dick payne

Canape in the majors In some two club systems, the cutting edge of technology is a 2D bid showing a weak two in a major, a flat 19-20, or a strong three in a minor. Shades of Colonel Buller. Introducing your suit for the first time at the three level on a strong hand is not a thing of grace and beauty. In a one club system there are several examples of a 2m bid being game forcing. For example 1C 1S 2C ?. Canape in the majors can solve some problems here. Responder bids majors up the line, 2H shows hearts, 4-6, opener agrees immediately with 4 hearts, bids 2S with spades 4-5, or 2NT/3C/3D with no major. In this case responder can rebid hearts. --- 2C 2H 2S 3H 3S opener shows 5 spades and denies three hearts --- 2C 2S 2NT/3C 3H responder shows 5-5 in the majors

Controls/points Straube says “I think responding with hcp ranges is extinct and with controls ought to be” I don’t understand how to distinguish between a negative and a semi-positive if it is not defined in points, and is a positive not defined as x+ points? I understand the case for controls being extinct. Any ambitious player who is thinking of using them should be warned off. The trouble with controls is that with all the Aces and Kings all you can guarantee to make is 2NT. A Blue Club heart response is 6-16 points and a 1S response is seven to the rest of the deck. The way to investigate the hand is cue bidding. It is very accident prone and not properly explained either by Reese or Mingoni. Their explanation of uneconomical cue bidding may sound fine, but over the years it is a recipe for disaster. Over the course of twenty-five years partners and I persisted with cue bidding and in spite of all the disasters, We gained sufficient confidence to use Blackwood no more than once a year. It is very , very complicated. I have already drawn people’s attention to two flawed examples of cue bidding in Mingoni’s book. If he does not understand it how can we be expected to do so For the last twenty odd years I have played natural positives and point count responses, and have come to the conclusion that point count is simplest The following framework is efficient 1C 16+ responses 1D 0-6, 1H 7-8, 1S 9+, 2 any 5-6 points with a six card suit. At the risk of using up the ether and boring the readers I will explain my use of the response of 1NT. I f the bidding is 1C 1D 1NT opener shows 16-19 and responder 0-6. If responder feels like bidding Stayman he is practically always wrong to do so The response of 1NT shows 5-6 points with 4-4 or better in the majors. If Stayman is not needed 2C can be Gladiator and an immediate 2M is another golden negative 5-6 points decent five card suit After the point count response of 1D/ 1H/ 1S the next suit up rebid of 1H/1S/1NT is conventional and strong 1H over 1D is A Kokish bid showing 20+ and asking fo 0-4 or 5-6. 1S over 1H is 18+ points and it follows that 1NT,2C,2D,2H,2S promise 16-17 and the sequences are freewheeling. 1NT over 1S shows 19+ points and asks for range. With 16-18 make any other bid. Partner becomes senior hand and is free to look for the less likely slam

It strikes me that the defining characteristic of various 1C systems is their responses to the strong club, controls, natural positives or point count. I would be interested to know the relative popularity of these three

sorry pressed the wrong button again K743 AQ108 K8 QJ52 QJ98 A A52 8743 J9652 9 10 KQJ1096 Partner pushed out a 2S bid , acceptable in our system, well nearly, next hand passed and I did not see any merit in bidding so we played 2S, two off In the other room South passed, (more to most people's taste) West bid a Blue Club 1D. It might be kindest to draw a veil over the subsequent bidding, but that would leave the story untold. North, a Grand Master made three bids on his hand, and out team-mates subsided in 4S undoable. It's a funny game though many treat it seriously

