nullve

From https://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/71848-verhees-van-prooijen-2m-openings/: Do others agree with DinDIP here? 2♣ on a 5-1 fit with a 5431 9-count opposite a classic Precision (6+ C or 5C4M) 2♣ opening is already so bad at the forms of scoring I care the most about (not IMPs!) that getting this decision right more often is really what counts. I wonder if Zelandakh's transfer structure over a Polish/classic Precision 2♣ opening could be modified to work also over a canapé version.

nullve(E)-nullve(W): 1N(1)-2♦(2) 2♠(3)-2N(4) 3N(5)-4♣(6) 4♦(7)-4♠(8) 5♣(9)-5♦(10) 5♥(11)-6♥(12) P (1) "14-16 BAL" (2) "5+ H or strong" (3) 4-5 H, not 3433 (4) strong relay (5) 3442 (6) puppet to 4♦ (7) forced (8) Parity Key Card Blackwood with H as trumps (9) odd # of key cards, no trump Q (10) ♦K ask (11) no ♦K (12) contract

MAFIA = MAjors FIrst Always, which is not the same as which looks like Walsh.

From yesterday's Zenith Daylong Reward (MP): [hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|nullve,~Mwest,~Mnorth,~Meast|md|3SKQ96HT98742D52C2,SJ75HAQ3DAK74C986,S32HKJ5DJT863CQJT,SAT84H6DQ9CAK7543|sv|e|rh||ah|Board%209|mb|P|mb|1C|an|Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20!C;%2011-21%20HCP;%2012-22%20total%20points|mb|4N|an|%20|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|C6|pc|CT|pc|CK|pc|C2|pc|CA|pc|H2|pc|C9|pc|CJ|pc|C7|pc|H4|pc|C8|pc|CQ|pc|S2|pc|SA|pc|S6|pc|S7|pc|C3|pc|H7|pc|H3|pc|D3|pc|C5|pc|D2|pc|D7|pc|S3|pc|C4|pc|D5|pc|HQ|pc|HK|pc|S8|pc|SK|pc|S5|pc|HJ|pc|H8|pc|HA|pc|H5|pc|H6|pc|DK|pc|D6|pc|D9|pc|S9|pc|D4|pc|DT|pc|DQ|pc|H9|pc|ST|pc|SQ|pc|SJ|pc|D8|pc|HT|pc|DA|pc|DJ|pc|S4|]400|300[/hv] Score: 92.6 % [hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|nullve,~Mwest,~Mnorth,~Meast|md|1S64HQT653DJT6C974,SAQ975H94DQ73CT83,S32HJ872DK982CA52,SKJT8HAKDA54CKQJ6|sv|o|rh||ah|Board%2011|mb|4N|an|%20|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|C3|pc|CA|pc|CK|pc|C4|pc|HJ|pc|HA|pc|H6|pc|H4|pc|CQ|pc|C7|pc|C8|pc|C2|pc|CJ|pc|C9|pc|CT|pc|C5|pc|C6|pc|H3|pc|D3|pc|H8|pc|HK|pc|HQ|pc|H9|pc|H2|pc|SJ|pc|S4|pc|S5|pc|S2|pc|ST|pc|S6|pc|S9|pc|S3|pc|S8|pc|H5|pc|S7|pc|D2|pc|SK|pc|D6|pc|SA|pc|H7|pc|SQ|pc|D8|pc|D4|pc|DT|pc|D7|pc|D9|pc|DA|pc|DJ|pc|D5|pc|HT|pc|DQ|pc|DK|]400|300[/hv] Score: 100 % [hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|nullve,~Mwest,~Mnorth,~Meast|md|4S876H43D82CQJT963,SKQ93HK6DQ975CA72,ST5HAT987DT43CK54,SAJ42HQJ52DAKJ6C8|sv|o|rh||ah|Board%2014|mb|1D|an|Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20!D;%2011-21%20HCP;%2012-22%20total%20points|mb|4N|an|%20|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|D5|pc|D3|pc|DK|pc|D2|pc|DA|pc|D8|pc|D9|pc|D4|pc|DJ|pc|C3|pc|D7|pc|DT|pc|D6|pc|C6|pc|DQ|pc|CK|pc|SK|pc|S5|pc|S4|pc|S6|pc|C2|pc|C4|pc|C8|pc|CQ|pc|H3|pc|H6|pc|HA|pc|H5|pc|C5|pc|S2|pc|CJ|pc|CA|pc|HK|pc|H7|pc|H2|pc|H4|pc|S3|pc|ST|pc|SA|pc|S7|pc|HQ|pc|C9|pc|S9|pc|H8|pc|HJ|pc|CT|pc|C7|pc|H9|pc|SJ|pc|S8|pc|SQ|pc|HT|]400|300[/hv] Score: 96.4 %

