nullve

2: pass (I miscounted earlier)

Yes.

Pass: 1,3,4,5 Open: 2,6 (no judgment involved)

The 2♣ and 2♦ openings are brown stickers according to the WBF Systems Policy, so will you be able to play them? Another possibility (without brown stickers): 2♣ = bad Weak Two in a major OR strong (GF if unBAL) without 5+M4+OM 2♦ = Ekren, either weak or GF 2M = constructive Weak Two 2♣-?: 2♦ = relay, can stand the 3-level opposite a bad Weak Two* ...2♥ = Kokish OR bad Weak 2♠ (NB!) ......2♠ = relay, not exactly INV opposite bad Weak 2♠ .........2N = BAL .........3♣ = strong, 5+H4+C .........3♦ = strong, 5+H4+D .........3♥ = strong, 6+ H .........3♠ = bad Weak 2♠ (NB!) .........(...) ......2N = INV+ opposite bad Weak 2♠, relay ......(...) ...2♠ = strong, 5+ S, unBAL OR bad Weak 2♥ ......2N = relay, not exactly INV opposite bad Weak 2♥ .........3♣ = strong, 5+S4+C .........3♦ = bad Weak 2♥ (NB!) .........3♥ = strong, 5+S4+D (NB!) .........3♠ = strong, 6+ S .........(...) ......3♣ = INV+ opposite bad Weak 2♥ ......(...) ...2N+: same as 2N over 2♣-2♦ in standard 2♥ = P/C ...P = bad Weak 2♥ ...2♠ = bad Weak 2♠ ...2N+: not sure*, but maybe ...2N = strong, 5+ H, unBAL OR BAL ......3♣ = Puppet Stayman-like .........3♦ = BAL, not 5 S .........3♥ = 6+ H (unBAL) .........3♠ = BAL, 5 S .........3N+ = 5 H, unBAL ......3♦ = 5+ S .....(...) ...3♣ = strong, 5+ C, unBAL ...3♦ = strong, 5+ S, unBAL ...3♥+ = strong, 5+ D, unBAL ...? 2♠ = P/C ...P = bad Weak 2♠ ...2N+: not sure*, but maybe ...2N = strong, 5+ S, unBAL OR BAL ......3♣ = Puppet Stayman-like .........3♦ = BAL, not 5 H .........3♥ = BAL, 5 H .........3♠ = 6+ S (unBAL) .........3N+ = 5 S, unBAL ......3♦ = 5+ H .....(...) ...3♣ = strong, 5+ C, unBAL ...3♦ = strong, 5+ H, unBAL OR bad Weak 2♥ ...3♥+ = strong, 5+ D, unBAL ...? (...) * It helps a lot if 2N over 2♣-2M is GF, but then the 2M response has to promise some values. So maybe the 2♦ response should also include very weak hands regardless of 3-level safety?

Suppose that prior to this, A has scored better than B overall over the course of a zillion same-board tournaments. Then maybe A was just unlucky to get two hard boards now while B got two easy ones? If true, why is A's bad luck under your MP scoring more acceptable than B's bad luck under standard MP scoring? If not true, why?

If you're willing to play highly artificial stuff over 1♥-1♠/N, why play KI (or Flannery, for that matter) to begin with?

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=3352-1519498685&u=nullve

If a goal is to keep as much of the standard structure as possible on strong hands, maybe 2♣-?: 2♦ = S preference, no preference or INV+ opposite 5-10 ...2♥ = Kokish or 5-10 ......2♠ = to play opposite 5-10 .........P = 5-10 .........2N+: as in Kokish ......2N = INV+ relay opposite 5-10 ......(...) ...2♠+: same as in standard with Kokish over 2♣-2♦ 2♥ = H preference and < INV opposite 5-10 ...2♠-3N: same as in standard without Kokish over 2♣-2♦ ...4♣+ = 5+ H, unbalanced, sets H as trumps (...) ?

