rbforster

Although no one seems to have mentioned this now, I will note that Bergen raises, for their preemptive nature, seem a much bigger plus if you're playing a limited opening bid system like precision. This way it's more often the opponents that you're preempting (at least compared to standard). If you play light and limited openings, say 9-15, you can really steal the auction sometimes when the opponent's have game but their points are evenly divided and the first opponent didn't quite have a call over 1M and the second isn't brave enough to double 1M-3M.

Does anyone here (among us crazy systems folks) play Bergen only over 1♥? I can see more benefits of a preemptive 3 level raise (whether constructive, limit, or weak) since the opps are more inclined to double or bid over 1♥-2♥ than over 1♠-2♠. After all, with spades and a 4 card constructive raise, you can always bid 3♠ later. It will be quite rare that the opponents will, having found a fit by interfering over 2♠, be able to and correctly judge compete to the 4 level over 3♠. This will save you from going down in 3♠ sometimes when there would not have been interference, as well as allowing for more precise game tries.

I play overcall structure in most of my partnerships, which switches X and 1NT (1NT is takeout, X is strong usually balanced). Double showing balanced seems safer than a standard 1NT here since when LHO has a penalty hand (X of 1NT or XX of a strong X) we can still stop in 1♠. I suppose the only downside to a strong (15+) double is that the opponents won't get overboard and bid a bad ♥ game and go down. If you start with 1♠, they might get optimistic.

I can see that opposite a minimum "stayman" response of 2♥ or 2♠ your weak hand with both majors can pass safely. What if partner inconveniently bids 2♦ with a max? Can you still stop at 2M?

If I wanted to get fancy, I might play this as either (natural and invitational+) or (any very weak invite, may not have hearts). Then responder can just bid 2♠ to decline the mild invite, over which natural game tries may continue and the heart suit will be known. Or with a hand that is interested in game opposite a mild invite, make a natural game try. I'll have to work out the continuations. Can't responder have 3♠5♥ (or even 6 bad hearts)? Surely you would bid Drury rather than risk a NF 2/1 2♥ call as a PH? So you could, in principle, be burying a 9+ fit in favor of a 7 card one. Still I agree it's a narrow target to play the 2♥ rebid as weak and NF, and it's more important to have methods to look for hearts after a 1♠ opening than to look for spades after a 1♥ opening (since 1♠ could have 5 or even 6 hearts, while 1♥ will not be 5-5 when a sound opener, usually 5+♥4♠ and only rarely 6♥5♠).

Cherdano, I think you quoted the wrong part of Adam's reply :). See below... It's just....bad bridge? :) Wow, every hand in 3rd seat - does that make it a forcing pass system? Here I thought I was a little nuts advocating all 8 counts/Rule of 15. Against those methods, I'd be tempted to trap pass with a strong NT now and then, just to see what happens.

It's even more clear you want a NF 2♥ response when you want to open AQJ Kxxx Jxxx xx 1♠ rather than 1♥ :) Kinda like those support doubles keeping you out of the 3-3 major fits.

I look forward to hearing once you figuring out your agreements B)

I had a feeling that might be the case. Replacing the game try asking bid (2M+1) with 2♦ seems reasonable. Unfortunately, I'm thinking about a system where 2♦ would be the drury response :).

I have a general question for those of you who play a version of drury that shows (or might include) hands with only 3 card support. If you only have a 5-3 fit, it might be worth looking for the 4-4 fit in the other major. Do you still check for this, or do you just give up and agree to playing in the opener's suit? I suppose you could play P-1♠-2♣*-2♥ natural 4+ and a real opener? P-1♥-2♣*-2♠ natural 4+ and extras Then again, I've heard some people like the 2♥ rebid (after 1♠ opened) to be natural and sub-minimum. It seems pretty clear 2♥ wants to be natural, but it's not clear to me what strength. Even if it shows a "real" opener, is it forcing opposite a minimum drury response who holds 3♠/4+♥? Another problem with this situation is how these bids to show the other major interact with your normal game tries. I like playing 2-way (Kokish) game tries, where P-1♥-2♣*-2♠ would ask for the cheapest help suit from responder P-1♥-2♣*-2NT/3♣/3♦ show opener's shortness in ♠/♣/♦ P-1♠-2♣*-2NT would ask for the cheapest help suit from responder P-1♠-2♣*-3♣/3♦/3♥ show opener's shortness in ♣/♦/♥ Is there any way to keep these nice game tries and still check for your 4-4 fit in the other major?

