PrecisionL

Playing a strong club system, we (Keylime & I) keep reviewing it for what we call "Parallelism." Many sequences are similar to ease the memory load: 1a) 1C - 1M - Relay - all 2-level rebids by responder are similar distributions no matter which Major his first response was in. 1b) A 2NT rebid by responder designates a freak hand: 6-5 / 6-4 2) The same design was used for our intermediate two bids and the GI or better response of 2NT. Rebids by opener show if he is minimum or maximum. 3) 1M - 2C = A & GF is similar to 1C - 1M - Relay, but 1-step higher. Larry

This subject has been discussed many times over the years. ACBL Rick "Beye said yes, I could open this hand 1C even though it has only 14 HCP. Beye said that the question is whether there is an intent to deceive, and given this hand, that is clearly not my intent. " See the rest of this posting (and thread): http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.b...57f7cac35958eb5

I saw the NEC Convention Regulations for Side Games in their Daily Bulletins: http://www.jcbl.or.jp/game/nec/necfest09/nec_bul.html Convention Regulations for Side Games (An explanation for foreign players) LIST C (Yokohama IMP Pairs / Asuka Cup) Responses and Rebids: 6. All responses to; a) artificial strong opening bids with 15 HCP or more. b) opening bids of 2♣ or higher (weak 2s must guarantee 10 opening points: opening points = HCP + number of cards in longest suit). Maybe I should submit this to the ACBL for their consideration?

See my previous posting in this thread - Although 1♣ promising 2 or more is a conventional bid, you may NOT use conventional defenses to it according to an e-mail I received in 2006 from Mike Flader. He said that the conventional bid has to be strong also (15+ hcp) before one can use conventional defenses to it. By the way, a takeout double is conventional (not usually strong) and conventional replies are allowed by responder to the opening bidder [or by responder to the takeout X - edited 2/9/09]. So as we all know, the GCC is not consistent or the interpretation by ACBL Directors is not consistent.

We play transfers over a Precision 2♣ opening (very good 5-card suit, usually 6♣). Opener accepts the transfer with a doubleton, and with less he rebids 3♣ (minimum) or anything else to show a maximum. We do not open 2♣ with a 4-card major. Another method is to play 2♦ asks for a major suit fragment: xxx or Hx. With 5,6-clubs and a 4-card major we open 1♦.

Additional information on opening a short club: Mike Flader in the May 2006 issue of the ACBL Bulletin discussed responses to a short club (2+ clubs) with 4+♦ showing 4 or more: "No Alert is required for a response in a major that shows at least a five-card suit. The 1♣ opening and the 1♦ response, however, must be Alerted. If your side declares, you should disclose the information available to you in the bidding at the end of the auction." My Qs (via e-mail): 1) "Did you mean announced: "may be as short as 2"? Is this considered a convention or a treatment?" 2) "Can the Gardener 1NT Overcall (16-18 or weak with a long suit, not generally GCC legal) be used over such a short club opening? Over an artificial 1D opening?" ANSWERS: 1) "Yes, I suspect that I meant announced. By definition, the Short Club should be a convention since when one opens 1C they could have fewer that 3 clubs." 2) "The Gardener 1NT overcall would not be legal over these artificial openings bids unless they were by definition strong (15+) according to the General Convention Chart." Hope this is helpful. Mike Flader

Say what ???? Let's ignore the restrictions surrounding relay systems for the moment. I thought that something like the following would be perfectly legal 1♥ - (P) - 2♣ = artificial game force (denies 3+ Spades) 1♥ - (P) - 2♦ = artificial game force (promises 3+ Spades) As I recall, the regulations permit bids that show game forcing values. I don't recall a limitation on the total number of said bids. I'd be interested in understanding where this (supposed) restriction comes from. The restriction comes from ACBL when I queried them on playing the Power System by Klinger that has 1M - 2♣ as Artificial and G.I. and 1M - 2♦ as Artificial and G.F. They replied (from memory) that these Power bids were not GCC as 2/1 bids in a minor must be either GF or GI but not one of each. I know Jacoby 2NT is also an artificial bid. I don't know the legality of your treatment showing or denying 3♠.

