. (1♠-xy-2♠) for us almost always shows a 6 card suit or 15-17 TP values. Other openings are basically SAYC... 1♣: (3-5♣) 12-14 (B), (5+♣(4414) 12+ (UB), or any STR 2♣ opening 1♦: (3-5♦) 12-14 (B), (5+♦(4441) 12-19 (UB) 1♥: (5+♥) 12-19 (rarely 15+ balanced) 1♠: (5+♠) 12-19 (rarely 15+ balanced) 1N: 15-17 3♣-3♠: 6 card preempts are possible for all... 3N: Gambling

Hello, Just putting this out there for feedback. I have been playing around with some 2-level openings to use at an average local club setting. Playing better minor at the one level, 15-17 NT. My main objective was to differentiate the weak 2 bids in a form of Multi. One concern of mine is if allowing opponents to double to show the suit is too much of a negative to use this approach. I am trying to keep the stronger NT bids out of the 1C opening to avoid bidding issues. The 11-14 major bids are just a thought. With interference, it will tend to cause a lot of issues when partner is too weak to get involved. Since I am playing in Sweden, most clubs that I play in do not add many restrictions to bidding systems. I will be thinking over better ways to play the bids and appreciate hearing what you think along with suggestions to possibly improve it. Thanks a lot! :) 1♣: (3-5♣) 12-14 (B), (5+♣) 12+ (UB), or any STR 2♣ opening 2♣: 18-19 NT, 11-14 TP 6♥, 11-14 6♣(well supported), or STR/long ♦ 2♦: 20-21 NT, 11-14 TP 6♠, WEAK ♥, 11-14 6♦(well supported) or STR/long ♣ 2♥: WEAK ♠, 7-11ish 5/5 ♣/♦+♥ 2♠: 7-11ish 5/5 ♣/♦+♠ 2N: 7-11ish 5/5 in minors/majors Edit: Adjusted 2C/2D minor bids to make it easier to know which minor partner will normally have with interference. Edit: Removed the NT bids from the 2H/2S/2N openings. Thanks Free.

Regarding the bid...I am expecting the hearts to split 4/1, but I still like going to 3. The majority of the remaining HCP appear to be with our LHO. We have 2 entries to our hand + a possible spade ruff entry. I feel more confident about gaining some tricks knowing this.

Where do you get this partner holding 4 spades from? A more likely holding is something like 3415, 3424, 2425, or 2434.

Sorry, the hands are not showing up on our club's bridge site...but I have a general idea of the hands held. 1st to bid...NV vs. V ♠ - Kx ♥ - x ♦ - Kx ♣ - AKQJT985 Partner's hand... Our bidding+opening lead...

I like this...

I like this...

Far too much offense and defense to discourage. What were the full hands if you have them?

If this is a X showing lesser values, then I am still slightly interested in slam. However, I do not fully understand why it even matters which way we do this. It seems to me that doubling for values is just as effective as passing for values. I mean, what are they possibly going to do over a X? XX for SOS? If me and my partner were playing the hand, X would show values and I would bid the hand as so. PASS would show a hand with not as much defense. 5♣/♦ would be a sign off. But that is just me...

First, I cannot understand why so many want to pass. We are giving the opponents a little too much respect here IMO... Partner obviously has something, and it is absolutely not ♥ values. My first question is how aggressive our opponents bid when RED. If my partner had doubled here, I would take it as showing good values. This can be a minimum, but the values are good. A of ♣, A and/or K of ♦, and the A and/or K of ♠. It is obvious that partner is sitting on 2 ♥ or even a singleton as well. I see the 4♥ bidder holding either 5 ♥s or 4 ♥s with some values in ♠. I will bid 4NT expecting to find out about the 3 remaining As and the K of ♦s. I am expecting 3/4 keys to be replied. If partner does reply 5♣ showing 1 or 4 keys, then I will bid 5♥ and see what else they got to say. It is possible that partner is holding 16+ HCP as well. Give partner Axxx, x, AKx, AJxxx, or a similar hand with 18 balanced, and we are looking at a very easy grand.

As far as how me and my regular partner would bid this... 1♥-1♠ 2♥-3♦ 3♥-3N/4♦ not really sure if I would be interested or not...3H typically shows weaker with very good hearts...too good for 10-14 TP 2H opening. 4N-5♦ 5♥/6♦/6♥/NT although I think playing diamonds actually lowers the slams odds? 1♥: 11-20 (5+H) --1♠: 6+ (4+S) 2♥: 15-17(18) TP (6+H) --3♦: GF normally natural or fit 3♥: Very good hearts --4♦: 5/5 or greater with longer spades 4N: 1430 RKC ♦s --5♦: 0 or 3 keys In this auction...we also wrong sided the NT slam. :huh:

I am not sure if I figured this out correctly, being that my math is horrible. I simply wrote down the possible splits in hearts to see the odds. I came to a 50/50 chance that the J will drop with 64 possible splits? As long as 6NT is declared from S, or the K of C is before S, it will make if the heart J drops. There may also be an entry problem, but I think it does not matter much. (Edit: Entries not really a problem...since if they hold off on the A of D we get winners anyways.) How to get there is a good question though, and at what scoring methods we even want to be there. The 3 heart jump would interest me though. It could be a more distributional or trick count jump as it is here, but it could also be a pure HCP jump. Do we really want to put all of our money on the 1st option and ignore the 2nd? I think the best thing to do at this point is to start with 4D IMO.

xxx is the best option here clearly...but we will have to settle for 2♠ or 2♥ if agreement allows. My first question would be about the xx. Partner is probably looking at a weaker hand with decent distribution. I am liking the odds of game even opposite a weak hand.