Kapi Blas

East definitely has to move although I feel like double with West's hand is a better option than 4♥. Double isn't penalty if opponents are known to have 9 card suit playing on 3 level.

The only problem is that there won't be 1♦ but 1♠ instead. In polish club 1♦ is either 0-6 any, 7-11 without 4 card major or 16+ balanced.

1♥ - 1♠ 2♣ - 2♦ 2 NT - 3♣ 3♦ - 3♥ 3 NT - 4♣ 4 NT - 5♣ 5♦ - 5♥ 6♥ 2♣ - 11-15 5+♥4♣ or any 16+ 2♦ - 8-11 2 NT - 18-21 6+♥ 3♣ - 4+♣, denies 3-card support 3♦ - waiting 3♥ - 2 card fit 3 NT - non-serious 4♣ - cue 4 NT - RKCB 5♣ - 1 5♦ - Queen? 5♥ - no Queen

1♥ seems to be the best option. Why would you ever consider passing this hand? It's 20/20 deal at best, moreover opponents probably have strength advantage. We have great shape and our partner is a passed hand. If we pass our partner won't start the bidding either and we will never make a sound during the bidding. If our LHO has like 18 HCP and RHO is 9-10 HCP it would be much harder for them to bid to the right contract with our interference.

Why would you ever play for lower percentage play instead of the better one? I can't imagine anyone covering this 10 with Q, ever. Opponents probably knows that you have 9-card suit and even if it would be 8-card there is no reason to raise with the Q because playing 10 from 10xxx to KJxx is therefore incorrect line of play. Playing for drop seems pretty obvious here.

I think that professional players open lighter sometimes because they have much better judgment. I remember one deal of BB where Justin Hackett upgraded his 18 HCP balanced hand to 2NT 20-21 because he had good shape and his honors were well placed. I saw Meckwell's upgrading theirs 14 or 15 counts to 1♣ opening or Geir Helgemo opening 2♣GF on 14 HCP . I truly believe that most of the professional pairs play more sound than intermediate players. Let's see for example on this 2 hands, you play 2/1 with mini-multi 2♦ and 5-5 2M's: ♣Kxx ♦Axxxx ♥Kxx ♠Qxx 12 HCP, both intermediate and pro player would probably open this 1♦ but: ♣xxx ♦AKQxxx ♥xxx ♠x I can imagine plenty of pro's opening this 1♦ but I don't think many intermediate's would.

2♣- 2♦ 3♦ - 4♦* 4♥ - 4♠ 5♣ - 5♥** 6♣*** - 7♦**** * - definitely forcing, might be slam seeking ** - we must realize that we have some serious values, partner didn't bid 4 NT so he is probably looking for some specific cue bid *** - asking for 3rd round control in ♣ **** - got it! At the point where our partner bids 5♥ we only need either Q♣ or doubleton♣. 6♣ is obviously asking about 3rd round control in ♣. After all I believe that novice par would never get to 7♦. Slam bidding isn't easy and you need to have some good tools, excellent hand evaluation and a lot of imagination to be really good at it. I'm pretty sure that me and my partner would miss that obvious slam. Edit. I can't see how can you possibly get to the Grand Slam after bidding 5♣ as a splinter. You can't check if a responder has K♥ or not.

You are obviously right. It depends on agreements and 3♣ as natural is probably the better use in this case but i think you need to have some tools to know when the actual cue bidding starts after this sequence. I'm really curious why people bid 2♠ instead of 1♠ with GF hand. I can't see any advantages of taking away so much bidding space.

If 4♣ would be showing 5-5 shape and 3♣ 5-4 shape what would be 2NT used for?

I can't imagine my partner leaving 3♦ after my double unless he has some 5-5 shape with ♦. How often penalty double can be used in this situation? Rarely i belive. That's why by agreement in my partnership all doubles to preempts are takeout except of for example this situation. 1♠ - 2♥ - 4♠ - pass pass - ? double - showing strong hand with some defensive tricks, partner decides if he wants to go higher or play 4♠ doubled

So at first let's look at this particular sequence 1NT - 2♥ - 2♠ - 4♣. Obviously it depends on agreements but it makes no sense to consider 4♣ as cue bid rather than splinter. By definition splinter is a double-jump bid in a side suit when you have already agreed your trumps and it's showing singleton or void. I believe 3♣ should be considered as cue bid because it doesn't take away our bidding space. It isn't bad if splinter takes a lot of space because it is much more descriptive than simply just a cue bid. The most important part about discovering whether the cue bid is showing shortness or 1st/2nd round control is base of your system. All professional partnerships can show almost exact shape of the openers hand if needed so it isn't hard for them to distinguish the type of cue bid because all the shortages were usually shown earlier. It is much harder when your opponents interfere and takes away you space and then you must guess whether the cue bid is shortage or control but sometimes you can deal with it in some specific situations: 1♠ - 3♦ - ? For example here information about diamond shortness in the responders might be very needed. 4♣ - 12+ HCP with 3+♠, there is pretty much no need for this bid to show ♣, with strong single-suited hand with clubs you will double 4♦ - SPLINTER 12+ HCP ♠ fit and ♦ shortage

4NT as any 2 suiter. If partner bids 5♣ you pass, if 5♦ you bid 5♥.

I play this way in this sequence: 1M - 2♣ ? 2♦- 4+ diamonds 2♥- 4+ hearths, or no other viable bid if opener bid ♥ 2♠- 4+ spades, or no other viable bid if opener bid ♠ And now: 1M - 2♣ 2♦ - ? 2M - 15+ with 3 card fit 2 in the other major - 12+ with clubs, denies fit, relay 2NT - 12+ balanced, relay 3♣ - 15+ single suited hand with clubs, denies fit, relay 3M - 12-14 with 3 card fit

Hi guys! I would really love to hear your opinions about this stuff. What are the advantages and disadvantages of both methods and which of these 2 is superior? Since i began to play bridge 2 years ago I always played Semi-forcing NT. Now I'm thinking of switching it to Forcing just as i changed my 1♣ opening a little bit.

You're making some good points here. The only thing is about this sequence: 1M-2♣* 2♦**-2M *** P. * "NAT, BAL or Drury". Forcing to 2M or game (or, alternatively, to 2M, 3♣ or game) ** ART MIN *** 3c limit raise 2♣ as a Nat, Bal or Drury obviously makes sense to me. The first thing is why would you like 2♦ a minimum and not 4+♦? The second thing is if u use 2M in this sequence as limit raise you must bid GF hands with 3 card fit as 3M I suppose, that's a lot of wasted bidding space when you are propably seeking slam or something.

That is how it looks like im my partnership: 1♣ 11-21 with ♣ or 12-14 balanced Responses: 1♦ transfer 4+♥ 1♥ transfer 4+♠ 1♠ transfer to NT 6-9 HCP or 12+ HCP balanced or weak with 6+♦ or GF with♦ 1NT 10-11 balanced without 4 card major 2♣ 12+ HCP 4+♣ without 4 card major 2♦ transfer to♥ 6+ very weak 2♥ transfer to ♠ 6+ very weak 2♠ GF with 5-5 Minor 2NT GF with any other 5-5 shape 1♦ 11-21 HCP with 4441♣ or 5+ Diamond unbalanced( with 5♦332 12-14 HCP we open 1♣) Responses: 1♥/♠ 4+ ♥/♠ 6+ HCP, forcing 1NT 6-11 without a 4 card major 2♣ GF with ♣ 2♦ 4+-4+ majors, less than invitational 2♥ reversed flannery 4♥ 5♠, weak Generally we use T-Walsh after 1♣ opening but since we play 2♣ as 18-19 balanced we can use 1NT rebid by opener to show a minimum hand with 6+♣. We play two-way Checkback

I'm playing really similar system right now. I'm not sure if there is any world-class pair that opens 1♣ with 5M332 with 12-14 HCP. Playing Gazzili you can't play forcing NT that normally includes some cool hand types such as 3 card limit raise, opening 1♣ with 5M would solve this problem but again i think it would be hard sometimes to find this 5-3 Major Suit fit after 1♣ opening. If you are playing 2+♣ then 1 Diamond opening is 4441 with singleton♣ or 5+ IMO.

Well obviously in ACOL system it must work differently. But im not really getting stolen though. If we don't have a major suit fit and i don't have any other long suit and less than 10 HCP im ok with passing while vulnerable. Not vulnerable ill just bid any 5 card suit on 2 level with 6+ HCP and good shape.

I don't think misfit can be the case in this situation because opponents have 8 card suit at least so we will find ours surely. The second thing is I play this double as 10+ HCP with at least 5-4 in unbid suits with no fit or any 12+ balanced and that's why i'm considering this pass as forcing since we are having strength advantage.

Even if you have no agreements in this sequence 4♥ is a horrible bid. It should show like a minimum hand with 7-8♥. These are the rebids i use in my partnership in this sequence: Pas - forcing since my partners double should be showing some values Dbl - obviously not penalty, our oponents found their long suit, showing extra values 3♦ - 5-5 shape 3♥ - 6♥ minimum 3♠ - asks for ♣ stoper 3NT - ♣ stoper, not minimum, with stonger hand and a stoper you should double 4♣ - Splinter strong hand, pretty much promises 6♥ 4♦ - very strong hand with 6+♥, almost ACOL, no ♣ shortage 4♥ - 7-8♥ minimum hand, too strong to open 4♥( we open 4M with even 7 HCP)

Pass - minimum hand Dbl - as every double to a preempt im my system it shows a better hand with possibly 6+spades or good support to clubs if they was invitational, forcing 3 hearths - 5-5 shape GF 3 spades - minimum hand with 6+ spades 3NT - any strong hand we would accept invite with 6+ clubs 4 diamonds - very strong one suited hand, almost ACOL

It is just the matter of partnership agreements, everyone can play what they are comfortable with. The most important thing in modern bridge is too bid on lower level with strong possibly slam hands and higher with weaker ones. Here is the example: 1♠-2♣"waiting" - i play this as GF with clubs, GF balanced, GF with exactly 3 card fit or 9-11 6+ minor invitational 2♦*- ? *relay 2♥ - GF with clubs denies 3 spades 2♠ - 15+ HCP with 3 spades, slam try 2NT - GF balanced, relay, denies 3 spades 3♣ - 9-11 with 6+ ♣ invitational 3♦ - 9-11 with 6+ ♦ invitational 3♠ - 12-14 HCP with 3 spades

Your system is very similar to Polish Club played in my country. I think that the biggest problem with strong club systems is they can't handle strong balanced hands. In your system all 15+ balanced holdings are in 1♣ opening. So its pretty hard to bid them in competetive auction .

I'm OK with opening very strong but not GF hands on 1 level. I play gazilli which should be a part of every 2/1 system in my opinion. While opening 1M and 1OM or 1NT response 2♣ is 11-15 with 4+♣ or 16+ any. Responder bids 2♦ with 8+ HCP "waiting" and openers 2M bid shows 11-15 HCP with clubs and every other response is 16+ and GF. For example the auction you mentioned: 1♥ -1♠ 3♦ is showing 14-16 HCP hand with 5♥ and 5♦. Very usefull bidding tool played by most of the Italian pairs.

I voted for upgrading this hand to 1♣ opening. The hand is too strong to open this 2♣. It's pretty the same thing like about opening this hand in 2 over 1 system: ♣ - ♦xx ♥ AKQxxxxx ♠AKx It is "only" 16 HCP but you must open this 2♣ ACOL, because IT IS A GF HAND. You have pretty much 10 top tricks. It's the same thing about opening this hand 1♣ 16+HCP. While opening this 2♣ you will never catch a balance with your partner during the bidding. If you partner will have an A♦ and K♣ you are making slam easily.