Syl20

Hi, There is also Ghestem's way using 1NT forcing to game and transfers (either weak or invitationnal). In his version, 1NT included control of all suits by honour (K or A) which may not be what you look for... Cut'n paste from my posts #130754 and #131161 (after 1♠ opening but it's the same), 1♠=4+♠. 1NT = forcing (as usual except GF with all suits controlled by honours if fitted, i.e, balanced) 2♣ = 6♦ weak or 5♦ unbalanced or fitted GF 2♦ = 6♥ weak or 5♥ GF 2♥ = 6♣ weak or 5♣ unbalanced or fitted GF 2♠ = 6-10S with fit 2NT = 11+S with fit and control by honours of ♦ and ♣ or ♥ 3♣ = 11+S with fit and control by honours of ♣ and maybe ♥ 3♦/♥ = 11+S with fit and control of honour of only ♦/♥ 3♠ = preempt 3NT = 4♠ + 5X with high shortage (-> 4♣ relay) 4♣/♦/♥ = 4♠ + 5 ♣/♦/♥ and low shortage Opener accepts the transfer with 2+ cards or super accepts with jump with 4 cards and minimum value or super accepts with 2SA with 3+ cards and maximum or bids naturally if unbalanced and singleton in transfer suit. After the transfer accepted, responder passes if weak or bids naturally at the 2 level or keeps transferring from 2NT and above (all new bid sets up GF auction): For instance: 1♠ 2♣ 2♦ ? 2♥ = 5♦+4♥ 2♠ = 5♦+2♠ (with High honour) looking between 3NT and 4♠ 2NT = 5♦+4♣ 3♣ = 6♦ 3♥ = fit transfer: 5♦ + xxx at ♠ (small fit) 3♠ = transfer to 3NT 3NT = xxx at ♠, 5♦ balanced 4♣/♦/♥ = xxx at ♠, 5♦ and singleton ♣/♦/♥ I see many advantages and not many drawbacks (that I am asking to you ): - ability to play in responder's long suit when weak - ability to differentiate trump support - hides opener's hand since he will probably be declarer - after bids of 2NT/3♣/♦/♥, responder's bid of a suit he doesn't control by honour means he's singleton or void. An additionnal interesting point I didn't insist on is the following (still from Gesthem's ideas): after 1♠ 2NT (fit either invitationnal 11-12S or GF with control by honours in ♦ and either ♣ or ♥ - and maybe trump). 3♠ shows minimal opening, 4♠ is concluding 3♣ shows interest with less than 3 Aces (or less than 2 Aces and a void) 3♦ shows interest with 3+ Aces or 2 Aces + a void Therefore, after 1♠ 2NT 3♣, a strong responder without Ace concludes since two Aces are missing. Thus, all rebids but 4♠ shows at least one ace: 3♦ = Honnor control in ♣ and ♦ (all other bids show Honour control of red suits) 3♠ = Hon reds + 2Aces (all other bids thus show 1 Ace exactly) 3NT = Hon reds + 1 Ace + nice trump suit (2 H or KJxx) 4♣ = Hon reds + 1 Ace, short ♣ 4♦/♥ = Hon reds + 1 Ace, 4 nice ♦/♥ (with 5 nice ♦/♥ would begin with a transfer) After 1♠ 2NT 3♣ 3♦, 3♥ is a relay with scheme as after direct 3♠+. Now, after 1♠ 2NT 3♦, 3♥ shows one Ace (all other bids show 0 Ace), 3♠ relay 3♠ 0 Ace, Hon control of ♣+♦ 3NT to 4♥ = 0 Ace, Hon reds such as after 1♠ 2NT 3♣ One exemple: Axxxx Ax Ax KQxx KQJx xx Kxxx Axx 1♠ 2NT 3♦ 3♥ 3♠ 3NT 4♣ 4♠ 6♠ 3♥ confirms ♦ control and shows one Ace (minimum, responder would conclude to 4♠) Opener therefore knows partner has ♣A with hon control of ♦ (obvioulsy the King) and nice trumps (HHx(x) or KJxx) 4♣ is a relay (hoping to hear 4♥ to show a singleton) which is not the case. 4♦ by responder would show the ♦Q in addition. Résumé (to understand the fun) 1♠ 2NT 3♦ 3♥ 3♠ 4♣ shows: 1) short ♣ with the ♥A 2) ♣K with Ace of ♦ or ♠ 3) 4 nice ♣ with ♣A I can send the files (in french) since they are no longer available through the web. Sylvain

Hi, I assume i'm not the first one to get this bug - but since it's still here... I bid ♠ and my partner NT. Then my partner concluded to 3NT which was passed out thus i was going to be dummy and, as usual, i saw all 4 hands. Finally, my partner asked for an undo, which was accepted, and he corrected to 4♠ where i became declarer. I still saw all 4 hands, i assume opponents didn't - although they didn't answer my question. Correction might be to either redeal when this happens (opponents accept and the dummy-to be becomes declarer), rather that not allow the undo which can be still changed without change of declarer. Regards, Sylvain