there have been comments with regard to distinguishing between distributional hands and quasi-balanced hands at the first bid. I have never heard of this at the one level, but for me it sounds good technique and it is essential at the two level 2H,2S,2NT are opening bids judged on the losing count showing 5-5 or better in two suits 8-15 points.which restricts one bids to no more distributional than 6-4 I have mentioned these elsewhere and someone pointed out that with this wide range you may be in trouble with a big misfit. Quite so. The perfect bidding system is a will o' the wisp which seduces and deludes us all. A more pragmatic criterion of any treatment is whether it gains more than it loses against good players. The reason for distinguishing between distibutional and quasi-balanced hands is because responder's technique is quite different If partner opens one cabbage or one brussel sprout a nine count is a nine count Here is a run of the mill nine count xx / Kxxx/ Qxxx / Axx. Suppose partner has 5-5 or better in the reds or perhaps 5-5 or better in the reds, this nominal nine count becomes a beast of a different hue according to partner having the reds or the blacks. If he has the blacks we must bid 3C and hope the weather stays fine, but if he has no more than six losers in the reds we want to be in 4H even if he has only a ten count Although it is not entirely relevant, and at the risk of using up the gigabites of the ether I will relate an unusual hand which came up ten days ago in our winter league. The hands are computer dealt for us by a friend and we suspect his computer has a sense of humour Board 23 Dealer South Game all - A107643 K765432 - K743

I take on board all of Straube's arguments for five card majors. If I were to say just one thing in favour of four card majors it would be this. In a competitive auction it is the first side to find their fit that has the advantage. If a side does not find its fit it may lose the board. A good example of this is Wagner, legal in the States and only recently legalised this side of the pond. 2D shows a weak two in either major NOTHING ELSE If responder has four cards in both majors with either a jolly good hand or a load of tram tickets he bids 4D if he wants partner to play the hand, or 4C if he has tenaces and likes the idea of the known hand going down in dummy. This is sound TNT theory. Imagine fourth hand's plight, his side could have more or less any total point count and could have a fit in any one of FOUR suits. I feel that such methods should not be used in the lower echelons of the game just as VFP should be allowed amongst serious players of a better standard.(No weak player has ever objected to playing against VFP, it is not destructive as many modern conventions are (Sorry hobby horse) If it is so essential to get a natural suit in as quickly as possible, particularly in the majors it seems sensible to bid four and five card majors With regard to a Blue style 2C bid and A Precision style 2C, Blue always believed that it was more essential to introduce a four card major rather than a five card minor into the auction. In reply to a Precision 2C the average responding hand will be about 9-10 points with a four card major and probably a doubleton club. You could be wrong to bid and wrong to pass, which, of course, was the fault in a 13-17 no trump, however kaleidoscopic the continuations might be. Oops sorry! Delete kaleidoscopic and replace it with "well worked out" My 2C bid is as follows:- With 6-4 choose between 1M and 2C according to the comparative strength of the two suits. 2C denies a four card major shows a six card club suit,and the responses are transfers. 2D is a transfer to hearts opener bids 2H if he would have passed a non forcing Blue Club 2H bid. Other rebids show stronger hands to taste In all sequences if you can incorporate shortage showing bid and splinters you will be ahead of the field. If you bid a new suit over a transfer such as 1H 1NT(clubs) 2D you show five hearts four diamonds and three clubs (and of course a shortage in the unbid suit) By analogy 2C 2D(hearts) 2S shows a shortage in diamonds(repeat cue a void) This 2S bid will normally show a fragment in spades but of course opener could be 2317. All, but all, jumps are splinters unless defined otherwise( 1D 2S weak two) In the sequence 1H 1S 3m etc 3m game try with primary spade support and shortage in that minor. (you can bid games on combined 22 counts and stay out of games with the magic 25 when you kave KQx or KJx opposite a singletont Of course you cannot do this in Acol or SAYC, but you wouldn't be reading this if you were an acolyte

I am totally in agreement with ArtK78. This has been exactly my experience after playing Blue club for many years

I am pleased That my apology, sincerely meant, has been largely accepted. The whole thing seems to have generated a rash of comment, which I suppose is to be welcomed. I have always played a weak no trump and four card majors. In the present climate there is a huge weight of opinion in favour of a strong no trump and five card majors. I would be very interested to hear the argument in favour of this

