rbforster

I was just going off the ACBL’s definition since that’s where I play, and for their purposes Artificial is anything not Natural or Quasinatural, so for unbalanced preempts this means denying 4+ cards in the suit bid. https://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/about/181AttachmentD.pdf

In addition, 2♠ promising 4+ is still “quasi natural”, again still with possible implications for other suits. “Artificial” is reserved for things neither natural nor quasi natural. 3(b) Any opening bid at the two-level or higher showing 4 or more cards in the suit bid In Basic, weak twos are Natural (5+) and weak 3’s require 6+ (with some Hcp requirements on 2’s) In Basic+, weak twos and 3’s are Natural (5+), (with fewer hcp restrictions on 2’s) In Open, various types of weak or possibly weak Artificial openings are disallowed, but natural and quasi natural (4+) are fine, subject to a few hcp restrictions In Open+, somewhat fewer weak or possibly weak Artificial openings are disallowed (usually to protect the top players from things like 2♥ multi) I have yet to figure out if I want to preempt with 4 card suits for a weak two, ie 2H majors / Ekrens (4+/4+), but it’s fine in Open, or similar things that have the suit they bid.

Looks like 3343 would bid 2♦, lacking 4M or 5♣?

If your partner makes a positive response instead of 1D, you are better placed. You know a fair bit about his shape, his values, and in almost all cases, you will be well below 2N (which you might have opened instead). There will be space to using asking bids, relays, etc, to taste starting from a lower level and hence you can find out more information. With a relay system, you will be able to get partners full shape after a positive response, and often be able to get an ask about his general strength as well, all below 3N.

I use 1C-1D(including all negatives)-1N as one range and 1C-1D-1H(art)-1S(waiting)-1N for the other of the two lowest balanced ranges. 22+ would bid higher at one point or another. You need to have a few more systems to allow 1C-1D-1H artificial to work, but it’s not too bad.

I’m not sure about your 1C structure is, but for me, I can stop at 1N (or as if I opened 1N, ie transfers, etc) with both the 16-18 and 19-21 ranges. Yes, this allows the opps to overcall 1C when they might not have otherwise been able to if I opened 2N, but at the same time, I can do much better slam bidding via relays if uncontested and have a better idea of if I want to explore while still below 3N. I think uncontested that it it’s clear 1C is better, so if you are fairly sure you’re losing on frequent competitive situations due to not having a split balanced range, that would be a good reason to consider the natural 2N. Against this, when one hand is balanced, it’s more often others will be too, so your opponents are less likely to have a good hand for interference when you’ve got a big balanced hand than for example if you have a big one suiter. Or you could play 2N as 12-14 like Zia did in some high variance tournament where he was swinging ;).

I have not. Can you link it so I can check it out?

For a while I tried to get a 2/1 non-forcing, non-constructive framework to work over a limited/precision 1M opener. The general idea was that 1N was forcing and included all GF hands without M support, while 1M-2x would be a 5-6+ suit with short M somewhat like a weak two. After 1M-1N, opener responded like a forcing NT in 2/1 making a natural rebid, after which responder could pass, preference to 2M, or bid a new suit to show a GF hand. Even with lots of articulate responses at that point, there just wasn’t space to reasonably sort out possible fits below 3N with many possible responding GF hands. This was partially hobbled by trying to be GCC at the time, which precludes things like transfers over 1M and such, that seem more promising.

Thanks for the explanation. Good luck in handling the extra load and I look forward to these solitaire versions returning to their old state once things settle down on your end.

Same question, the sizes of all the cards are super big now compared to how they were this weekend, in addition to the player/chat list starting on that side by default. I seem to remember a way to adjust the font size but that seems to be gone too. I also can’t get the double dummy results anymore when looking at the hand results. Animations when playing are also much slower. Edit: there do seem to be some new features, like being able to only see certain hands when you replay the hand in the results, and letting you declare when your partner robot steals the contract from you. For comparison, you can see the difference if you look at the Practice->Bridge Master teaching hands, which use the old format, and the Solitaire->Just Play Bridge, or Bridge 4 ones, which use the new format.

a slight tweak to that might be 1♠ 4♠ and longer minor 1N 4♥ and longer minor 2N strong unbalanced no 4M You could probably put the (41)44 hands into the 4M unbalanced openings instead of 1♣ if you wanted.

If you want to include those, it looks like you could use 1H-2S or 1S-2D. Do you really need 1H-1S forcing natural as well as a 1H-2S invitational jump? You could consider using 1H-1S-rebid-3S as your invite along the lines of normal 2/1. It’s not as low, sure, but maybe it’s ok. If 1S-2D shows hearts less than a GF (assuming your could relay with a heart GF), possibly weak with long hearts, it’s not getting passed in 2D, right? So maybe there’s space in your openers rebid structure to allow 3m to be a GF minors hand as well as weak-invitational with hearts if openers typical responses are 2H/2S/3H (maybe make 2N a H superaccept instead of 3H jump raise to stay lower). Another option might be give up your (Jacoby?) 1M-2N response. What types of responding major fit hands do you typically not want to relay ask with? You do have void splinters and maybe there’s space in your 1M-(2M-1) raise to include a few odd GF raises hands like maybe singleton splinters, ie 1S-2H(raise)-2S-4m. If you free up 2N, you can use that to show both single suited GF minors hands along the lines of strong Solloway jumps if you use relays, ie 1S-2N-3C(relay): 3D strong diamonds hand 3H strong hearts hand(?, that wanted to show instead of relay) 3S clubs with 4+ major support, no shortness 3N solid clubs 4C not solid clubs 4DH splinter with good clubs and major support 4S as 3S but fast arrival so not as slam interested Over 3D or 3H, opener relays again and you use all the same answers as above to describe which type of strong D or H hand they have (except possibly 3S-vs-4S might not be available). You can do a similar thing for jumps over 1H but then the space works best if you use 1H-2S as the strong jump so there’s space to unwind it all below 4H according to the above scheme.

I seem to remember the “simple” defense to precision 2D was “double and lead trump”. As such, a 14+ balanced hand or similar probably wants to start with a double and aim for penalties. Furthermore, with bad breaks in most non-♦ suits, overcalls should be made more cautiously and on better/longer suits, ie for 2M overcalls.

Start transfers with XX as suggestion / transfer to NT, where opener can bid something else if he has good shape. After 1N, you can give meanings to new suits (two suiters DONT style?) as well as returning to 2M (maybe 3M invite?). Pass followed by any action from responder shows the strong misfit hand, ie X is penalty, NT bids are natural. With transfers to a two level suit, opener will accept if he doesn’t have anything exceptional to bid, ie good 5/5 or good 6+ suit rebid. Then responder can bid 2N or self raise (invite), or return to 2M (weak fit with lead direction, or however you want to play it), or bid a new suit as a natural GF.

Here’s the basics. In a relay sequence, after asking for AKQ=321 points, https://bridgewithdan.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/IMprecision.pdf Also try searching just this forum (Non-Natural) for the word “parity”. You should see a collection of posts PCB## from 2017 where different hands are bid, as well as another set on Auction Termination from 2013 with examples. There are only 2-3 pages of threads in total.