Why would anyone pass in this position unless they thought LoTT is total BS? :)

I don't have very detailed knowledge of Zelandakh's system, Z Club, so maybe I shouldn't have a very strong opinion about it. But I've always thought, even after a lengthy discussion about it in a thread back in 2017, that the non-forcing two-over-one responses to 1♠ must be one of the major problem areas in the system. (I might have adopted his INV+ 1N relay already if I didn't.) So here's an idea: Turn the system into a true canapé system except that 1♦ still covers most 10-17 minor 2-suiters. The point is to be able to play 1M-2♣ = < INV, 2+ C, P/C, especially when M=♠. Responder will then be able to respond 2♣ to 1♠ on the vast majority of positive-but-less-than-invitaitonal hands without spade support, and Opener should have an easy rebid (or pass) on virtually all minimum hands. The non-forcing 2♦ and 2♥ responses can then also be more defined, which must be a good thing. I may have had some experience with such a 2♣ response to a canapé 1M opening already. As a junior I invented a Swedish Club-like system ("Suicide Club") that at one point had an opening structure that looked something like 1♣ = 9-11 BAL, 4S3-H OR 16+ unBAL or 17+ BAL 1♦ = 11-15, (exactly) 5 M OR 12-13 BAL 1♥ = 11-15, either 6+ H, 4H5+m, 4H(441) OR 13(54) 1♠ = 11-15, either 6+ S, 4S5+O, 4144 OR 31(54) 1N = 14-16 BAL 2m = 11-15, 3-S3-H6+m 2M = 6-10, 6M3-OM (massively abused, I'm afraid) 2N = 11-15, 5+D5+C others: more or less standard. In response to 1M I used 1N as a (INV+?) relay and 2♣ as P/C (and < INV?) and I seem to recall that that was very easy to play. (Why wouldn't it be?)

Aargh, I meant to write 1x-1y [2z-1]-2z 2N-P. Corrected now.

Are you talking about a multi-way 2♣ rebid over 1♦-1♠ (when "both hand types" might refer to AKQ95 --- QT8732 A8 and AKQ Ax QJTxxxxx --- ) or 1M-1N ("immediate GF rebids")? Maybe it doesn't matter, since I play a kind of limited Gazzilli 2♣ (inspired by what Bocchi-Duboin played over 1M-1N) and an immediate GF 2N+ structure in both cases. The difference, which has to do with the fact that 1♦ is "10+" (with responses starting at 0) and 1M only "10-21" (with positive responses starting at ~ 5), is that 1♦-1♠; 2♣ = "19-21, any" if strong 1♦-1♠; 2N+ = "22+" (GF) 1M-1N; 2♣: "16-18, any" if strong 1M-1N; 2N+ = "19-21" (GF). Regarding transfer rebids: I played transfer rebids over 1M-1N in a regular partnership a long time ago. (See here, inside the spoiler) Then nullve-nullve started playing transfer rebids also over 1♣-1R*, * T-Walsh 1♦-1M and 1♥-1♠. At first I thought this was a huge improvement over standard, but then I realised 1) that I frequently ended up in 2N after 1x-1y; [2z-1]-2z 2N-P when standard players would have been able to stop (but sometimes at the risk of missing game) in 2z after 1x-1y 2z-P. 2) how hard bidding can get after e.g. 1x-1y [2x-1]-GFR when Opener has not further limited his hand. Then I learned about Gazzilli and how it helps solve both of these problems. I now use two Gazzilli-like rebids (1N and 2♣) over 1♦-1M to better be able to handle 1M responses on tradtionally subpostive hands. The focus is then on partscore bidding ratther than slam bidding, of course. My relay structure is not quite as bad as +4 since Opener has already shown his range. The ranges are, for each given shape, always defined in terms of (non-walrus) hcp, but I could have (although I suspect the system would suffer) defined them in terms of (say) controls or AKQ points instead. And a range-then-shape approach is not inherently less economical than a shape-then-range approach.