We (Keylime and me) play intermediate twos in all suits. Responses to 2♦ (may have 4♣, but not 5♣ - open 2NT): 2M = Good 5,6-card suit, N.F. 2NT = G.I. Relay or better: Opener rebids 3♣ (4+♣) or 3♦ with ALL minimums, major response shows Hxx & Max (GF). 3♣ to play 3♦ promises a ♦ honor (3NT possibility). 3M = G.F. asking for support: 1st step = 0-1 cards, 2nd step = 2, 3rd step = 3 & zoom to controls. 3NT To Play Larry

In ACBLand you can play ONE 2/1 response as artificial: Either G.F. or G.I. but not both. The Power System, thus, is not GCC legal. I researched this a few years ago and had e-mail correspondence with ACBL. Larry

I Table 5♦ :lol: a good Trent pre-empt and partner knows what to do with 2 Quick Tricks (p) or 3 Q.T. (6♦). Larry

Well three-fers are hard and we faded at the end to finish 8th for 2.06 Silver MPs in the Swiss. Still a good Sectional for Keylime and Precision L for 23.87 Silver MPs (Our personal best as a partnership - Lookout NABC Washington, DC Summer 2009!) Thanks to Dwayne, Charlie, and Tyler. Larry

Ah, but canape is GCC legal so 1♠ showing 4♠ and maybe a longer side suit is OK.

I have been playing Precision and TDs allow us to play: 1♦ promises one or both 4-card majors without a 5 cd M. May have a longer minor. This works really well and I would be greatly disappointed if we could not play this in GCC anymore.

Yep, we are going to be Raleigh :rolleyes: Larry

Playing Matchpoints with weak NT consider playing Keri over the 1NT opening. 2♣ is a puppet to 2♦. Now 2M is G.I. with 4 or 5-card suit. You still get to play transfers, somewhat modified. Larry

George 2♦: 18-20 hcp, balanced, from THE NOTRUMP ZONE BY Danny Kleinman, 2004, pgs. 121-6. RESPONSES TO 2♦: 2♥ (transfer to 2♠ denying hearts) 2♠ (puppet to 2NT denying spades) 2NT (puppet to 3♣ denying NT interest) 3♣ (Stayman, promising spades) 3♦ (super Flannery) 3♥ (clubs) Strong 1-suiter. 3♠ (diamonds) Strong 1-suiter.

I would play almost any Strong Club with canape (FCF: four cards first). It is fun and you can add as much science as you like (and your partner can stand). Larry

Not strong enough for a reverse, I raise to 2 Spades.

honors are 3 points, but -1 pt for each missing honor directly above: Axx 3 Kxx 2 AKx 6 KQx 5 AQx 5 AKQ 9 AQJ 8 Tricks = pts divided by 3.

Mexican 2 D are from Romex. I have all the versions and will e-mail them Monday when I have access to my other computer. Larry

Under the GCC, you can play any conventional responses you want to a two level opening (like Precision 2♣), as long as the opening is not "weak". As discussed in previous posts, I have an e-mail from ACBL stating that transfer responses to a Precision 2♣ opening is not GCC. Perhaps if I ask again, I might get a different ruling? Larry

Yes, 2♦ must have an anchor suit (for GCC), cannot be either major, otherwise it is mid-chart. This is well known by many tournament players. Suction is mid-chart also. Larry

Super accept only with AKxx or KQxx in trumps AND maximum (Aces and Kings) AND a doubleton (for the extra trick).

I forgot Churchill as a System without a forcing opening: http://www.northshorebridge.com/church2.pdf Back from the Chattonooga, TN Regional and the slam bidding in the top bracket was horrible. Twice slams bid missing two aces! Slams appear about 6% of the time (simulations) and at pairs, you can win without finding the hard to bid slams. Larry

Examples won't convince (there are so many for either side of the argument). Theoretically there needs to be one forcing opening. However, try EHAA if you want all weak 2-bids (it has NO forcing opening).