https://www.chrisryall.net/bridge/weak.two/assumed-fit.htm#flemish

True. But in a strong NT context, suppose the bidding goes 1♣-(1x)-something-(2x) P-(P), Opener's pass doesn't deny balanced shape, but opps can be trusted to be in a 8(+)-card fit. Then, if Responder has * 2- x, in which case partner has 3+ x and therefore maybe as little as (1)2 C, competing to 3♣ seems to require at least 6c support, but Responder will usually have no trouble finding another call with less. (His shape will often be ideal for a classic takeout double, for example.) * 3 x, he knows partner has 2(-) x and therefore 3+ C, so competing to 3♣ with 5c support is possible; * 4+ x, he knows partner has 1- x and therefore 4+ C, so competing to 3♣ with 4c support is possible. If Responder has 3+ x but insufficient club support, LoTT may still suggest competing, although it may be less obvious how. My "solution" in situations where opps have found a fit is to allow balancing doubles to be a bit (more) offshape and maybe play 2N as "two places to play" over them. (I know LoTT comes with adjustments, so the above is only approximate.) It's probably just my name for the version (first played by Swedish internationals Nilsland-Wirgren?) where, roughly, * 1N over 1♣-[1M-1] corresponds to 2N over 1♣-1M in standard; * Opener accepts the 1M-1 transfer not only with 3(+) M but also with weak NT and 2-3(4) M.

As ahydra noted, 5551 is similar to "natural or balanced club, unbalanced diamond", maybe just with the tiny difference that 4441 is opened 1♣ instead of 1♦. What people who play the latter system know is that finding club fits in competition after a 1♣ opening is usually not that difficult, despite Responder not being able to "support" clubs directly with 4-5 clubs. All one needs are good agreements about doubles and 2N in competition, and I don't think it makes a huge difference that the the opening can be also be made with 4441 (singelton club). So my suggestion is to use the same 1N range you'd use in a "natural or balanced club" system, although 14-16 is probably ideal if you play "Swedish" T-Walsh.

GiB also opens 1♣ on QJ2 QJ2 QJ2 QJ32, so let me guess....

This may be my last chance to give partner a club ruff, but I think a better plan is to induce declarer, who expects the trump king to be offside anyway, to play trumps from the top. (We would then also get our trick back if the ♣9 is a singleton.) Then a spade return might be sufficient, but it could also look like an attempt to establish a spade trick. A diamond return, on the other hand, will certainly look like a singleton. It's also very unlikely to cost a trick even if partner has the ♠KQ. (Declarer would need to have something really ugly like ♠xxx ♥AQTxx ♦Kx ♣Kxx.) And happy birthday!

A song* about bridge by Kungsgeten's band Idyllen: Live: * "Det gröna bordet" (the green table) (Watch the kids headbang to "långfärg i klöver" (long suit in clubs)!)

"Michaels -- 3- ♣; 3- ♦; 5+ ♥; 5+ ♠; 9+ total points; forcing" I wouldn't know how to handle the range.

I forgot! :(

From yesterday's Free Daylong (MP): [hv=sn=nullve&s=SAJ752HAKT76DTC64&wn=Robot&w=SQ4HJ9DAJ762CJT73&nn=Robot&n=SK986HQ85DQ8543C9&en=Robot&e=ST3H432DK9CAKQ852&d=n&v=o&b=1&a=P1C(Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20%21C%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)1S(One-level%20overcall%20--%205+%20%21S%3B%208-17%20HCP%3B%209-19%20total%20points)2C(4+%20%21C%3B%206-10%20total%20points)4S(4+%20%21S%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%209-12%20total%20points)PPP&p=CJC9C5C4DAD3D9DTD6D4DKS2C6C3S6C8DQH2H6D2SKS3S5S4S8STSJSQCTS9C2H7&c=10]640|480[/hv]

