pbleighton

4H. 2H is a MP bid, IMO, and even at MPs I might bid 4H. Peter

3H is enough. Both opps have shown points, and your CK is probably worthless. If pd has the right hand he will go. 4H is much better than pass, however. Peter

Does anyone know of a writeup of such a system (in English)? I have a BTC document, but haven't been able to find any "natural canape". Is it a practical approach? Peter

Nice problem. 3C and 3H are both bad. I bid 3H. I play 3C as absolute GF, which may be old fashioned. Peter

After 6S, I double, and hope. Peter

Pass on the first. I would bid at any other vulnerability, or at MPs. Pass on the second. Kind of close, but too flat. 2S. I don't like the hearts or the shape, but I still bid. Peter

"Incidently, I would have opened it 2♣, but 1♥ is ok too." I think this isn't consistent with rebidding 3H. To make a NF bid after pd has bid, on a hand you think good enough for a GF opener makes no sense. Either bid is OK in isolation, but if you think the hand is worth 2C, you must make a forcing bid now. I would have opened 1H and rebid 2S. I *never* do this, but the alternatives are worse. 2N is closest, but it hides your 6 card suit. Nice post, Hannie. Peter

5D. Peter

Some ammo for the strong NT'ers: The common arguments against weak NT are: 1 They bury your fit. This is a real problem. 2 They go down. This can be a problem down 2 vulnerable, and very occasionnally doubled, but generally it is not nearly as common to get a bad board as with 1. 3 Strong NT hands opened 1m are vulnerable to a WJO, especially if you don't have very sound 1m openers. Pd doesn't know what to do with a 9 count. True, but not frequent. There is one good argument against weak NT which I have very rarely seen in this type of discussions. That is that strong NT hands opened 1m lose in part score auctions where it goes 1m-1M- (1S or 1NT) -2M, and you must let them play in 2M or balance, and the strong NT pairs see the auction go 1NT-All Pass. In my experience, this is a much more frequent than 3. Generally, playing weak/mini NT, we have preempted opps games a LOT more than they have ours. Peter

"Playing weak NT, what do you do with this? QJx xxx AKxx AQx 1D-1S ?" 1NT. Pd can rebid S if weak or use NMF if he is strong enough to invite over a strong NT opener. "Or 1D-1H-X-P ?" 2S. You have been given warning that a 4-3 fit may play better than NT, a warning probably not received by the strong NT bidders :( Peter

"Are transfer responces to natural 1♣ GCC legal?" No, unless they are game forcing. In response to Justin's question: I have played a wide range - occasionally awkward, but not bad as a tradeoff. I am currently playing 10-13 NT, with very undisciplined 2 bids (including 2C) with a range of 9(8)-12, so that minor suit openings are 13+, and the 2M support rebid is 15-17 support points, or 14 only if 4333. We are careful about raising with 3 with a dead minimum. Peter

Ron - Which Dune movie - the 1984 version (I liked it a lot, though it didn't really *get* the book, which is my favorite sf book), or the made-for-tv miniseries of a few years ago, which didn't have the production values, but which was truer to the book? Peter

"I don't think the 2♠ bid is that bad." I didn't say "bad", I said "adventurous" :D Peter

"I like the structure I suggest better when not vulnerable." Well, let's face it, all of the stuff we've been discussing plays a LOT better NV. Your 2S bid is a bit adventurous, even by my very relaxed standards, but it would be a lot of fun :D Peter

"You can certainly increase the frequency of the 2D preempt by permitting 2D openings on 5-4 patterns and the like, however, this dramatically increases the chance of missing a fit in a side suit." True, which is why I play them with a 2NT relay response. It doesn't help on the part scores, but the game/slam bidding is decent, as long as you keep a relatively tight point range (I use 9(8)-12). I agree that playing 5 card weak 2s with the only 5 card suit hands being 5332 doesn't make sense. I also agree with your implied point that this style requires a very high tolerance for bad results. It can ruin an otherwise respectable game. It can also turn an OK game into a win. It depends on your attitude towards high variance systems. I know that Justin hates them - if I could play like him I might hate them too (though I doubt it). I know you don't have much of a problem with them. I have no problem whatsoever. To each his own. Peter

"You'll quickly discover that the assumed fit style is both more frequent and better at finding 7+ and 8+ card fits at the 2 level" Richard: Without regard to suit quality, 5 card weak 2s in all suits have a 65% frequency in a given point range. What 2 bid structure do you use which has a higher frequency? Peter

