rbforster

1. 2♦ overcall initially, with sympathy for X (and pass hearts) or pass (and later 2N). I don't like X on the first when partner rates to bid hearts and I can't pull to NT. 2. Pass, and it seems pretty clear with partner as a PH

Prior discussion of both direct and balancing doubles in the auction 1D-1N.

This makes some sense. If you play X as takeout, isn't it essentially 4=4 majors? I mean if you're strong enough to compete over 1N, you would probably have overcalled a 5cM if you had one. And if you had 4423 or 4414 with similar values, you would have doubled the first time around. So the delayed double is looking more and more like 4432 or 4441, which is to say "takeout of clubs".

I think I would. I sometimes play 2♣ as 5+ clubs and a 4+ major, weak 2 strength. That doesn't do perfect justice to this hand, but it clues partner in to my major and gives me some latitude if I later bid some unreasonable number of clubs.

Although you'll block the suit leading low if declarer has Jxx, and you need to run partner's 5 heart tricks before letting them in.

You get invitational and distributional jumps by opener, typically 5/5+, if you're playing precision or playing Gazilli in standard. I might wish I was playing weak jump shifts here (1♥-2♠ as weak rather than invitational), since then it would be clear 3♠ is forcing after opener shows a maximum. Lacking this, I'm glad I have such good spades and don't have too much in terms of extra strength which makes 4♠ acceptable.

Double is cards, right? I've got plenty, and many of them are even likely to take tricks against 5♣ :D. Hopefully partner won't pull to 5♥ when it's wrong.

I like the squeeze line as well. Draw trumps, AK♦, and then run trumps pitching diamonds from East. Picks up Qx♦, 3-3♠ and either hand with Qxx♦+4♠.

4♠ - still looking for the right strain. Masterminding since it was a posed problem, 5N pick a slam :). If I understand your double style, partner is more likely to have wasted heart values by taking other actions than double? This seems to suggest caution. As for what I expect from partner, seems like he could have: 1) slam interest with clubs, too good for 5♣, or 2) a semibalanced/flexible hand with clubs, unsure what strain is right 3) a balanced hand with stopper(s) too good for a direct 3N (or do you start those with double?)

4♣ sounds good to me, since it shows my 2 suits. I think I'm content over 4♠, since I think partner might have done something stronger (like 4♦♥ with a better hand). After all, I would usually have more HCP strength for a 4♣ bid, so if partner isn't interested enough to do more than take a spade preference I'm willing to call it a day.

Also, while this may be a little more detailed question than you've considered, what are your rebids going to look like after 1♣ (forcing) - 1♦ (negative?). I can see there being some confusion between minimum club hands with 4♠ and the intermediate 5♠ hands (since only one of these can rebid 1♠). I might suggest: 1♣(various, forcing)-1♦(generally negative): 1M 4M unbalanced with clubs (usually 5), almost forcing 1N 17-19 2♣ 5+♣, no 4cM, intermediate ~14-18 (else 2♣ initially) 2♦ artificial force (22+ unbal/24+ bal) 2M 5+ strong but NF, ~18-22 2N 22-23 3♣ 5+♣, no 4cM, strong but NF, ~18-22 This assumes increasing your 1M openers to 11(?)-17, and dropping your 2N opening to a standard 20-21.

It seems like your basic idea is along the lines of the Swedish/Polish club - 1♣ being natural or strong, but removing the weak NT hands entirely (those being passed rather than opened). Perhaps you could share some of your thoughts about the choices you made here. My take: - I like your 2♣ opener - why make 1♥ stronger than 1♠? Seems like you could have 1♠ go up to 17 too for consistency (and to avoid another hand type in 1♣) - I take it you're not opening balanced 13 counts or weaker - your 2♦♥ openers seem to be assigned to pretty rare hands. would it be so bad to include those in 1♣ (strong) and 1♥?

Nice suggestion Adam. If you're opening all your unbalanced hands in 1st/2nd, the strong forcing option in 3rd/4th can be higher since there are so many fewer hand types to worry about. In particular, I think 1♣ probably wants to include a couple of the balanced 8-16 ranges since you'll have a potentially artificial 1♦ response that you can use to separate strengths. Maybe this means you play a strong diamond in 3rd/4th.

This is Non-Natural Systems... it's par for the course. Besides, aside from the customary alerts of 1m openings similar to any strong C/D system, all the rest of the bids are very natural. All the bids show the suit they have!