Maybe a similar "heart system", 1♣ = "10+, 4+ C, unBAL" 1♦ = "10+, 4+D3-C, unBAL" 1♥ = "10+, either 5+S4+H or 1-suited w/ 6+ H" OR 14+ BAL ...1♠ = "0-6/10+, relay" ......1N = 14-19 BAL (playable because Responder can't have "7-9") ......2♣ = "10-18, 6+ H, 1-suited" (=> 2♦ = "10+, relay") ......2♦ = "10-18, 5+ S" (=> 2♥ = "10+, relay") ......2♥ = "19-21, 6+ H, 1-suited" ......2♠ = "19-21, 5+ S" ......(...) ...1N = "7-9", to play opposite 14-16 BAL, GF opposite 17 BAL ......P = 14-16 BAL ......2♣ = 17+ BAL ......2♦ = "6+ H" ......2♥ = "10-15, 5+ S" (NF) ......2♠ = "16+, 5+ S" ......(...) ...(...) 1♠ = "10+, either 4+S5+H or 1-suited w/ 6+ S" ...1N = "0-6/10+, relay" ......2♣ = "10-18, 5+ H" (=> 2♦ = "10+, relay") ......2♦ = "10-18, 6+ S, 1-suited" (=> 2♥ = "10+, relay") ......2♥ = "19-21, 5+ H" ......2♠ = "19-21, 6+ S, 1-suited" ......(...) ...2♣ = "7-9, relay" ......2♦ = "5+ H" ......2♥ = "6+ S" ......(...) ...(...) 1N = 11-13 BAL 2♣+ = weak-only preempts, is better? (It's not quite a strong heart, natural 1m system, but it's close.) I guess it's possible to use the 1st and 2nd step as "0-6/10+" and "7-9" relays, respectively, also in response to 1m. Added 30 January:

X (LoTT)

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=701-1517079788&u=nullve Sorry, BBF! Two mistakes by me (that I noticed): * on board 4 I didn't cover the ♠9, allowing declarer to shorten himself by ruffing a club * on board 14 I had 9 top tricks (in 3NT) after 5 tricks, but managed to go down. (I don't think I noticed that LHO played the ♠T to the 5th trick. :()

Using my (nullve-nullve's) system, maybe 1♣-2♣ ("NAT or 11-13/17-19/26+ BAL"; "GF, 5+ C, unBAL") 2♦-2♥ (relay; "13-15") 2♠-2N (relay; "4+ H or 1-suited") 3♣-3♥ (relay; "2425 or 4H6C") 3♠-4♦ (relay, willing to bypass 3N opposite 4H6C; 2416 (then 12-14 hcp)) 4♠-5♣ (parity key card ask in ♣; odd # of key cards) 6♣-P (looking stupid opposite e.g. Kx-QJxx-J-KQJxxx; ---). Or should Opener sign off in 3N over 3♥?

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/71227-mini-no-trump-hero-or-villain/

CAYNE - BBF 76 - 29 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=8918-1516475166&u=nullve No, I didn't think the spade void was worth an ace on board 5. I was just confused.

I think I have enough space for almost everything I want after my "NAT or 11-13/17-19/26+ BAL" 1♣ opening, so I'd be happy to simply remove the balanced hands, try to put the 5D5C hands where some balanced hands used to be (e.g. in the the transfer accept) and leave many bids idle. But using the partly freed-up transfer accept as Gazzilli (e.g with 3c support or a strong hand) would be an obvious alternative.