These weak jump reverses (or what to call them), even similar double-jump reverses 1♣-1♦*; 3♠ * = H and 1♦-1♥; 1♠, were part of the Bocchi-Duboin system (2010 book). And I believe Versace-Lauria play them.

Yes, my mistake. Corrected now.

See last parts of https://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/85172-a-norwegian-wood/page__view__findpost__p__1018946

Responder would have to bid 3N over 3♥, intending to play there opposite (16-18 and) 4252 or (15-17 and) 6D4S(21). (Yes, 4♥ could then be a much better contract. :() I haven't really thought out a system other than "natural" (which is hardly optimal!*) after that, but the idea has always been that Opener should be able to bid again with every other shape, including (15-17 and) 4063. * There is also more space available for the remaining hand types after ...3♥-3N(T/P opposite 4252 or 6S4D(21)) than after ...3♥-3♠(relay) now that Opener can no longer have 6D4S(21). I can't! Asker will usually only know about * the (usually) exact shape and (non-walrus) 3-point range; * (the number of) key cards and the trump queen. (Yes, a suit could be wide open.) I hope so! My relay structure started as a GF 2N+ structure over 1M*-1N** * "10-21, 5+ M, unBAL" ** "5-12, NF" and was inspired by Bocchi-Duboin's 2001(?) card. I've long wondered what 2N+ structure others would come up with given that Teller has already shown * what his primary suit is (for some definition of 'primary suit' that deals with suits of equal length); * an unbalanced (but possibly semibalanced) hand; * approximate strength. I guess most regulars in this forum would start with a (+4?) SR-like structure, i.e something like 2N = 5+x4+u or 3-suited 3♣ = 5+x4+v, not 3-suited 3♦ = 1-suited 3♥ = 5+x5+w 3♠ = 5+x4w, high shortage, not 3-suited 3N = 5x4w22 or 7x4w11 [unplayable, cannot F1 with 5x4w22 shape] 4♣ = 5x4w31 [unplayable, cannot bypass 3N with this shape] 4♦ = 6x4w21 4♥ = 6x4w30 4♠ = 7x4w20 etc., and work from there. Of course, I don't have to play essentially the same structure in all these other situations...

Done! :)

Another example, this time with 4♠ as a -wood: [hv=pc=n&w=sakq95hdqt8732ca8&e=s73haqj8dk65cqj74]266|100[/hv] 1♦(1)-1♠(2) 1N(3)-2♣(4) 2N(5)-3♣(6) 3♥(7)-3♠(8) 4♠(9)-5♣(10) 6♦(11)-P (1) "10+, NAT(ish) unBAL" or "20-22 BAL" (2) "0+, (3)4+ H. < 4 S unless GF" (3) 9-14, 2-H5D5C OR "10-12, 2-H6+D" OR "16-18, any" OR "20-22 BAL, < 5 H" (4) "8+, relay" (5) "16-18, either (3)4+ S or 1-suited" (6) relay (GF) (7) 4252, 6D4S(21), 8+D3(!)S or 6+D4+S0H (8) relay [20 March 2021: Responder should just bid 3N(=T/P opposite 4252 or 6D4S(21)) here and miss slam opposite the perfecto AKxx-x-AQxxxx-Kx] (9) 14-16, 5062 (and simultaneously a -wood) (10) D is trumps, odd KC outside H, no trump Q* (11) contract (happens to not be a very good one, but...) * assuming 4N = even KC outside H ...5♣ = trump Q ask [i'm not sure exactly when it should be used. Suggestions?] ......5♦ = no trump Q, D is trumps ......5♥+: I have to think more about this. Suggestions? ......[if 5♣ can be bid with sufficient KC if D is trumps but insufficient KC if S is trumps, then the following scheme, which is similar to the one in the OP over 4♥(-wood)-4♠(even KC); 4N(trump Q ask), will not work: ......5♥ = trump Q, D is trumps ......5♠ = no trump Q, S is trumps ......5N+ = trump Q, S is trumps] 5♣ = odd KC outside H, no trump Q, D is trumps 5♦ = odd KC outside H, trump Q, D is trumps 5♥ = odd KC outside H, no trump Q, S is trumps 5♠ = odd KC outside H, trump Q, S is strumps --- I wonder if there's a place for this kind of -wood outside my system (which I realise very few will ever play). How about (2♦)-4♣*-(P)-4♦** (P)-4M-(P)-? * Leaping Michaels, so 5+M5+C, F1 ** asking for the major ?