Nick suggested in this thread the outline of a system that passed all balanced hands of 16 or less. I'm not sure this is a good idea, but I thought the idea was interesting enough to try to throw something together to start some discussion. I tried to incorporate the ideas Nick had assembled (light canape 1H, wider ranging 5+ 1S, wide ranging 2C, etc). P weak or 0-16 bal (no 5cM if 8+) 1♣ 10-15(16) unbalanced catchall: 5 card minor, or 5 hearts (generally stronger than 1♥), or 4441 1♦ strong: 16+ unbal or 22+ if balanced 1♥ 4+ 8-13, 4♥ minor canape, 5332, 1444, or 6+ and a little too good for a weak two 1♠ 5+ 8-15(16 if bal) 1N 17-19 bal 2m 8-15 6+ 2M normal weak twos 2N 20-21 Over 1♦, play you favorite strong diamond system. Over 1♣, use 1♦ as catchall, either weak or no better bid, and otherwise standard responses. 1♣(unbal catchall)-1♦(weak or catchall)-? 1♥ 5+ hearts with a side suit, or 5332 14-16 1♠ 4 cards, 4S/5m or 4441 1N both minors: 5/4+ either longer 2m 4♥/5 minor and a decent hand (13-15, else open 1♥) 2♥ 6+ and a decent hand P-? 1♣ 8-15 catchall: 8-13 balanced, 3-suiters, 2 suiters with a 5c minor, or 6+ diamonds and a good hand 1♦ strong: 16+ unbal, bal: 17-19 or 22+ 1M usually 5+ 8-15 1N 14-16 2♣ 8-15 6+ 2♦ 8-11 6+ (could maybe be weaker too) 2M normal weak twos 2N 20-21 After P-1M, use Drury or 1N forcing to handle decent passed hands. P-1♣-? 1♦ catchall: weak with no 4cM or balanced 11-13 (4cM ok) ----> 1M natural, Polish style (could be 3 if 8-10 balanced); 1N rebid or 2M raise show 11-13 bal ----> 1N 11-13 balanced ----> 2♣ both minors, 5/4+ either way ----> 2♦ 6+ good hand with diamonds (13-15) 1M natural NF (limited to 10 hcp): 4 cards if 8-10 bal, or 5+ if weak ~4-7 pts 1N 14-16 bal no 5cM, strong NT systems on (4cM ok)

For those playing 2N was a 6 card major and a balanced maximum, do you have an agreement on whether or not this includes/denies 3 spades?

Thanks for pointing that out - I'll see if I have it mislabeled somewhere. Josh - if you start reading about page 34, he gives some description of what all the funny symbols mean. Roughly speaking, he's asking the question - in a given potentially ambiguous 3rd hand defensive situation, can the defender figure out what's going on using a particular system of leads from the cards seen at T1 in the suit? If not, how much partial information does he have at T1? What about seeing the cards from T2 in that suit?

Unless they are known for really crappy overcalls and/or not playing 2♠ as a weak jump overcall, I think I'm playing overcaller for a diamond honor and laying down the ace.

No additional inferences from the 2H rebid, should you choose to make it. A 2H opening would be weaker than Rule of 18, typically 3-8(bad 9).

You hold a maximum precision opener and must choose a rebid over partner's 1♠ response playing a 2/1 style: [hv=d=y&s=sqjthkq9xxxdkxca9]133|100|Scoring: IMPs 1♥-1♠ ? 1♥ was limited, 9-15[/hv]

big offensive takeout

I think about the worst hand I can construct for partner is Kxx Ax(x) (x) AKQxxxx Even opposite this, I think 5♦ has better play than 3N, and there are good chances for 6♦ if partner holds 3 aces which seems pretty likely since he should at least have clubs & hearts for his minimum bid. I'll make a move forward, but confess I don't know which.

For this problem, I think I'd bid 3♥ to emphasize my nice ♥ suit, which will probably play better in 4♥ opposite Qx and short clubs than anywhere else. It also leaves as much space as possible for partner to bid 3N himself or 3♠ perhaps. In general, I think you're always going to have this problem since partner can always make a space-consuming 3♦ rebid over your 2♥s. Perhaps expanding 1♠-2♥-2N to include hands with stoppers in both minors would help some, even allowing a stiff in hearts like 51(43). This would allow 1♠-2♥-3m to promises a purer hand with extra strength and/or a 5 card minor, so it's more reasonable that you make the 3N-vs-not decision purely on your own.

In retrospect, I think I'd almost feel better if partner had responded 1♥ instead of 1♦ in terms of the decision to bid the (more obvious) 2♠ rather than a pessimistic 1♠. I spent some time looking at 4M-6m strong hands in the ~19-21 point range and my conclusions (perhaps obvious?) was that these hands are quite strong with a 4-4 major fit, but otherwise playing in the minor was usually best. Taken together, it seems that 4M or 3N are the likely targets for game assuming partner has some values, and without a spade response, 3N seems a closer target than 5♣. Given our heart shortness, a 1♥ responses, especially in Walsh style, would be a lot more encouraging for a likely stopper/lead-deterrent than 1♦ (which very likely denies length in either major and will indicate the ♥ lead against NT once I rebid spades).

Partner expects you to often open light, should you so choose. At V/V, what's your call? [hv=d=y&v=b&s=saqt98xxhdqt8xxcj]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] If you open 1♠ and the auction gets competitive, do you generally plan on introducing your diamonds or do you treat this as a 1-suiter? For example: 1♠-(2♣)-2♥-(P) ?