"Peter - I had thought about the 4 natural weak 2's idea and threw them out because of frequency. However, at that time I was considering only 6 card suits. When you mention 5 card preempts you are going to have the following issue: are they exactly 5 carders or 5+? If exactly 5, you are going to be opening on 5332s, or else they will have a side suit. If 5+, do you allow a side suit? Either way, any constructive auction will need to find this out and with too many hand types this would be quite difficult. Also, I don't mind NF responses, but would think that the relay should be next step as in EHAA (rather than 2NT)." EHAA uses NF responses, and doesn't have a relay - 2NT is invitational with less than 3 trumps. If you use 2H as a relay over 2D, you lose 2H NF. The 2NT relay works quite well, except for 5-5s. If you are 6-4, rebid the lower ranking suit, and pd can check back. 2x-3x is invitational and 2+ trumps when opps are silent (preemptive when they double or bid, or if you are a passed hand). I do open 5332s - rebid 3NT after the 2NT relay. If you are GF and have a 5 card major or 6 card minor, bid your suit at the 3 level. Peter Peter

Hannie, some random thoughts: What about 4441 shapes? Your 2M openings seem like they would perform poorly. Caroline Club uses 5M4m, and puts 4M5m into 1M, therefore 1M-1NT-2m and 1H-1S-2m is clear. Would that work for you? You might want to shift your 1NT and 2C bids up a bid, making them NF, to put some pressure on the opps. 1NT could be both minors. If majors can be canape as above (including 4M6+m), then 2m could be 6+, no 4cM. The canape openers might be handled pretty well because of the transfer openings. Your openings are unlimited. How light will you respond? This might be the toughest issue for you, especially if you respond light enough to mitigate the loss of preemtive 2 bids. Peter

Seems good to me. However, have you considered the "simple option" - 5 card weak twos in all suits, suit quality no an issue not vulnerable, cowardice permitted when vulnerable? It has the huge advantage of frequency. Some people discount natural 2m openings, but I have found them to be very effective. Opps have three possible games to investigate, which can tie them in knots. They also have a proclivity for marginal 2M overcalls, which can be very profitable. In response, I play a new suit at the 2 level as to play. I like the idea of combining undisciplined shape with a fairly narrow strength range, allowing 2NT to be a GF "show your shape, partner" relay. I realize that this is probably not what you're looking for ;) Peter

"Roland, 1NT is certainly an option (I would open 1NT), but to claim it's the only correct option borders on indoctrination." Indoctrination? I just had a thought - are Roland, Ben, Richard, and Ron really just one bridge evangelist with a brutally split personality? :blink: Peter

"...4x opening or overcall as showing a strong hand rather than pre-emptive" IMO, a 4M call shows a hand which has lots of strength if the contract is in your suit, but not much in the way of defense. Like this one. It is really a perfect 4S overcall, because slam is very unlikely, and if the opps can set it, they probably have a game. Peter

"But scoring is MP and often there is 3NT+1 and 4♠." This is an important point (I have to admit that I paid no attention to scoring in my first post). I know a number of players who are no trump hogs at matchpoints, going for the extra 10 points in an anti-field contract. While the bid is somewhat unusual at IMPs, it is much less so at matchpoints. In any event, it's just a judgment call, in spite of the fact that none of the posters, myself included, would have made that call. Peter

My decision would have been to admonish West for wasting my time. Opening 1NT with a singleton honor is not alertable. As to North's 3N bid, it was a judgment call to play in 3NT if pd only has 3. He has a mediocre suit and semibalanced shape. As to the title of your post, any suggestion of cheating (if that is what is implied) is unsupported by the facts. Peter

"The ACBL requires that the Goren HCP evaluation method be used, but does not allow Goren distribution adjustments, and it has no right to do either" Except that it does, and in ACBL events, what it says goes. Peter (no fan of the ACBL)

"You might find The Bridge World June 2005 editorial of interest. The ACBL regulation is supposedly based on Law 40D, but is actually in conflict with it. A competent director should allow a 1 level opening on your second hand, but might look skeptically at your first one." Do you have a link to this article? The directors I have seen rule on this issue have always taken the attitude that all 8 counts are OK under the GCC (a pretty straightforward reading), and I believe at least two of them to be quite competent. I have never tested the second hand scenario. I can believe that there are directors who would permit the second hand. Peter