Which one?

Idea: In a natural(ish) system, open the shorter (5c) suit with 6(+)-5/5-6(+) shape. This could help solve two problems: 1) In some Italian 2/1-like systems 3-level jump reverses e.g. of the form 1x-1y 3z*, * y>z>x shows 6+x5z and a hand too weak for a normal reverse. I believe this is a much better use of the jump reverse than mini-Splinter, but unfortunately the bidding is sometimes already too high. It seems like Responder would be able to pass 3z more often if it showed 5(+)x6+z instead. 2) In my (range-first) relay structure I currently resolve (6511) at 4♦ (more than low enough IMO) but (6520) at 4♠ (too high). A solution, after a 1x opening with 5x6z, could be to treat 5x6z20 (currently resolved at 4♠) as equivalent to (a very dissimilar shape such as) e.g. 6x0z34 (currently resolved at 4♣) when resolving shape, but rely on Asker's ability to "guess" (by looking at his own hand and drawing conclusions from opps' silence) which of these two shapes Teller actually has. (Guessing whether Teller has e.g. 6x5z20 or 6x0z34, after a 1x opening (and no canapé with this shape), could be significantly more difficult.)

If this (purely qualitiative) argument that "invite (relatively) heavy, accept (relatively) light" > "invite (relatively) light, accept (relatively) heavy" is valid, there must be, for every "invite heavy, accept light" strategy short of "invite even if you clearly belong in game, accept always" (= the ultimate invitational strategy?), a better strategy consisting of even sounder invites and more aggressive acceptances. Or am I missing something?

In what sense?

Responder will respond 2♥ (P/C) to 2♦ on the same set of hands whether a) 2♦ = Weak 2♥ or Intermediate 2♠ 2♥ = Intermediate 2♥ or Weak 2♠ or b) 2♦ = Weak Multi 2♥ = Intermediate Major Flash, but he will obviously respond 2♠ (also P/C) to 2♥ on a much larger set of hands (and 2N on much smaller set of hands) in a) than in b). So if the bidding goes 2♥-2N in b), it will likely go either 2♥-2♠ or (less frequently?) 2♥-2N in a).

Consider how often Responder needs to relay with 2N if 2♦ = Weak Multi 2♥ = Intermediate Major Flash compared to if 2♦ = Split-range Multi: Weak 2♥ or Intermediate 2♠ 2♥ = Split-range Major Flash: Intermediate 2♥ or Weak 2♠. The split range effectively allows Responder to relay with 2♥/2♠ on invitational-but-not-too-strong hands in response to 2♦/♥, respectively.

So it seems that e.g. 1M = standard, but not 13*-15 if one-suited with 6+ M (=> 1M-1♠/N; 2M = 10-12 (instead of 10-15, say)) 2♦ = a) 13*-15, 6+ S b) Weak 2♥ 2♥ = c) 13*-15, 6+ H d) Weak 2♠ * Milton Work points is a Brown Sticker-free structure. :D I've long known that a Major Flash opening promising 10+ Milton Work points is not a Brown Sticker, but I have not been aware of this particular "loophole".

I interpret the WBF Systems Policy (a largely nonsensical document, unfortunately) as saying that an opening promising 10+ Milton Work points can never be a Brown Sticker. The policy doesn't apply in Sweden, though.

