nullve

1) nullve(S)-nullve(N): 1♣(1)-2♣(2) 2♦(3)-2♥(4) 2♠(5)-2N(6) 3♣(7)-3♠(8) 4♣(9)-4♥(10) 4♠(11)-5♣(12) 6♦(13)-P (1) "10+, NATish unBAL" or "11-13/17-19/23+ BAL" (2) "13+, primary C, unBAL" (3) relay (GF) (4) "13-15" (5) relay (6) "1-suited or (3)4+ H" (7) relay (8) 13-15, either 1435 or 0445 (9) slam interest, no C fit (10) 1435 (11) Parity Key Card Blackwood in D (12) odd # of key cards, no trump Q (13) contract 2) nullve(S)-nullve(N) 1♣-2♣-(2♠/3♠) X*-P * penalty

What was it like to play against him?

Maybe [hv=pc=n&s=sakhq973dqj9653c6&n=sq95hak62d2cakqj7]133|200[/hv] South-North 1♦-2♣ 2♦(1)-2♥ 4♣(2)-4♦(3) 4N(4)-5♣(5) 6♥-P 1) Assuming a style where 2♥ would promise extras 2) Splinter (what else?) 3) cue 4) RKC 5) 0 or 3 key cards ?

So the endplay wouldn't work (on the lead of the ♣Q) if South had a spade less and a club more. Nice!

Not 2♣

A very (too?) major-oriented strong club system with 1♦/1M/2m/2N openings largely as in Suicide club, an old (and probably not very good!) Swedish Club-like system of mine that I've mentioned before: P = "normal" or "11-13 BAL"* [including 11-13, 5M(332)?] 1♣ = "16+ unBAL" or "17+ BAL" [no longer Swedish Club-like] 1♦ = "10-15, 5M5-OM" 1♥ = "10-15, either 6+ H, 4H5+m, 44(41) or 13(54)" 1♠ = "10-15, either 6+ S, 4S5+m3-H, 4144 or 31(54)" (Maybe the 1M openings can be switched.) 1N = "14-16 BAL"** 2m = "10-15", 6+m3-S3-H [5 Om allowed?] 2M = Weak 2N = "10-15", 5(+?)D5(+?)C [i hate the wide range now] * including 22(54) and (say) 10-12 hcp ** including 22(54) and (say) 13-15 hcp (I know some of you have toyed with similar 1♦/1M openings.) Relay stuff with some ideas borrowed from Zelandakh's system and Ambra: 1♦-?: 1♥ = INV+ relay (...) 1♦-1♥?: 1M-?: (...) 1♠ = NAT 1N = INV+ relay 2♣ = < INV, "P/C" (...) 1♥-1N; ?: 1♠-1N; ?: Will correct errors if I find any.

Style question: 1♦-(1♠)-3♦ = ? In particular, what is partner supposed to do with 18-19 BAL? Pass? Not pass below 3N?

1♦(1)-1♥(2) 1N(3)-2♣(4) 2♦(5)-P (1) "10+, NATish unBAL" OR "20-22 BAL" (2) "0+, (3)4+ S, may have longer H unless GF values" (3) 9-14, 2-S5D5C OR "10-12", 2-S3-H6+D OR "16-18, any (unBAL)" OR "20-22 BAL" (4) "8+, relay" (5) "10-12", 2-S3-H6+D

1♥-1♠(GF relay); ?: 1N = 4+ S or 3-suited ...2♣ ......2♦ = 1- S, 3-suited ......2♥ = 4 S, 3-suited ......2♠ = 5+H5+S ......2N+ = 5+H4S, 2-suited 2♣ = 4+ D, 2-suited ...2♦ ......2♥ = 4H5+D, 2-suited ......2♠ = 5+H5+D ......2N+ = 5+H4D, 2-suited 2♦ = 6+ H, 1-suited 2♥ = 4H5+C, 2-suited 2♠ = 5+H5+C 2N+ = 5+H4C, 2-suited 1♠-1N(GF relay); ?: 2♣ = 4+ D, not 5440 ...2♦ ......2♥ = 1- H, 3-suited ......2♠ = 4S5+D, 2-suited ......2N = 5+S5+D ......3♣+ = 5+S4D, 2-suited 2♦ = 4+ H ...2♥ ......2♠ = 3-suited ......2N = 5+S5+H ......3♣+ = 5+S4H, 2-suited 2♥ = 6+ S, 1-suited 2♠ = 4S5+C, 2-suited 2N = 5+S5+C 3♣+ = 5+S4C, 2-suited

Welcome back, straube!