I accept this criticism. It is fully justified. I suppose I bridled when someone dismissed 45 years of work in five lines. I apologise and will try to be less incisive in future. I accept that many of the people who prefer to be anonymous may be much better players and theoreticians than I am Returning to technicalities page 6 of Reese's book. " xx / AQx /Axx / KJxxx Holding three fair diamonds, open 1D Qxx / K10x/ Kx / AJ10xx With all round strength and only two diamonds, open 1NT." We went further than that after more accidents and refrained from opening xxx in diamonds when partner led from Kx I was not referring to myself as a one eyed King. I was referring to precision players, which of course I had no right to do. If there are world class players who play Precision, there must be advantage elsewhere in the system gained from opening a short diamond. That I cannot know, I know Precision but I have never played it

Glen, I am sure you will know that 1D on a non-existent suit is common in Precision, because they play five card majors In Blue 1D on a doubleton is very rare. It has to be precisely 3325 distribution. Previously I would have apologised for my imaginative metaphor, but Nige1 has warned me that I must expect caustic comment

Diamonds If a Precision player tells you that he is quite happy that his 1D opening bid may hold 1-7 diamonds, there is nothing to be said, but one cannot help thinking that in the land of the blind the one eyed man is King I gave up opening two card diamond suits largely as a result of the following amusing specimen from the archives Dealer North, E W vul Pairs scoring 652 K73 98 AKQ108 K7 AJ943 65 QJ984 1075432 AK6 J43 - Q108 A102 QJ 97532 W N E S 1D 1S 1NT Pass Pass 2H Pass Pass 2NT 3H Dble 3S Pass Pass Dble All pass On an apparent misfit it is often good technique to lead a trump. If it loses a trick, that trick often comes back. I led a trump. Not in my wildest nightmares could I have imagined that the opponents would make 3Sx +2 with the aid of six tricks in partner’s “suit” It was not very amusing at the time Your average common or garden expert is proficient in counting up to the magic figure of 25. But if he is playing an amorphous 1C or 1D he is floundering like a stranded fish if there is a minor suit slam. Learned treatises on Slam Bidding will contain 70% of slams in spades, 25% in hearts and the occasional carefully contrived oddity which comes to peaceful rest in six of a minor My legal club system has 1D as 4+ diamonds. The response of 2D is forcing with primary support, a game or slam try, asking first for a shortage (Do not dismiss this with a knee jerk reaction. It is sound theory ) In my illegal variable forcing pass system progey of the same club system I have a natural club and a natural diamond bid. That takes a bit of doing. It requires a bit more imagination than the agony of deciding between Flannery and Reverse Flannery. On the assumption that it is improbable that people will be interested, I will refrain from the boring details

Thank you nige1 for telling me that antipathy is the norm on this web site. Without that knowledge one could easily become discouraged

Mingoni People speak highly of the Italian Blue team book. If you see a book with an author you know and a second author that you have never heard of you can bet your bottom dollar that it was the unknown who wrote it and the expert card player may or may not have checked it carefully, Bertie Bloggs may or may not be a good theoretician. When I read Vernes’ “levees totales” and wrote my “TNT” in English. I sent it to Reese knowing that if he liked it he would publish it under his own name and perhaps offer me 10% of the proceeds. He did not go that far, he wanted me to pay him to read it The “Sunday morning bus to West Kilburn” has the meaning that you can’t remember what you did the previous night and you don’t remember where you were, but you do know where you are going because it says that on the front of the bus. Italian cue bidding takes about twenty years to learn, and requires digging yourself out of dozens of elephant traps before you graduate. In Reese’s book on the the Blue Club he alludes briefly to “ uneconomical cue bidding2 suggesting that this is something which the expert bidder might aspire to. Take my word for it, it is a recipe for total disaster Mingoni has two excellent Sunday morning buses in his book Kxx Axxx Kxx Ax Ax Kxx AJxxx KQxx 1NT 2D 2NT 3C 4C 4D 4H 4S 5D 5H 5S 6C Opener with his first three bids has shown 15 points with 3325 distribution. Thereafter we have cue bidding. Junior hand’s bid of 5D is suggesting a grand (partner is the boss) 5H CONFIRMS THE POSSIBILITY OF A GRAND. (partner is perfect and a grand has a snowball’s chance in hell This is not up for discussion as one might argue the merits of Flannery and Reverse Flannery. This is CARVED IN STONE.. If you do not understand or disagree go to jail, go directly to jail, do not pass Go do not collect £200. One could be forgiven for assuming that Mingoni has made a mistake. Let us be generous and look at his next example of a slam after a 1NT opening bid Axx QJx Kx AJxx Kxxx Ax AKxx QJxx 1NT 2D 3C 3D 3NT 4C 4D 4H 4S 5D 5H 6C As before, and as always, junior hand has shown the boss what he has got. In this case up to 3NT he has shown 16-17 and two four card minors. The bid of 5D which forces the partnership to a small slam but does not bid it Is A GRAND SLAM TRY. If you do not believe it you have just landed on a snake and must start again. It appears that the ethos of this website is to dismiss other people’s ideas as summarily as possible in order to mount one’s own hobby horse as quickly as possible. These examples are on pp 242,243 of Mingoni’s book. Judge for yourselves