We would too, but the ACBL thinks that's be too much fun for the old folks to handle. 5+ in your bid suit and you're good to go on conventional responses, etc, around here.

So far, so good. I am happy with the constructive auctions for the most part, and have developed some reasonable agreements for game/slam exploration. It's a little tricky since both hands in a constructive auction are on 10-15, and we still have to look for major fits starting over 2♣. Still, like I said, I think these are all manageable issues since the PH's shapes are quite tightly defined. Currently I'm playing 2♦ and 2N as artificial asking bids over most 2♣ rebids, showing invite- and GF respectively. This seems pretty good. You can almost "pretend" you're bidding over a precision 2♣ opener and play similar methods (especially after a 1♦ opening). I'm also quite happy with the occasional pass outs - we avoid misfits on very weak hands where 2♣ could be in trouble and rarely miss a partial. Competitive issues have come up in real play, but I haven't really had enough experience to really say much definitively. The times it's come up it's been good for us - there are cases where partner can figure out to lead a club even when you passed throughout based on his strength and the opps bidding. Other times, we've been able to compete at a low level effectively without getting shut out. Small samples, like I say. New agreements will probably need to be worked out, but often it's as simple as not having separate PH agreements (like after a 1NT bid) so in that sense it makes things simpler sometimes. Edit: oh, and playing Free's style of two-suited weak two bids, showing 5+/4+ in the suit bid and a major are lots of fun too. Right now we're using 2m = 5+m/4+M (either longer), 2♥ = 5+♥/4+♠ (either longer), and 2♠ weak. You can still preempt at the 3 level with a 6 card single-suiter if the mood and colors encourage you.

At some point after I learned the old school jump shifts (17+ good suit) and before I learned Bergen, I played* Soloway jump shifts over 1M to promising one of 3 hand types - 4+ support and a good side suit (the suit bid). A minimum GF is enough strength. the old school jump shift, very strong single suiter slam invitational balanced hand, without a fit (wishes 4N were quantitative) All of the hands given by Arclight fall into the first category, and I would happily make a 3♦ bid with them. This will focus partner's hand evaluation on his fit for your good suit, which at worst should be something like KQJxx and more typically is AQJxx or AKxxx. I even had a partner make a jump with only AKJT and 5 trumps, allowed but definitely unusual. After the jump shift, opener will usually bid the next step to inquire which hand type. 3NT shows the balanced slam try, rebidding your suit shows the strong single suiter, and the remaining bids show 4+ trump support hands, where new suits show shortness and returning to opener's major denies shortness. For example: 1♠-3♦ - 3♥ (relay) - 3♠ - 4+♠s, good ♦s, no shortness, extras 3N - balanced slam try, ~16-18 4♣ - 4+♠s, good ♦s, ♣ shortness 4♦ - very good ♦s, single suited, ~17+ 4♥ - 4+♠s, good ♦s, ♥ shortness 4♠ - 4+♠s, good ♦s, no shortness, minimum GF At this point, you've very precisely described your hand to partner, who can cue bid, Blackwood, or sign off as appropriate. * I actually still play these together with Bergen, using 1♥-2♠ to show a Soloway jump shift in an undisclosed suit. The first relay asks which suit, and then the second shows shortness, etc, as above (it's a little complicated). Over 1♠-2N is the "compressed jump shift bid", and we move up J2NT and the Bergen bids up one step.

linked - the article in Esoterica 'TSAR' by Jeff Rubens at The Bridge World website. I'm also a fan of "3rd suit GF" when using 2/1 non-forcing methods.

I just wanted to add my regret that I can't kibitz my friends or stars playing in online tournaments. I have never played in such a tournament, but I know I would be much more likely to in the future if I could watch or two first. I don't know if this ban is the right choice for BBO - even if there are a few "self kibitzing" cheaters spoiling the tournaments, it may be worse to punish the very large number of real kibitzers. If the cheaters are motivated by earning masterpoints, perhaps the answer is to change the business model to running cheaper/free non-sanctioned events (in which cheaters would have less interest). You could even imagine charging a small optional fee per user for the right to kibitz all live tournaments for a year. I know I would definitely pay a yearly fee to regularly watch star players competing in live tournaments. Remember, there are a lot more honest folks out there. Make sure your business model reflects that.