In my system, where 1♦ must be unbalanced: 1♦-1M-2NT is Max unbalanced with 5+♦ and 3 card supports. 1♦-1NT-2NT is Max unbalanced with ♣>♦>=4

2♣ - the system thinks for you, isn't He? At worst (concerning the ♦ fit), partner is 3=3=5=2 and partner passes 2♣ Or it can be 3=3=6=1 and he will bid 2♦. Anyway, partner will know that opener is unbalanced and this might be critical in case responder is strong with ♦ (btw it can also be balanced any strength in my version). Sylvain

Hi, I would be interested to see how your system cope with these two hands: [hv=d=n&n=sah105da965cakqj93&s=s94hak874dqj8c852]133|200|[/hv] With your comments of the bids of course :) Thx

Hi, I am considering playing a TWalsh structure. Since one of its aim, in addition to discretion, is to right side the contract, I thought of this scheme over 1♣ (12-14 or 18-19 balanced or 12+ with ♣s): 1♦/♥=4♥/♠, 6+ 1♠=a-) transfer NT with 6+ or b-) 11+, 5♦ (may be a 4 card major) 1NT= 6-10, 4♥+4♠ 2♣=Inverted minor raise without 4 card major 2♦=6-10, 5♥+4♠ 2♥/♠=5-9, 6♥/♠ 2NT=11-12, invitationnal Maybe this scheme concerning the 1♠ bid already exists, anyway I didn't find it elsewhere. The advantage is that when responder is weak without major, the opener will always play 1NT. And when he's intermediate or better, he can choose between a direct 2NT bid or transfer via 1♠ if he wishes to receive the lead or not. Although, 1♠ can be irregular with ♦s. In that case, he will simply bid on his suit over opener's last bid. The only drawback I see could be the 1NT bid when opener is balanced whithout 4 card major, wrong-siding the contract. I would be happy to know what you think of that and to point out what other drawback i (must) have missed...

I suppose you are right. Reason wants to include strong two in minors or balanced within 2♦ (that I wanted to play mini-Multi) to lighten the 2♣. Could you please tell responder's actions after 2♣ if they also include the weak 2 in diamond variant (in case they differ from Siege)? Thanks all :P

At last one hand where the old-fashionned system my p forced me to play could pay ! I was avoided to open 1NT with a small doubleton. The bidding would therefore be: 1♦ 2♣ 2♦ 3♦ 3♥ 3♠ asks about half ♠ stopper 4♣ ? Avoiding 3NT would be easy, but not avoiding 5Min since if you change KQ♥ by the A♥ then 5Min is fine. Of course, the drawbacks are huge and i don't recommand this old opening style :P

Hi, With the increase of agressivity, people want to have as many weak openings as possible (such as Micky's 2♦/♥/♠ Siege for instance). I like the idea of using all the 2 level opening bids for preemption and dedicate one bid (2♣) for strong hands (this of course applies to non strong club systems). I wonder how well we can then handle all those strong meanings in one bid without interference. For instance, if 2♣ clusters all strong two's, balanced 21+Hcp and GF hands, do you think it is possible to bid constructively, what scheme would you design? After little thoughts, I am thinking of: 2♦ = GF (5-6+Hcp), any shape other = (0-4H) pass/correct style but some further developments shall be awkward. Any thoughts welcome,

Hi all, Some thoughts I had concerning the ability to use twalsh after the polish 1♣ opening: 1♦/♥ = 7+H, 4+♥/♠ 1♠ = 0-6H any 1NT+ = same as usual. Of course the drawback is the handling of 1♣ 1♠ beginning: 1NT = 12-14H balanced 2♣ = 15+H with clubs other = strong. I don't think it could be that dangerous when 12-14H opener faces a 0-6H responder since opponents could interfere and let us out of the auction, or double but there is nothing worst than being doubled after a weak nt opening. In addition, if N°4 doubles and N°2 holds, there are still many ways to survive. I would be interested by your remarks. Regards

