marcD

you may want to have a look at http://www.melihozdilbridge.com/english/esystem.htm .

bocchi does not say much . this is more fun to read : http://neapolitanclub.altervista.org/eng/f...as-opinion.html

This is from that link Is that really part of SEF? And if so, what do French players respond with a 2344 16-count? This is definitely not part of SEF . For starters SEF/Majeure 5eme does not include Inverted minors so you have to answer 2♣ over 1♦ with fairly unsusual shapes (with Kxx Kxx KQTxxx A pick you poison but I guess 2♣ is the safest lie). 2♥ does promise 5 cards . 2/1 is forcing to 2NT only. Agree with other statements - 1M-2x-2NT shows 15-17 . 1♦-2♣ is less standardized but the common treatement is to play it forcing a.k.a minimax (either good 13/14 or 18-19 , 3NT showing 15-17 with club shortage) - 2♣ and 2♦ openings are as described previously Be careful , SEF was written for education purposes so nobody plays SEF per se (this is France after all) . Taking SAYC as a base and being aware of the above is probably the best way to proceed - other differences may (my knowledge of SAYC is not that good) include * 2♣ relay over 1m-1M-1NT which is a specific for of checkback (2♦ no fit minimum, 2M FIT minimum, 2OM Fit maximum) with some other variants popular too * 1m - 1X - 1Y - 3m forcing

Passing is a bit rich for me at IMP. Spades and Hearts are breaking fine for declarer and I would not be surprised if 3S is making 50% or more of the time . Partner has definitely 5C and possibly 6 and is making an action double in case I have spade tricks (I sort of promised 4 of them already). The initial double is marginal at best

Guess it is a matter of cue bidding style but according to me Soth denied a club control and North accordingly signed off. Think South's Hand is strong enough to cue bid in Club first with 4C then with 5D over 4H.

Pass . 4♠ is brilliant but my partners cannot take a joke . 4♠ could possibly work at MP , would even less consider it at IMP

NV vs V this is a clear 1NT opener for me . the chances of rightsiding a NT contract by opening 1♣ are minimal. If I were to open 1♣ I would rebid 2♣ (I would possibly consider this if vulnerable)

I actually think it is much easier to bid 3♠ as East (does not promise much) than 4♠ from West : The 4♥ raise could be sort of a blackmail hoping to induce a costly defence at these vulnerabilities

Hate 3♥ too but if I rebid 2♥ (the "reasonnable" choice) there are too many hands where partner is going to pass and 4♥ has some play or is cold . I think 3♥ is the practical bid under the system conditions.

Seems 4♠ was perfect . It may be occasionnally too high but it is much better to mix it up rather than offer a roadmap to law addict opponents.

Interesting thead. I play that rdbl shows spades so It would be my choice ; however, playing standard do not see what's wrong with rdbl (guess i would take my chance with dbl over 2♦). May this example just shows that the standard definition of redouble is pretty much useless

That's always a good thought : wins the post mortem :( Still even though the no brainer systemic bid is 1NT I think the right bid seems to be 2♠. Will take the blame if the experiment goes wrong but system is supposed to help no to get in the way

Not my style. Only acceptable over 1♦. Perhaps too conservative by today's standards but that's what my partners would expect

2♠ guarantees 4 trumps so .. 2♠. I'ill pretend I missorted my hand. Even if we belong in 3NT rightsiding the contact may be critical

I guess it is a matter of agreement . For me South dbl shows values. I think is dbl is clearcut (3NT is not out of the picture if North has a stopper). Pass from North is not an option (good offense, no defense) . Close call between 4♣ and 4♦.

I think this post captures very well the issues. I would bid 1♣-1♥/1♠-2♦/3♦-3♥ (prefer 1S over 2S as I do not want to emphasize too much clubs / we may even belong in diamonds !), 3D over 2D shows 5C non minimum, diamond fragment and uncertainty over final contract). Over 3♥ I would cue bid 4♣ (side benefit of not emphasizing clubs too much earlier in the auction). 4♦ would show diamond control for me . That said the is not the best slam ever and getting to 6♥ or 6NT by North is not that easy

Because handling these hands in competition is difficult (often you face the choice of passing or committing the partnership to the 3 level) ? (1m - 1S - P - 2S - ?, 1m - P - 1S - 2H - ?) especially if partner insists on playing support doubles. getting rid of these hands provides much better definition of your hand in competitive auctions. So I do see some merit to this treatment even though the problem hands when opening 1m do not appear all to often

Interesting post . Only a beginner or someone looking to win a brilliancy prize would pass with this hand. I can see the logic but it all rests on responder not passing with an average/good balanced hand . I think it was Ed Manfield who wrote an article advocating passing with good hand lacking clear direction in BW a few years ago.

Not sure what partner is doing . Anyway I am not passing : not my problem if we are off 2 aces . 6♥ to show good trumps and side source of tricks (the only reasonnable way to invite 7).

Frankly, the main reason I play this method is that it is standard here. Do not think garbage stayman is a big winner in a strong NT context so I do not really miss it and knowing 2♣ shows at least invitational values does help in competitive auctions. Another (small) benefit of bidding 2NT with both majors is that it allows to locate a spade fit more easily in slam auctions (which otherwise would probably start 1NT 2♣ 2♥ 3 or 4NT Over 2NT most player play 3♣ and 4♣ as transfers for H and 3♦ and 4♦ as transfers for spades. Playing 3♥ and 3♠ as natural SI(instead of natural GI) makes sense but a downside is that the 3 level xfers are no longer SI . to address the information leak issue some pairs play that 1NT 3♦ shows 4M333 , 3♥ 4spades, 3♠ 4♥ without slam ambitions

4♥ intending to dbl 4♠ later if applicable to show desire to bid 5♥ (either on a 4♠ overcall or takeout dbl with 4♠ answer)

As mch as I do not like to dbl with a void , here the extra power + the MP format makes the dbl clearcut. I think the most likely explanation for the hesitation is that partner cannot remember where he parked his car. In any case , no one but a complete beginner would tank for 30s wsith a penalty dbl of clubs

I am with Gerben on this one . Disagree with the message below. You cannot expect this pair to have formally agreed to a defense in this situation . I think part of the thinking from East could be to figure out which more common situation is this hand like : does the 1st round double induce a force (like a redouble ) answer no, is this to be treated like a delayed 2♣ overcall (DBL takeout), would take out by partner be takeout , so his pass could be for penalties and i am suppose to double etc (I guess not). It would help to know whether this was a short match or not and whether pre-alert was used . barring that I would give EW the benefit of the doubt. The only thing W can infer from his partner hesitation is that E has no natural bid By the way I would hesitate with E hand too : My choice would be between pass and dbl (points/DSIP). (2♣ by my partner on the 1st round would have been takeout, Dbl shows points, dbl second round by west would have been penalty). It is a matter of style but do not think penalty dbl by East is an option

at IMP I would only consider 3♠ and 4♦ (pass might be correct at MP , 3NT is sick ). Guess 3♠ is clear in spite of my longer diamonds as partner could still surprise me and rebid 3NT or 4♣(much harder on 4♦)) .

2♦ lead directing :) 2NT takes too much space and shows some extra in my book . For all I know , partner's plan may be to rebid 2♥ or 2♠ and I will be happy to pass (I assume we do not play NFB)