Johnu makes the point that one must appreciate the strengths and weaknesses of Blue club and give a lot of thought to such weaknesses as are bound to occur. That is the point. Not everyone will agree as to what those changes should be. For example transfers in response to 1M are about 57 times better than Jacoby, I have given a glimpse of these elsewhere on this site. According to the cognoscenti these can only be used if RHO doubles 1M. I hope their opponents are more obliging than mine

I started playing Blue Club when Reese's book came out and have been playing it ever since. Over 45 years a system does not remain static. All systems have their strength and weaknesses. If there is something that Acol does better than Blue Club why not use it? People are agonising what to do with 5-4 in the majors, Acol has no problem. The 13-17 no trump was mind bogglingly clever with its intricate 2C and 2D responses. That was until you had picked up a few 8-9 counts (not a surprising hand for responder to hold) and done the wrong thing. Then you began to realise that you were being outbid by a simple Acol no trump. The 2C bid was another horror Kxx / x / xxx / AKJxxx and AJxxx / x / x AKQxxx were both 2C bids If responder held four spades to Axxx or Kxxx the first hand wants to play in 2C and the second in 4S. For about eight years I refused to change anything from the Blue Club book. Everyone wants to paint some go faster stripes on his new car after he has had it for a couple of months. Personalising the system is almost de rigueur

Thank you Zelandakh

Neither 1C nor 1D are explained. I assume 1C is strong and perhaps 1D is a typo for 1H In a two club system "senior hand" is a large bunch of bananas. In a one club system "senior hand" is a fundamental concept which underlies all sequences. In a two club auction both players make a series of predetermined noises until one or other of the players grabs the auction by the scruff of the neck, brings out the old faithful 4NT saying "tell me how many controls you have and I will do the business" Senior hand is,in fact,the player who knows most about the other hand. After an artificial 1C, opener is the senior hand, partner will try to make descriptive responses and rebids in an effort to define his hand within closer and closer limits until the "captain of the ship" announces where he is going Any other limited opening bid (not 1C) automatically confers seniority upon partner who might have anything between 6 and 26 points. In Blue Club style cue bidding there are occasions where senior hand will abandon seniority and pass the baton to partner. A simple bog standard 1C sequence might be 1C (16+) 1H ( natural game going values) 1NT (controls?) 2H/2S (x/y controls) 3H (trump quality?) 4 any (trump quality) 4H This is open to partnership discussion, but a partnership might agree that asking for controls and trump quality is in itself an slam try which is not the whole story. Junior hand is told " If you have lots of fillers which have not been shown, and a useful side suit or a shortage , feel free to bid on" This was common in Blue Club However do not let this exception confuse the issue When partner opens 1C (unlimited), you try to describe your hand, and if later you get up on your hind legs and ask him (the unlimited hand) how many controls he has, this is ridiculous. A good analogy would be a flea trying to rape an elephant MInorwood is indispensable. There are two rules that players should consider 1/ Only senior hand uses MW 2/ In responding to a limited opening bid it is possible to construct a 4m bid which is invitational and in a different sequence it can forcing. If it is forcing 4m is MW .If it is invitational four of the other minor is MW