I like your classifications, but I don't think they are nearly as hard to defend as you seem to imply by your ordering. Transfer preempts (type 6) are much easier to defend if you know what you're doing, and at worst you can just treat them like you would a regular preempt and still do pretty well. I would suggest something like: GCC - types 1-6 ok Midchart - also type 7, if the known suit(s) either 1) alway include or 2) never include suit bid Superchart - anything goes Oh, and I like how Strong Forcing Pass systems (15+) fall under type 1, so anyone should be able to defend them!

The General Chart fairly clearly refers to strong hands as 15+ HCP, and further that 2C and 2D openings are specially allowed to show a strong hand. There's nothing about how you can't show different kinds of strong hands, that you may only have one bid in your system for strong hands, etc. Heck, following the logic you received, you'd think a 15+ version of Namytas would be banned because it was a transfer opening (even though it has it's own specific exception). I think we can all agree that the ruling you received was not correct in light of what the GCC clearly says is allowed. It's certainly nothing personal for me. What Richard wants (in terms of defenses to his Midchart methods being approved, etc) is a complicated issue involving possibly considerable effort on the part of someone knowledgeable to handle well. Perhaps one could understand, if not forgive, the ACBL for not prioritizing this when 99% of all games are played at a GCC level. On the other hand, the General Chart is as much part of the rules governing a GCC event as are the Laws of Duplicate Contract Bridge. I would be as appalled that a TD denied your methods in a GCC event as I would if they gave my opponents two more tricks than they deserved due to some irregularity. The rules are very specific about what is allowed/required in that case, and any competent TD would either know the rules or where to look them up. Likewise, the GCC says that certain things are specifically allowed and so they should be, without any need for "interpretation" or "intent" by the TD. To have a TD (or worse, an ACBL official acting in his professional capacity) issue a mis-ruling that egregious is at best an example of incompetence and at worst a capricious misuse of their position. Follow the rules, that's why they're there. If some official thinks the GCC "intended" something other than what it says, they should argue for the wording to be changed or clarified. Until then, what they think shouldn't matter in the least for their rulings.

Completely ridiculous. It is arbritrary and clearly incorrect rulings like this that give ACBL regulations (and regulators) their well-deserved bad name.

My initial inclination was not to force to game. I also don't like side 4 card majors getting shut out by the jump - I think 3m there should show a hand primarily interested in playing in its minor or 3N. Why not bid 1NT forcing? If partner has 4+ hearts, you'll hear about them. If you don't like what you hear (partner rebids 2♣ or 2♠ most likely), you can always continue with 3♦ which should be invitational with long diamonds.

I play a 16+ strong club system with light openers (Rule of 18, ~9-15). I presently play standard precision openers for 2♣ and 2♦: 2♣ 6+ or 5C/4M, 10-15 pts 2♦ short diamonds (43)15, 4414, or 4405 shapes, 10-15 pts I know that many people don't like the 2♣ opener, especially with only 5 clubs, viewing it as a necessary evil in comparison to a completely nebulous diamond in competition. Similarly, 2♦ showing 3-suited with short diamonds specifically is very infrequent. I thought I had a neat new idea when I considered Pass(!) as the initial bid for both 2♣ and 2♦ hand types in 1st/2nd seat (standard precision openings would apply in 3rd/4th seat), although I found that it had been previously discussed here (impossible pass, 1435s). To avoid passing out "our" hand too often, I was thinking of opening all 8+ point hands in both 3rd and 4th seat (these minimal, possibly balanced hands would bid 1♦ 3+, 1♥♠ 4+, or 2♣ 5+). The relevant auctions to show these stronger passed hands would use a 2/1 bid of 2♣ or 2♦ as shown: P-1♦-2♣ 10-15 usually 5+♣ (except for 4414), NF P-1♦-2♦ 10-15 4+♦/6+♣ (inverted), NF P-1M-2♣ 10-15 5+♣, no fit for major, NF P-1M-2♦ Drury 3+M 10-15, forcing to 2M P-2♣-2♦ asking bid, forcing to 3♣ (with 9+♣ fit) Since I play a light opening bid system, the 2/1 bids by a passed hand cannot be "natural" in the sense that 10+ points and a 5+ suit would have already bid, so these 2/1 bids didn't have a good meaning before (aside from Drury). Assuming a reasonable set of constructive continuations can be worked out, I was trying to understand the trade offs between these methods and playing normal precision. Advantages of Passing with 2♣/2♦ hands: + 2♣ and 2♦ openings in 1st/2nd seat are available for weak preempts + better uncontested auctions since these hands will hear from partner about his best suit before bidding + 4-4 major suit fits can be found opposite hands too weak to move over a 2♣ opener + lighter bids in 3rd seat help with leads and annoy opponents + 1♦ opener in 1st/2nd seat can promise 3+ (instead of 2+) if we also pass with 3325 shapes out of NT range (ie 13-15 balanced, playing a 10-12 NT) + GCC legal (for those in the US that care) Disadvantages of Passing with 2♣/2♦ hands: - occasionally passing out "our" part-score hand with 14-15 opposite 6-7 pts - loss of the precision 2♣ opening as preemptive/lead directing when it's the opponents hand (less true of precision 2♦) - bidding by opponents may jam the auction before the strong passing hand can rebid (ie P*-(1♠)-P-(2♠)-AP B)) - 3rd seat preempts might need to be more disciplined to cater to partner's possible values - 3rd seat bidding with 8 point balanced hands could be risky when partner has a weak pass - loss of 2♣ as a conventional 2/1 by PH (2-way Drury or whatever) - 4th seat openings with minimal values could balance opponents into a partial when it was "their" hand (instead of being able to pass out) Despite the longer list of disadvantages, I think preemptive 2♣ and 2♦ openers and improved uncontested auctions would provide net gains due to their high frequency, while the disadvantageous scenarios seem less probable (at least to me). Please help me add to my lists with any other good or bad points you can think of - suggestions for improving these methods are most welcome!