Thanks all for comments. I forgot to mention that the one major opener is unlimited. :) To Marlowe: with 6 carder weak, suit will be played at the 2 level except with ♣ since responder transfers in his suit). An additionnal interesting point I didn't insist on is the following (still from Gesthem's ideas): after 1♠ 2NT (fit either invitationnal 11-12S or GF with control by honours in ♦ and either ♣ or ♥ - and maybe trump). 3♠ shows minimal opening, 4♠ is concluding 3♣ shows interest with less than 3 Aces (or less than 2 Aces and a void) 3♦ shows interest with 3+ Aces or 2 Aces + a void Therefore, after 1♠ 2NT 3♣, a strong responder without Ace concludes since two Aces are missing. Thus, all rebids but 4♠ shows at least one ace: 3♦ = Honnor control in ♣ and ♦ (all other bids show Honour control of red suits) 3♠ = Hon reds + 2Aces (all other bids thus show 1 Ace exactly) 3NT = Hon reds + 1 Ace + nice trump suit (2 H or KJxx) 4♣ = Hon reds + 1 Ace, short ♣ 4♦/♥ = Hon reds + 1 Ace, 4 nice ♦/♥ (with 5 nice ♦/♥ would begin with a transfer) After 1♠ 2NT 3♣ 3♦, 3♥ is a relay with scheme as after direct 3♠+. Now, after 1♠ 2NT 3♦, 3♥ shows one Ace (all other bids show 0 Ace), 3♠ relay 3♠ 0 Ace, Hon control of ♣+♦ 3NT to 4♥ = 0 Ace, Hon reds such as after 1♠ 2NT 3♣ One exemple: Axxxx Ax Ax KQxx KQJx xx Kxxx Axx 1♠ 2NT 3♦ 3♥ 3♠ 3NT 4♣ 4♠ 6♠ 3♥ confirms ♦ control and shows one Ace (minimum, responder would conclude to 4♠) Opener therefore knows partner has ♣A with hon control of ♦ (obvioulsy the King) and nice trumps (HHx(x) or KJxx) 4♣ is a relay (hoping to hear 4♥ to show a singleton) which is not the case. 4♦ by responder would show the ♦Q in addition. Résumé (to understand the fun) :) 1♠ 2NT 3♦ 3♥ 3♠ 4♣ shows: 1) short ♣ with the ♥A 2) ♣K with Ace of ♦ or ♠ 3) 4 nice ♣ with ♣A Funny !

Hi, Surely already are topics about that but I'm not able to find them. What do you think of responding with transfers after partner opens 1 major? The scheme I think of is, over 1♠ opening (from Gestem ideas): 1NT = forcing (as usual except GF with all suits controlled by honours if fitted, i.e, balanced) 2♣ = 6♦ weak or 5♦ unbalanced or fitted GF 2♦ = 6♥ weak or 5♥ GF 2♥ = 6♣ weak or 5♣ unbalanced or fitted GF 2♠ = 6-10S with fit 2NT = 11+S with fit and control by honours of ♦ and ♣ or♥ 3♣ = 11+S with fit and control by honours of ♣ and maybe ♥ 3♦/♥ = 11+S with fit and control of honour of only ♦/♥ 3♠ = preempt 3NT = 4♠ + 5X with high shortage (-> 4♣ relay) 4♣/♦/♥ = 4♠ + 5 ♣/♦/♥ and low shortage Responder accepts the transfer with 2+ cards or super accepts with jump with 4 cards and minimum value or super accepts with 2SA with 3+ cards and maximum or bids naturally if unbalanced and singleton in transfer suit. After the transfer accepted, responder passes if weak or bids naturally at the 2 level or keeps transferring from 2NT and above (all new bid sets up GF auction): For instance: 1♠ 2♣ 2♦ ? 2♥ = 5♦+4♥ 2♠ = 5♦+2♠ (with High honour) looking between 3NT and 4♠ 2NT = 5♦+4♣ 3♣ = 6♦ 3♥ = fit transfer: 5♦ + xxx at ♠ (small fit) 3♠ = transfer to 3NT 3NT = xxx at ♠, 5♦ balanced 4♣/♦/♥ = xxx at ♠, 5♦ and singleton ♣/♦/♥ I see many advantages and not many drawbacks (that I am asking to you ;) ): - ability to play in responder's long suit when weak - ability to differentiate trump support - hides opener's hand since he will probably be declarer - after bids of 2NT/3♣/♦/♥, responder's bid of a suit he doesn't control by honour means he's singleton or void. Any comment welcome,

Hi, What continuations do you use after the beginning of auction: 1♣-1♦ 1♥-1♠ 2♣-2♦ ? Thanks

Pass. 1) 6 ♥ headed by AK are not enough for 9 tricks in notrump. 2) 3NT can cost a lot if partner is minimum (he never said he was maximum, but used the 2!s bid to pursue the pre-empt). 3) 3NT, as a save or psych, should not even work since 2!s is non forcing (2NT shows 14+) and the opponents are aware that we have a maximum of 23 Hcp.

Dear DelfinoD, I do agree with you. What I meant is that with relay bidding, after two rounds of bidding, you know the kind of hands almost the same way natural systems do (I mean that you still don't know the residues but you know partner is short in the other suits :blink: ). Therefore it can be time for relayer to switch to natural bidding at the 3 level, still the same as in natural systems ... except that relayer can keep on relaying when he's strong and slam inviting and then there is no more comparison with the accuracy of natural systems. Playing duplicate, I would still recommend to keep on relaying since there is (almost) no difference between 3NT and 5m but you now have a lot of space to figure out if 6m is laydown.