bluecalm

So if partner leads a Q and you have xxx(x) what do you discard ? How do you know if he had lead QJ8x and wants attitude for a ten or if he had led from KQT9x and just want count ?

Damn, my pattern recognition doesn't work well enough. This time I haven't even thought about it :(

Who cares about standard let's just think what is the best. I don't have strong opinion. I play natural leads all my life (Ace from AK, King from KQ, Queen from QJ etc. give attitude and if it doesn't matter then count) and I haven't noticed many problems. With one partner we agreed to play Ace = unblock/count , rest = natural. I have two questions for "unblock/count to A/Q" users: a)what do you lead from QJ9x(x)/QJ8x(x) ? b)what do you discard from Txx and from xxx ?

Interesting. Could you give some more details for bidding after responses showing minor suit ? For example: 1♠ 2♣ 2♠/2NT - ??? It seems to me there may be problem with space in those. Also what 3♣/3♦/3♥/3♠ after 2♣ mean ?

3♥ for me too. The reason is that partner is not likely to have 2-3 majors because with such hand he would strive to bid 3♥ himself (and even if he didn't he will bid 4 now). That leaves all the 2-2-5-4/2-2-6-3/2-1-6-4 for him and opposite that and minimum we don't want to be in game usually.

I like passing in teams. The only real danger I see is that partner is like 13+ and couldn't make t/o double. Imo with most hands like: AQTx xx AKxx Jxx he should've bid 1♠ anyway though so this is not that big of a problem. I think 2 more common scenarios are: a)partner has something but he couldn't bid because of club length and then collecting a couple of 100's will make for any possible partscore we could make (or they could make...). b)opener is 18-19 balanced then we really want to pass this one

Yes, right. I worked out follow ups which allow this but then it stops being so simple. You can reverse 2♥ and 2♠ bid gaining one more step which make it easier to agree 2nd suit (because then 2♠ is relay and you show 4card suit by transfer). So it would go like this: 1♠ - 2♣ 2♥ - ???? 2♠ = relay, show your suit by transfer (then accepting transfer shows 4 card support, bidding openers suit shows 3+card support; one can agree that accepting transfer asks to show shortness too). 2NT/3♣/3♦ are all free to use here. Following ideas from Ambra one can use 2NT as slam try in clubs and 3♣ as hand with 6 clubs but without slam aspirations. The problem is that with minimum you don't have this step available. Anyway, this is one of many schemes possible. I like it on first view. The possible issue is with showing 5-5 later (responder may be interested in making slam attempt in diamonds for example opposite 5-5 but not 5-4 and it would be useful to have room to show both strength and diamond length which seems to be difficult to achieve here. Well there is something going for natural bidding. You won't forget and maybe gains from artificial scheme aren't that big. That being said I think 1M - 2c sequence is one of those when it's really worthwhile to play something different than standard.

Haha, right. It's not "equal level" afterall and but the idea is similar enough I think :)

I remember toying with those schemes some time ago. I think there are better ones than just reversing 2D and 2M. For example: 2D = any minimum without 6card major 2H = 6card major any strength 2S = any 5-4 max 2NT = natural, max (5-3-3-2) 3C/3D/3H 5-5 natural, max After 2D you can bid 2H asking and follow ups are symmetrical. Is one very simple scheme without all the relays which I think is very good.

+1 for that. Martens even reccomends using transfers after 3♣ opening ! He also reccomends using transfers after 3H openings/overcall after 1NT (then dbl is transfer to spades and 3S is transfer to 3NT/stopper ask. I wish one day I will form partnership with someone willing to play all those toys :P

Just to clarify, you guys are talking about: 1m - X - pass - 1NT pass 2♥ right ? If yes I think it's matter of agreements. Where I play people don't play ELC at all so this is strong and GF but I saw some awesome players bidding 3♥ her with quite average 16's. I guess 2♥ would be 5H-4S for them and weakish. My guess about standard is that it's not standard though :P

Why not overcall 1d with: KJxx x AJTxx xxx showing suit to lead and giving partner a chance to jump if he finds nice support ?

People still play 2C as natural here ? Anyway to simplify things I think it's good to play system on.

I don't 2/1. I still don't know about 3♦ (assuming it's natural invite). It looks bizarre but I haven't thought about it yet and I am not sure if it's terrible.

This is minor thing. The major thing are gains in competition. As opener can't have 18-19 balanced anymore then double is always pure takout and practically guarantees shortness in their suit. For example: 1♦ - 2♠ pass - 3♠ dbl It's much easier to make decisions here when you know opener is 1-3-6-3/1-4-5-3/1-3-5-4/1-4-4-4 almost always. In standard system you have to worry about 18-19 balanced all the time. One other example: 1♣ - pass 1♥ 2♠ dbl 3♠ - ??? Now with 5 hearts you have easy 4H almost always as well as with 5clubs 4C or even with 5d you can bid 4D often. In tandard you often pass those doubles fearing 18-19 balanced. This is recurring theme in competiton. If you absolutely don't want to adopt mexican 2D you should at least move all 18-19 balanced to 1C opening imo.

My preference is to double but I think it's close and 1♥ certainly ok. Not much to say about it. It's good if partner knows what to expect.

If your suit aren't known you usually can't preempt fast as responder. My personal preference as precision player is for my opponents to play something which allows them to bid as often as possible and as high as possible without showing suits preferably :-) The best of all (for me) is defense which doesn't allow them to preempt in real suit (cause they are not known) but makes it easy to read hands as declarer (cause I know they have 2 suiter or 1 suiter for example and seeing dummy it's easy to guess suits). I recommend to all my opponents the following defense: x = any one suit; others = some kind of 2 suiters without known suit. Preferably jump to 2NT or higher with 5-5+. Yummy !

Lauria Versace don't play support doubles. I think other Italian pairs don't play them either (not 100% sure though). It's not that retro. In fact I think it makes a lot of sense if you play wide range openings. Having extras you are often stuck for good bid. Obviously in systems like polish club or precision this double is not of much use without support hence someone who play such systems invented support double :P

Ok, I like it.

Imo it is decent solution, especially if you combine it with putting all 18-19 balanced hands in 1♣ so after 1♦ 2NT is always some kind of unbal strong hand (6-3M, 6d-4c, 5d-4c); this way you can have natural reverses and natural jumpshifts (showing 5cards). Better yet would be putting all 18-19 balanced hands in mexican 2♦. Then I would even like to play such system... :P

I am not sure about 3♦ (if that's an invite). Suit is weak and all but maybe it leads to good things. I will have to think about it. Anyway 1NT looks normal now. As partner's rebid is 2♦ the subsequent bidding should be easy assuming you have semi-standard agreement that 2♠ is strong raise (1♥ 1NT 2♦ 2♠ 3♣ - game). The more problematic would be 1♥ 1NT - 2♥ does everybody agrees that 3♦ isn't weak here ? (I am not 100% sure).

So you play it as forcing ? All is easy if this hand was GF opposite 1♥ response but it isn't imo. Do you guys all want to GF with it ?

Interesting. I remember thinking about this and wondering what is the best use for 3♣. What strength such 3♣ promises ? I also want to add that one more advantage is that if you transfer to major and end up playing in it overcaller is on lead which is always a nice bonus. So more + for method 1.

+1 for suit preference. Many people here had given up smith in favor of suit preference. Interesting. Playing with advanced+ partner without any agreements other than "no smith" I would assume this is suit preference. I guess we live in different bridge cultures. I think top level is overstatement. I usually play with bright people but by no means some top level guys and all of them play either smith or s/p or some combinations of those (smith if honor possible s/p otherwise etc.). Nobody dreams of giving count in declarer's suit when there is so much useful information to give. Anyway, gotta think about the hand assuming ♠ spot is irrelevant.

Oh c'mon. I have nothing against playing 1♠ not being limited to 17 or w/e. I just say you can pass that with weakish hand hence it's NF. I think I would agree with followers of this style what hand bid this way. I just call the bid which can be passed NF and apparently other people call it forcing as it's usually not passed :) I am all for using some bid to show 6+♦-3 in partner's major (or to use multimeaning bids when it's one of the options). I usually use 2NT for those hands playing precision or polish club (cause natural 2NT is not needed there). If you play Gazilli you can do that too with either 2♠ or 2NT. The problem arises if partner bids ♠ instad of ♥. If you play Gazilli you can still use 2♥ as multimeaning (cause all the monster's go to 2♣ anyway). I guess in real standard you are not going to bid 2♥ though !