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.

This might not be a new idea but I've never seen it anywhere. For those playing strong club with 1♠ as second negative after: 1♣-1♦ 1♥-1♠ = 0-4 Hcp any hand. I thought of using 2♣ as GF with the same scheme as after 1♣ opening (just one step more), then: 2♦ = 3rd negative (0-2 Hcp) other = same as over your 1♣ opening but with 3-4 Hcp. The advantage is that opener can still inquire for exact distribution when he's very strong such as: AKJx Axx AKx ARD since 6 clubs or speads with responder almost garantees small slam. Any comment ?

Dear Robert, Interesting points. Viking club has the same style as Power except the GF bid is 1NT and the invitationnal one is 2♣, maybe here the point you mention where people would be ready to kill to save one step below 3NT ;) Your argument concerning the 2/3NT bid with unbalanced is not receivable since responder already bid 1NT... I agree with 1♦-3♦ as preempt since no game is in view due to the limited opening range except if opener is very shapely with 15Hcp which, at extreme, can correspond to a 5 losers hand. Therefore, this frees up the 2♦ bid. I wrote that 1♦-3♣ shows 6 good ♣ and invitationnal strength therefore I don't think it would be too bad to meet a minimium with singleton ♣ opener and play 3♣ there. I reserved the 2NT bid to show 6♣ and 5-9(10)Hcp without 3♦. I agree that this bid is tricky and might lead opener with a difficult bid: either he transfers to 3♣ to play even with a singleton, he can pass or bid 3♦ with 6. This might get a bad result but anyway, we won't be playing 3♣ when the field will play in a safe 1NT with these holdings. At least we'll get there quickly and let the opponents decide wether to compete or not. To conclude, the 2♦ bid could then show this kind of hands (6♣ 5-9Hcp). The adavantage is that the misfit opener can pass 2♦ with 6 good or bid a non forcing 2♥/♠ to show a 5+♦/4♥/♠ hands implying misfit and trying to get the best spot. This now frees up the 2NT bid :) which could then be used to show the 10-11H balanced hands (which I would bid through 2♣). Concerning the shape resolution, I've been told in other threads that Viking club is not the most efficient system at all. Anyway, I really enjoy the logic behind it. For instance, I reckon that Moscito is more efficient for shape resolution but I don't feel confortable with the classifying of hand types depending on the residues, equal length, etc... I really dislike the fact that 1♥ over 1♣ shows 4+♠ and can be canapé. Without interference, it's Ok, but when opponents bounce... I play support double but only with a maximum hand, therefore if responder only has 3 cards major, he can bid 1/2NT.

IMHO relays are the worst method to check that. When you plan to play 5m instead of 3nt you have to well know the honor distribution. This can be only achived on a low level with natural bidding. Dear DelfinoD, I partly agree with you. The advantage of relays is to know the exact shape or at least the kind of hand early in the auction. Then the relayer is free to switch to natural bidding or keep on using relays depending on the information he's looking for.

Thanks hrothgar, I am not yet playing this system but hope as soon as my partner and I will be ready. The aim of this low level GF auction is to be able to find the best game (3NT or 5m ?) or even 6m when the hands fit well. Besides, being able to hide one of partner's hand suits me. In addition, not using this GF auction will mean the responder is limited. This might be useful information for a maximum opener. The 1♦-1M with 3+ cards, while being compulsory, also looks very aggressive and coherent from the point of view that opener is not balanced. In fact, i don't see any disadvantage of this system. Although i know there must be some, i would be happy if someone could point them out. My idea came from 1NT GF after 1M opening in Viking club. I wanted to be able to create a GF relay auction after any opening bid (up to 2♣): trying to have this scientific approach in bridge is part of my pleasure (as well as many people on peticuliar this forum :rolleyes: ). Your scheme is also interesting. I assume 1♥ there is GF so of course it is more economic but you didn't say what are your other responses apart from 1♥ (for instance what is responder's bid with 7Hcp and 4♥?). Your point concerning the range ask is very valuable since it would save some space. For instance, keeping my scheme with 1NT as GF trigger, 2♥ after 1♦-1NT could show 1-4-4-4 any strength, 2♠ asks and: -2NT = mini, then 3♣ ace ask or CRASH... -3♣+ = maxi and are the answer to ace ask.