With zero points, a fit, and no enemy competition yet, consider a short suit 2/1 and then drive to game ;).

I can't speak for the WBF, but in the US encrypted carding/signals are banned, but not encrypted bidding. Of course there are much fewer cases where encrypted bidding is practical (as opposed to encrypted signals, like varying your 3NT leads from 4th to 3/5 based on if you've got >8 pts vs not).

Personally I prefer to use 2♣ and 2♦ as encrypted drury, designed to confuse my opponents while still being constructive. Taking spades as an example, 1♠ - whenever light in 3rd seat, must have A or K of trump 1♠ - 2♣ - Drury with exactly one of the A or K of trump 1♠ - 2♦ - Drury with either both or neither of the AK in trump After the 2♣ response, often opener will have the other honor - either since he is weak and must have it, or if sound, will often have it. In those cases, the game tries and signoffs can be encrypted so the opponents won't know what is going on (and in cases where we aren't sure, we revert to normal methods). After 1♠ - 2♣ : 2♠ - light signoff (with A) or balanced minimum (with K) 2♦ - light signoff (with K) or balanced minimum (with A) or any sound hand (with neither) 2N - encrypted 2-way game try (responder shows cheapest help suit with A, cheapest missing help suit with K) 3♣♦♥ - encrypted short suit game try in suit bid (with A) or in next higher suit (with K) All rebids except 2♦ confirm the encryption. After a 2♦ bid that might be sound with neither honor, responder must bid 2♠ with the A (since 2♦ might be weak), over which sound openers may make a natural, unencrypted game try. Responder with the K (hence knowing opener is sound), he may make a natural, unencrypted game try over 2♦ (since opener might not have the other honor) or bid 2♠ to show a balanced minimum. Observe that the sequences P-1♠-2♣-2♠-P and P-1♠-2♣-2♦-2♠-P could either be a weak hand signing off, or alternatively one hand showing a balanced minimum and the other declining to invite game. These are two very different situations from the opponents' perspective of whether or not to balance in the auction.

How about a forcing pass system together with Lorenzo Two's? All the opening "bids" are pretty darn light. P - any 15+ (pass is forcing) 1m - 8-14 natural, 3+ of that minor (could be balanced out of 1NT range) 1M - 8-14 natural, 5+ of that major 1N - 9-11 balanced (NV), 12-14 balanced (Vul) 2m - 0-7 (8 balanced) 4+ m, no 4 card major 2M - 0-7 (8 balanced) 4+ M (could have a longer minor) Remember that the weak 2 bids with 0-7 points are mandatory!

I'm not sure about Europe, but in the US remember that the ACBL's general chart rules allow any defense you want to "conventional calls," in particular to an artificial 1♣ or 1♦ opening. So while you can't play 2♥ multi in ACBL Superchart events, you can use it as a weak jump overcall if your opponents play Precision, Polish Club, 1♣ "could be short" (2 or fewer), or even over a standard strong 2♣.