And not too hard for even a basic 2/1 system. (1♦-2♣; 2♦-4♣ etc.) No, I meant 5♣. South knows about the 7-1 club fit but not yet about the 6-2 diamond fit. Of course, South would often prefer a 6-2 diamond fit to a 7-1 club fit, so he could (should), knowing what I know about my system, have bid 3♦ (6+ D, slam interest) over 1♦-2♣ 2♦-2N or 3♠ (5+ D, slam interest) over 1♦-2♣ 2♦-2N 3♣-3♦. But then I couldn't have used these hands as an example. :( Hence the "wishful thinking". Change the EW hands to [hv=pc=n&w=st9hkqda982cqt963&e=sa3hajt753d4cak84]266|100[/hv] and my auction would start East West 1♥(1)-1N(2) 2♣(3)-2♦(4) 3♥(5)-3♠(5) 4♦(5), (1) "10-21, 5+ H, unBAL" (2) "5-12, NAT, NF" (3) "13-15", either 5H or 5S6+H OR "16-18", any (4) 8+, relay (5) same as in the auction starting 1♥-2♣; 2♦-2♥; 3♥-3♠; 4♦, but with "16-18" (15-17 hcp if 2614) instead of "13-15" but Welland-Auken, for example, who use 1N as a GF relay in response their relatively standard 1♥ opening, would probably have to start something like 1♥-2♦* 2N**. * 9-13, 2 H ** GF, 4+ C (iirc) Change the EW hands again to [hv=pc=n&w=st9hq3da982cqt963&e=sa3haKjt75d4cak84]266|100[/hv] and my auction would start East West 1♥(1)-1N(2) 3♥(3)-3♠(3) 4♦(3), (1) "10-21, 5+ H, unBAL" (2) "5-12, NAT, NF" (3) same as in the auction starting 1♥-2♣; 2♦-2♥; 3♥-3♠; 4♦, but with "19-21" (18-20 hcp if 2614) instead of "13-15" although West doesn't have values even for an INV+ 1♠ relay. (But I know East is too strong for a 1♥ opening in your system.) I like the fact that even though my relay structure is not as efficient in the slam zone as many of the structures you see in this forum (for example, yours), it can be used "everywhere". Instead of (...) 5♠-7♣ P I could have bid (...) 5♠-6♠* 7♣**-7N P * ♥J ask ** ♥J, no ♠J [not finished]

How about 1♣ = Moscito (15+) but not 18+ unless primary C 1♦ = NAT unBAL (11-14, 4D5C possible) but not 15-17 OR 18-20 BAL 1M = Chapi 8* (standard but not 15-17) 1N = 12-14 BAL (4414 possible) 2♣ = Precision but 11-14 2♦ = 23+ BAL or any GF w/o primary C 2M = Weak 2N = 21-22 BAL or 1♣ = Moscito (15+) but not 18+ unless primary C 1♦ = NAT unBAL (11-14, 4D5C not possible) OR 18-20 BAL 1M = Chapi 8* (standard but not 15-17) 1N = 12-14 BAL (4414 possible) 2♣ = Fantunes but 11-14 2♦ = 23+ BAL or any GF w/o primary C 2M = Weak 2N = 21-22 BAL ? * benlessard's Chapi 8 system: https://bridge.downagain.be/FD/main.php?vul=9&dealer=9&system=s2ftdw1w63o

About how I got the idea and what kind of problem it is supposed to solve: In my relay system, if x and y are given suits and hi is the highest remaining suit, then 6x4y(21) shape is shown using the structure 3♥ = 5x4y22, 6x4y(21), 8+x3(!)y or 6+x4+y0hi ...3♠ = relay, either guaranteeing slam interest and either 2+ x or 4+ y, or just looking for a 6-2 or better major suit (x=M) fit ...(...) ......(...) ......4♦ = 6x4y(21) ......(...). (Teller's strength is already known to within 3 hcp, so this isn't quite as some relayers might think.) For all possible values of {x,y} except one, Asker can then launch PKC(T) (= Parity Key Card Blackwood with T as trumps) at a level no higher than 4T+2. But when {x,y}={C,H}, 4♥ must be to play and 4♠ is already 4♣+3, which is one step above the safety level for PKC(♣). So I started wondering if the needed space could be freed by letting Asker show instead of ask, as in 4♦*-?: * 6x4y(21), x and y rounded suits 4♥ = to play 4♠+: same as 4♠+ in response to the -wood (4♥) described in the OP and used in example above Here's an example of how this could work using the EW hands from https://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/82267-rebid-with-6m4m-over-1m-2m/page__view__findpost__p__1014475 [hv=pc=n&w=st9hkqda982caqt96&e=sa3hajt753d4ck843]266|100[/hv] East West 1♥(1)-2♣(2) 2♦(3)-2♥(4) 3♥(5)-3♠(6) 4♦(7)-4♠(8) 4N(9)-5♦(10) 5♠(11)-7♣(12) P (1) "10-21, 5+ H, unBAL" (2) 3-way (3) usually just a good MIN ("13-15"), so GF even opposite a LR (For a fuller description, see https://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/83281-a-better-1m-2c-nebulous/page__view__findpost__p__1001309) (4) GF relay (5) "13-15", either 2542, 6H4C(21), 8+H3C or 6+H4+C0S (6) relay (7) 12-14, 6H4C(21) (8) even # of key cards (9) trump Q ask (10) trump Q, C is trumps (11) confirming all key cards, 2614, no ♥K (12) contract