A Multi 1C This includes three types of hand 1/ a 7-11 hand from which the following hand patterns have been removed A/ a six card major (opens 2D) B/ a five card diamond suit (opens 1D) C/ 4-4 or better in the majors (opens 2C) D/ 5-5 or better in any two suits at the top of the range, no more than six losers (opens 2H, 2S, 2NT) E/ a flat 9-11 , non vul (opens 1NT) F/ 11 points with a five card major (opens 1M) The result of all of this is that this hand will usually hold 3+ clubs, (but it is not guaranteed) 2/ a normal 2C opener in a one club system, which includes A/ 10-15 a six card club suit B/ 12-15 5+ clubs and another four card suit 3/ A/ a 12-15 no trump , non vul (prefer one of a suit if sensible) In reply to this 1C partner distinguishes between opening values and non-opening values. The response of 1D shows opening values and is a game try. If the opponents intervene double replaces the 1D game try 1C 1D ? 1H 7-10 five hearts 1S 7-10 five hearts 1NT 7-8 non vul 7-11 vul no 5 card major, nor both majors 2C 10-15 six clubs transfer continuations (not game forcing) 2D,2H,2S - 4 of that suit 5+ clubs, 12-15 (game forcing) 2NT 12-15 no trump non vul Less than opening values 1C ? 1H 7-11 five hearts 1S 7-11 five spades 1NT a normal 2NT response, could have majors 2NT by opener is Stayman 2C 7-11 five clubs 2D, 2H, 2S six cards, weak two values This Multi 1C is for use in a VFP system. In a basic VFP system the bid of 1C shows non-opening values. Opponents bid constructively , doubling 1C with a 1C opener (in their system). When 1C is a genuine opening bid, the structure of the opponents’ bidding is based on overcall values. Against a Multi 1C bid the opponents will try to get the best of both worlds. In theory their bidding will be less accurate

W N E S Pass Pass! 1C Pass 1D Dble Pass Pass Rdble Pass 1S Pass Pass Dble West had waited a long time for this. It went two down for 300. Perhaps all it proves is that is fallacious to try and penalise the opponents at the one level when the have all the one level to choose from

North K643 / J52 / 532 / Q109 East Q5 / Q94 / QJ98 /K875 The bidding was W

North K643 / J52 / 532 / Q109 East Q5 / Q94 / QJ98 /K875 The bidding was W

Over the years keen rivals have tried all sorts of defence to VFP in the hope of proving it unviable. For several years one pair have been playing a variable pass over our variable pass in the hope of catching us bidding on nothing. This had never happened, or at least it hadn't happened until last Monday Board 11 Love all Dealer south South J1072 / K1063 / 64 / J32 West A96 / A87 / AK107 / A64 North

Over the years keen rivals have tried all sorts of defences to VFP in an effort to prove its fallacy. One defence which has been in place for several years is to produce a variable forcing pass over our pass. The idea is to catch us bidding on nothing. This had never come up until last Monday Board 11 Love all Dealer South K643 J52 532 Q109 A98 Q5 A87 Q94 AK107 QJ98 A64 K875 J1072 K1063 64 J32 W N E S Pass Pass! 1C Pass 1D Dble Pass Pass Rdble Pass 1S Pass Pass Dble All pass West thought that Christmas had come at last. The contract went two off for 300 and they made 430 in the other room. Perhaps the only fallacy that this demonstrates is that it is a waste of time trying to penalise the opponents if they have all of the one level to choose from

Any strong club bid is vulnerable to controlled psyches. Many players have abandoned a strong club as a result of this. A precision 1D bid is also something of a Aunt Sally, because it is so imprecise. It is easy to devise a system of overcalls on an either/or principle and start with a double on any sound opening bid

You are so right, it would never have seen the light of day. How do you go about self publishing on the net