1. I agree, but the problems will likely be most severe after a 1♣ opening, when Opener hasn't denied any suit, than after a 1♦ opening, when he has practically denied clubs, allowing club bids to be ART in auctions such as 1♦-(P)-1♥-(2♠); 3♣. To alleviate the problems after 1♣, Roman Twos could be used, although I'm not sure they would solve more problems than they create. (Btw, here's one form a "Roman spade" system might take. :)) 2. I think there's just about enough space for full relays on GF hands (see below), but finding most major fits on partscore deals is a problem I need to solve. 3. See below for an attempt to solve this problem. 4. It's not clear to me either, but one vague idea (which might ultimately not work) is that the since the structures 1♣-1♦; 1♥-1♠; 1N+ and 1♣-1♦; 1N+ are supposed to be kind of mirror images or each other, but it's clearly better to use the latter for 5C5O hands (especially 5C5M hands, so that 5-3 M fits aren't missed), the former can take care of 4C(441) hands. Similarly, the 1♦-1♥; 1♠-1N; 2♣+ structure could take care of 4441 hands. Here's how I imagine fleshing out the structure after the positive relay (and I suppose something similar can be done after 1♠-1N, depending on how the opening is defined) when Opener has an unbalanced hand in the "10-21" range: 1♣-1♦; ?: 1♥ = catchall ...1♠ = relay ......1N = "10-18, (4)5+C4+D" .........P = allowed .........2♣ = INV+ relay ............2♦ = "10-12" ............2♥ = "16-18" ............2♠+ = "13-15" .........2♦ = to play opposite "10-15", GF opposite "16-18" .........(...) ......2M-2 = "10-15/19-21, (4)5+C4+M" .........2M-1 = INV+ relay ............2M = "10-12" ............2M+1 = "19-21" ............[2M+2]+ = "13-15" .........(...) ......2M = "16-18, (4)5+C4+M" (NF) ......2N+ = ? ...(...) 1♠ = "10-21, 6+ C, 1-suited" OR "19-21, 5+m4+Om" ...1N = INV+ relay ......2♣ = "10-12" ......2♦ = "19-21, 5+m4+Om" .........2♥ = relay ............2♠ = "5+C4D" ............2N = "5+C5+D" ............3♣+ = "4C5+D" ......2♥ = "13-15" ......2♠ = "19-21, 1-suited" ......2N+ = "16-18" ...(...) 1N = "10-18, 4+C5+D" ...P = allowed ...2♣ = INV+ relay ......2♦ = "10-12" ......2♥ = "16-18" ......2♠+ = "13-15" ...2♦ = to play opposite "10-15", GF opposite "16-18" ...(...) 2M-2 = "10-15/19-21, 4+C5+M" ...2M-1 = INV+ relay ......2M = "10-12" ......2M+1 = "19-21" ......[2M+2]+ = "13-15" ...(...) 2M = "16-18, 4+C5+M" (NF) 2N+ = ? 1♦-1♥; ?: 1♠ = catchall ...1N = relay ......2M-2 = "10-15/19-21, (4)5+D4+M" .........2M-1 = INV+ relay ............2M = "10-12" ............2M+1 = "19-21" ............[2M+2]+ = "13-15" .........(...) ......2M = "16-18, (4)5+D4+M" (NF) ......2N+ = ? ...(...) 1N = "10-21, 6+ D, 1-suited" ...2♣ = INV+ relay ......2♦ = "10-12" ......2♥ = "13-15" ......2♠ = "19-21" ......2N+ = "16-18" ...(...) 2M-2 = "10-15/19-21, 4+D5+M" ...2M-1 = INV+ relay ......2M = "10-12" ......2M+1 = "19-21" ......[2M+2]+ = "13-15" ...(...) 2M = "16-18, 4+D5+M" (NF) 2N+ = ? 1♥-1♠; ?: 1N = catchall ...2♣ = relay ......2♦ = "10-15/19-21, (4)5+H4+S" .........2♥ = INV+ relay ............2♠ = "10-12" ............2N = "19-21" ............3♣+ = "13-15" .........(...) ......2♥ = ? ......2♠ = "16-18, (4)5+H4+S" (NF) ......2N+ = ? ...(...) 2♣ = "10-15/19-21, 6+ H, 1-suited" ...2♦ = INV+ relay ......2♥ = "10-12" ......2♠ = "19-21" ......2N+ = "13-15" ...(...) 2♦ = "10-15/19-21, 4+H5+S" ...2♥ = INV+ relay ......2♠ = "10-12" ......2N = "19-21" ......3♣+ = "13-15" ...(...) 2♥ = "16-18, 6+ H, 1-suited" (NF) 2♠ = "16-18, 4+H5+S" (NF) 2N+ = ? As you can see, there's also a lot of space available for unbalanced hands with "22+". Maybe not enough for full relays, but at least much more than after a standard strong 2♣ opening. Added 27 January: Added 3 February: