glen

the fun of generating Bridge World Death Hands is seeing how many bids are selected in trying to get the least/cheapest distortion. I gave this auction, 1♣-1♠-?, and this type of hand: ♠ AJ3 ♥ AK4 ♦ A ♣ QT7632 Getting answers/reasons such as: 2♣: a cheapest distortion attempt, if partner doesn't pass I'm in good shape 2♦: a cheapest distortion attempt, the fake reverse 2♥: a least distortion attempt, if partner has 4♥s, then will have at least 5♠s 2NT: a least distortion attempt, as if the hand is 3-3-2-5 3♣: a least distortion attempt, should have better suit 3♦: a least distortion attempt, singleton shouldn't be ace, doesn't have 4♠s 3♠: a least distortion attempt, should have 4♠s

Nice set of notes, great structure, thanks!

From Brogeland on Bridge Winners yesterday

this is the old Al Roth "if I get by this round I'll be well placed" The person who cares is partner, the one working with you to get to the best spot. If your distortions are so bad as to make your bids meaningless, you destroy the two-way conversation. Using your other example, after 1♠-2♦;-2♥, can responder still splinter with a 2-4-6-1, and if so how does opener's 6-3-1-3 unagree hearts? The two-way conversation is off the path and onto the rocks.

If you do this, play 2♣ as 18 to near GF, and 2♦ opening as any GF

just wants a defence to it that is not "treat it as natural"

You are correct, with some system mods: http://www.eclipse.co.uk/~sa5046/midmac.htm One can buy a used copy of A New Approach to Bidding: Complete Hand Valuation (Cv) and the Midmac Bidding System (Paperback), Jon Drabble for 21 cents, plus shipping

This is accurate except about the relative beginners. It is true they get a simple system, but they have 2♦ Multi, 1m artificial openings, and 2m artificial responses. Only a certain subset of beginners would be happy with that. The system is like the Diamond Major (see this link: http://www.bridgeguys.com/Conventions/diamond_major_opening_bids.html) except it had the 1♦ opening showing a major. I think your approach is better. I did a complex system where 1♣ was a four card major or big (http://www.bridgematters.com/mobclub.pdf). In the 2009 world championships a pair played 1♣ as 4♠s, 1♦ denying a 4cM (http://info.ecatsbridge.com/Systems/2009worldteams-brazil/bermudabowl/egypt/pascal-ahmed.pdf). The Montreal Relay continues to attract converts, including this site: http://www.montrealrelay.com/ and see the interesting discussion of approaches here: http://web.mit.edu/mitdlbc/www/articles/Major_Suit_Fits.pdf I've seen adhoc systems where 1♣ shows a 4cM, 1♦ denies a 4cM at bridge clubs, but they had no notes. You should adjust 1NT to 15-17, as right now your 1NT rebid is too wide, 11-15. 1X-2♣ as an artificial invite is not ACBL GCC (General Convention Chart) legal. For this market you should have 2m as natural, forcing bids with invite or better values.

this doesn't seem to be designed to have 4M and a longer minor playing canape I think it is essential to have something like this to unwind the hands

Since 1M keeps getting lighter and lighter, even among expert natural, the requirements for a GF correspondingly go up, meaning one should not waste most of the two level for relatively infrequent bids. One of the best approaches is: 1M-2♣: GF without 5+ in the other major, and not 3+ in M unless some slam interest (see Golady and equivalents) 1♠-2♦: transfer to ♥s, includes all GF with 5+♥s 1♥-2♦, 1♠-2♥: invite with 3+M, includes bad invites 1M-2NT (or some bid above 2M): GF raise with 3(4)M, no slam interest, and, if playing a limited 1M, some interest in 3NT (otherwise bid 1M-4M) Simple 1M-2♣ structure: - all of opener's rebids are natural except 2♦ which is catchall, either minor or minimum balanced - 1M-2♣-2M shows 6 or longer - 1♥-2♣-2♠ does not promise extras - 1M-2♣-2NT natural with extras - after opener rebids 2X (not 2NT) cheapest bid asks, natural responses except 2♠ shows ♦s, and 1M-2♣-2♦-2♥-3X is ♣s - after opener rebids 2♦, 2♠ by responder shows ♦s, and 3X is ♣s 1M-2♣-? 2♦: catchall, either minor or min bal -- 2♥: asks ---- 2♠: ♦s, 2NT re-asks ---- 2NT: min bal ---- 3X: ♣s -- 2♠: ♦s -- 2NT: bal -- 3X: ♣s 2M: 6+M, cheapest bid asks 2OM: 4+OM, cheapest bid asks 2NT: bal, extra 3m: natural, 5-5, good suits 3M: natural, one/no loser suit

thanks

Can you point out where you found this, as the GCC just says "Disallowed ... 5) Relay (tell me more) systems" edit: question answered below

I don't understand this reply. I've played Relay Stayman over 1NT, and it seems quite the relay to me.

As you can see from the reply to Scotts email, whatever you do don't describe your bids as "tell me more" Example: 2♣(Strong)-2♦(Tell me more]-2♥(Kokish)-2♠(Tell me more) = relay system for ACBL 2♣(Strong)-2♦(waiting]-2♥(Kokish)-2♠(waiting) = not a relay system for ACBL

the Meckwell approach is very good

the MAFIA responses combined with 2♦ 8-10 balanced is best of class

not what I'm proposing, the Q is a puppet (but not mandatory) to the cheapest bid the amount of times it goes opener-overcall-responder has GF with no fit-advancer can raise is not worth taking up a lot of bidding space, and establishing the GF/no fit gives opener forcing passes

perhaps the Q should be GF, no fit, and asks opener to bid 2NT unless shapely, and 2NT+ are raises

To answer the thread question, how do I design my very own HUM system, is that I put everything I like into it, such as: Pass: 13-16 bal NV, 10-13 bal V (I prefer value showing pass, that it is not forcing) 1♣: 14+ unbal, 17+ bal 1♦: 7-9, artificial, not too shapely 1♥: 0-6 fert (if ACBL allowed ferts, I would have been playing them for three decades) 1♠: 4♠s, (8-9)10-13, unbal with longer second suit, if 8-9 shapely, or (8-9)10-13 5-4/4-5+ in majors 1NT: 14-16 V, 10-12 NV 2♣/2♦/2♥: (8-9)10-13, 5+ suit, not 4+♠s, if 8-9 shapely 2♠: (8-9)10-13, 5+♠s, not 4+♥s, if 8-9 shapely 2NT: 5-7 shapely two suited In second seat, all openings go up 1 point (1♥ is 0-7) 4-4-4-1s are treated as bal

back to the glory days of rgb, here is this Bobby Goldman post: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.games.bridge/rNRZHbfN1Dk

To compare, Ben Lessard started the same thread both here and on BW (inverting 1H and 1S responses after a 1D opening) On BW he got 16 comments, including those from Kit Woolsey and Barry Rigal Here he got 7 replies

there is a design that compresses your 2♠ and 2NT, that is: 2D...transfer, 5 cards ......2S-GI, artificial ......2N-GF with a minor. ...........3C-no heart fit .................3D-short spade .................3H-3-5-4-1 .................3S-3-5-1-4 .................3N-no shortness or not slamming .................4C-2-6-4-1 .................4D-2-6-1-4 ...........etc. with heart fit becomes: 2D...transfer, 5 cards ......2S-GI, artificial or GF with a minor ...........2NT-no heart fit, not GF ...........3C-no heart fit, GF .................3D-short spade .................3H-3-5-4-1 .................3S-3-5-1-4 .................3N-no shortness or not slamming .................4C-2-6-4-1 .................4D-2-6-1-4 ...........3D-heart fit, GF ...........3H-heart fit, not GF

play opener always super accepts 1NT-2♦(transfer) with 4+♥s

Article: After 1M-1NT;-2♣-? Pass: to play 2♦: no other good bid, "almost always" 4♦, now 1♠-1NT;-2♣-2♦;-2♥ shows 3♥s 2♥: if new suit, 5+♥s 2M: preference 2NT, 3♣, 3M: invites rest: undefined in article, editor might have removed them

May issue of The Bridge World has Denis Lesage's Illizzag (Gazzilli spelled backwards): After 1M-1NT-?, 2♣: Artificial, less than 16 without 6+ in M, not 4+♥s if 1♠ opening 2♦: Artificial, 16-18, now 2OM or 3M establishes a GF 2M: 6+ in M, 11-15 2OM: natural if 2♥, 18-19 balanced if 2♠ 2NT+: various game forces What is nice about this is if 1M-2♣ is any GF, then 1M-2♦ can be a ♦ signoff