1. ♦A, diamond ruff, club towards dummy 2. 3N 3. 4♥ 4. 1♣ 5. P (partner has almost certainly four hearts, so likely 1453-ish shape) 6. 3♥ (mixed raise)

Welland-Auken use the 1♠ as ART GF (with shape resolution more or less as in Symmetric Relay, often followed by Optional RKC) in their version of T-Walsh. But 1♠ is not a mandatory response with GF values. See e.g. the 2N response (which they seem to use as a right-siding device) on this CC from 2016: http://clairebridge.com/textes/systemes_budapest_2016/GEROT_Auken-Welland.pdf

I'd be shocked if total tricks > total trumps on this deal,mainly because the ♦KQ are likely of no use on offence and there doesn't seem to be (what Larry Cohen calls) positive adjustment factors to fully compensate for that. So e.g. if partner has 3415 shape and we can make at least 12 tricks in hearts, opps should by LoTT not be able to make more than 4 tricks in diamonds. So I agree with mikeh that pass (in tempo) is likely the winning call if we can trust partner to reopen on any minimum hand with 0-1 diamonds.

So e.g. 1♥-2♣ 3♥(1)-3♠(2) 4N(3)-5♣(4) 7♥(5)-7N(6) P 1) setting H as trumps 2) cue (A,K,singleton or void) 3) RKC 4) 0 or 3 key cards 5) counting 13 tricks 6) logic

Unusual problem! This would have been a potential problem hand had East passed. (1♠-(P)-1N-(P); 2♥-(P), now what?) I voted Pass (which strictly denies positive values the way I have played it). My plan: 1♠-(P)-P-(P) (makes?) 1♠-(P)-P-(1N); P-(P)-P (suboptimal maybe, but it seems I've already done well (opposite a partner who seems to have 5S4H and who will often be 5422) by not responding 1N) 1♠-(P)-P-(1N); X/bid-(P)-? (easy decision) 1♠-(P)-P-(2m); P-(P)-P (yippee!) 1♠-(P)-P-(2♥); P-(P)-X ("takeout", counting on partner to pass with 5422/54(31))

An Ambra-like structure I came up with ideas from Symmetric Relay: https://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/77381-qpstrength-ask-without-scanning/page__view__findpost__p__933727 I (nullve-nullve) don't play this in my 2/1-like system (I think the MIN ("10-15"?) and MAX ("16-21"?) ranges there would have to be too wide), but still something inspired by Garozzo's GAR. My auction: [hv=pc=n&s=saj752h6da852cak4&n=sk6haq52dkq93cq32]133|200[/hv] nullve(S)-nullve(N): 1♠(1)-2♣(2) 3♣(3)-3♦(4) 3♠(5)-4♣(6) 4♥(7)-4♠(8) 5♣(9)-5♥(10) 5N(11)-6♦(12) P (1) "10-21, 5+ S, unBAL" (2) 3-way (NAT, a not-too-unBAL GF hand or an INV+ raise) (3) "16-18, (3)4+ D, not 5S5D" (4) relay (GF) (5) 16-18, 5143/5044 (6) slam try not in D (7) 5143 (8) Parity Key Card Blackood in D (9) odd # of key cards, no trump Q (10) ♣K ask (11) ♣K, no ♠Q (12) contract

1) I believe the most frequent shape around the table is West: 2272 North: 2524 East: 3433 and that total tricks >= total trumps because of the double fit and all my quacks and intermediates being in our suits. The true shape around the table is probably close to this, so by LoTT it's probably better to play 4♠ than defending 4♦X. If I double ("takeout"), partner will pass with this shape (2524), so I'm going to bid 4♠ instead. 2) Pass!

[hv=pc=n&s=skq73h7da952ckj94&d=s&a=1sp2hp?]133|200[/hv] :(

Opener is strong enough to bypass 3N in both cases, so I think the auction could start either 1♠-2♦ 3♥-3N 4♣-etc. or 1♠-2♣ 2♦-3♦ 4♣-etc. So bidding slam is easy. Determining that 7♦ is a poor grand, however, e.g. after ...-4N* 5♣**-5N*** 6♣****-? * RKC(♦) ** 0 or 3 key cards *** specific king ask **** ♣K , is not so easy. .

3♣ (systemic)

2♦. The only systemic call, like opening 1♠ with AKxxx x AQxx Kxx.

With 5134 and INV values only: 1♠-1N; 2♣-2♠; 2N = INV, 5S4C3-H With 5134 and GF values: 1♠-1N; 3♣ = NAT GF With 5044 and INV values: either as with 5134 or 1♠-1N; 2♦, intending to rebid either 2N (INV, 5S4D3-H) or 3♣ (INV, 5044?) With 5044 and GF values: either as with 5134 or 1♠-1N; 3♦ = NAT GF With 5035 and INV values: 1♠-1N; 2♣-2♠; 3♣ = INV, 5+ C With 5035 and GF values: 1♠-1N; 3♣ = NAT GF ------- My guess is that partner intended 3♦ as F3♠ with 6034 (e.g. AKxxxx-void-Axx-Axxx). My call: 4♠.

Even if (1♥)-P-(P)-1N = 11-15 (or so, but definitely not 15-17!) ?

... and Good/Bad not available in response to my double I'm going to bid 2N (16-18 BAL-ish?) now.

It may depend on the system, e.g. on how I show approximately this many hcp and a balanced hand, whether 2♦ promises 5+ D and whether we play Good/Bad.