Dear D. Gerben, What do you use 2NT for ? (I suppose Invitationnal without 4 card M and without ♦ support, which means balanced or with long ♣s ???) The more i think of it, the more 1M in 3+ cards interests me since it can sort of psych the opponents if partner is singleton in that major. In addition, if opener supports the major then he is either 4441 or 54xx and playing 2M in Moysian is not that bad. Moreover, it puts pressure on the opponents to balance when they are not sure we have a fit. Concerning your invitationnal bids without M, I don't get the logic behind it: you suggest 2♣ as being weak with clubs and 2NT or 3♣ for invitationnal hands rather than using the 3 level as preempt with long weak clubs and 2♣ for invitationnal which leaves more room to investigate the best game if opener is maximum. What are your reasons for that?

Hi, I thought of the possibility to use 1NT as FG relay after a limited 1♦ opening. This is because the 1♥ response from the Viking club (naturel, 4+♥, 6+H or GF any hand) is restricted in France. My a level opening are: 1♣ 16+ any 1♦ (11)12-15H, 4♦ if 4441, 5+♦ else, not balanced 1NT (12)13-15H, balanced 2♣ (11)12-15H, 5+♣ and 4♥/♠ or 6+♣ Of course, 1NT would only be GF relay after opening 1♦ in 1st or 2nd seat. The scheme would be: 2♣ 5+♦ but not 5/4 in the minors 2♦ exactly 4/5 or 5/4 in the minors, mini 2♥/2♠ 1-4-4-4 / 4-1-4-4, mini 2NT/3NT 4-4-4-1 exactly, mini/maxi 3♣ 5♣+4♦, maxi 3♦ 5♦+4♣, maxi 3♥/♠ 1-4-4-4 / 4-1-4-4, maxi The advantage is that after 1♦-1NT-2♣, we can use the same scheme as after the 2♣ opening since the shapes are exactly the same. After the very accurate 4441 answers, we could use next relay as BW or CRASH. After 2♦, 2♥ is a relay asking for the 5 card minor (2♠=5♣ and 2NT=5♦) then next relay asks for the residues. After 3♣/♦, next relay asks for residues. I think i would like to reserve 1♦-2♣ as invitationnal with any hands with responses: 2♦ = mini other = natural, maxi, GF and 1♦-2♦ as 5-10H, with 3 or 4♦ and 1♦-2NT as 5-9H, 6+♣ and no 3+♦ and 1♦-3♣ as 6+♣, 10-11H The only drawback i see to this scheme is that sometimes, responder will have to bid 1♥/♠ in 3 cards when he won't have 4 cards in ♥ or ♠ and not 3 cards in ♦, thus specifically 3-3-2-5, 5-10H. I am looking forward for your comments and critics, :D

For those playing strong club system (16+Hcp for basis) and evaluating distributional hands with Zar point count, how many Zars do you think you need to open 1C ? :) I would say between 34 and 36 ? <_<

There is not much in Grootheim book about auctions other than relays. :) When playing 1♦-1♥ = 4+♥, 6+H or GF all distribution, how does responder invite after 1♦-1♥-1NT since 2♣ is GF relay ? I think of using 2♦ might be the solution to show 10-11H and asking for 3 cards ♥ and strength: 2♥ = 3♥, minimum 2NT = 2♥, minimum 3♣/♦=3♥+5♣/♦, maximum 3♥ = 3♥, maximum 3NT = 2♥, maximum Therefore, we loose the natural 2♦ fit which can thus be found via 2NT over 1NT as puppet for 3♣ with either weak long ♣ or weak shapely ♦ fit. Any comments ?

Hi, I would like to know your favourite defense when opponents dare interfere over your strong club opening. :blink: Sylvain

As Free pointed out, i might not have been clear. :unsure: The point is I cannot get the Viking Cub book in France. I can just look at the system on their site but it is (of course) very limited in terms of the drawbacks of 1NT forcing game when responder is weak with clubs, or balanced average (8-10 hcp) without a fit and just too weak for invitation. officeglen gave some clues. I also wanted to know the bidding after 1♥/♠ 2♣ when it is played as invitationnal (no information anywhere on Internet to my knowledge). I wanted to know how they work in practice :blink: