junyi_zhu

using hinzhu raise: 1H 2S(blanced GF raise or distributional raise with at least 16 HCP) 2N(5-3-3-2 or 5-4-2-2 minimum) 3C(relay) 3S(2-5-3-3) 4H(now we discover the "mirror distribution", there should not be good slam chance even if partner has 18-19 HCP. The shape checking allows responder to avoid bad slams when mirror distribution is discovered. responder does need extra from opener to make a good slam. So my sequence is convincing in my humble opinion. That's also the reason why we developed our 1H-2S, 1S-2NT raising structure to allow the responder to do detailed shape checking. When both sides are balanced, it's usually critical to check for shapes to avoid overbidding with "mirror distributions". Also, Sxxxx Hxxxx DAx CAKx is usually good enough to force to game, it's a matter of hand evaluation. Sxxx Hxxxx DAxx CAKx is not enough, because it has one more loser than the previous hand.

using hinzhu raise: 1H 2S(game forcing raise, balanced or distributional with at least 16 HCP. 2N(balanced) 3C(relay) 3S(2-5-3-3) 4C(asking for range) 4H(18-19) 5C(cue, denies sp control) 5D(cue) 5H(nothing much) 6H(I have extra)

If one plays walsh style response, I believe she should also garantee unbalanced shape for the opener when she rebids 1 M. That's an easy cure for this hand: 2C by responder is automatic. Even if you don't play 1S garantee 4-5 in black suits, 2C would still be nomal here. 1S can be passed only when responder holds short clubs, around 5-6 HCP. I don't play the traditional walsh style reponse. I bid 1D over 1C with invitational hands as well, because over partner's possible 1NT rebid, we still can check back his major suit by this sequence: 1C 1D 1N 2C(relay to 2D) 2D 2M(invitational hands) 1C 1D 1N 2D¡¡¡¡game forcing. 1C 1D 1N 2M game forcing. 1M rebid by opner garantees unblanced shape. We also play it over 1D opening. so 1D 1H 1S: unblanced. With 4-3-4-2, we usually bid 1NT or 2H. We may miss some good partial, but it improves game and slam bidding.

All you need from partner is HA or a friendly lead + SA, or heart 4-4 + SA to have some good play in 3NT, so 3NT wasn't that horrible in my opinion. do you expect partner to bid 3NT over 3D with something like SJTxxx HAxx Dxx Cxxx? Also, the doubler might not know which suit to lead, since his partner never bids.

I agree with Rado's choice except that I might double 3C. I think double here should be a game try and partner can pass if he likes. The hand is good for offence and defence. So 3D here is also a game try, but more offensive oriented. Playing intermediate jump, people may have a tough time to bid that hand. Perhaps 2NT to show preempt in either minor is a cure. I don't really like traditional 2NT to show both minors. Perhaps a multi 2NT is possible: either a preempt in minor or a strong minor suit two suiter.

two way double is a good idea, rado. I don't really like Larry Cohen's Pre-balancing idea though. The major flaw is that the bidding hasn't ended at that point. So it's not really a balancing seat. opener may hold balanced maximum and cause serious damage to the pre-balancing bidders. Also, partner would almost always pass you since the range is very wide. Sometimes, you may be out of bid with a really decent hand. I am just wondering what would Larry Cohen bid with Sx HAKxxxx DKQxx Cxx over 1S p 2S£¿ 4H? he only need such a normal looking dummy to have good chance in 4H: SQxxx HQxx DAx Cxxxx£® If he bids 3H with much less, partner would usually pass his 3H unless he holds an excellent hand. Pre-balancing might be good for MP, but for IMP, I think it has a lot of systemic problems.

It's always a contradiction in balancing style. Some like sound overcalls and aggressive balancing, others like aggressive overcalls and don't like balancing much. When you hold something like: SAxxx Hxxx DAxx CKxx, even the most aggressive players wouldn't double RHO's 1S opening. However, when the bidding goes like this way: 1S p 2S p p ? It's quite a sound way to reopen the bidding since partner is rated to be short in S and has some value. What would you bid now? double? Isn't that a penalty double for something like this? SKQJTx HAxx DAxx Cxx? There is one way to distinguish this two hand types. All we need is a out of date convention called "Fishbein double". Fishbein was designed against opponents' preempts. A double shows balanced hands and willing for penalty. A suit contract right above the preemptive suit is take out. It doesn't work well, because you just lose too much: you lose the possibility for partner to pass your take out double. You can't bid the suit above naturally. However, a Fishbein like convention works perfectly in balancing auctions: Here, a double would be penalty. 2NT: take out. 3C/D/H: natural. Over 1H p 2H p p double: penalty. 2S: take out. 2NT: minors. 3C/D: natural. Here, you should try to make light overcall 1S over opener's 1H as much as you can to avoid the later balancing problem. So with SAKxxx Hxxx Dxx Cxxx, my suggestion is to overcall 1S. Thus, you wouldn't have a tough balancing decision later. The principle is that if you feel like balancing 2S over 2H, you should bid 1S directly. If you know your opps play standard minor suit raise, you should also make light overcall 1H over 1D to avoid later balancing problems if you want adopt this structure.

Yes. I play 2/1 100% gameforcing, 4 card major opening, 14-16 1NT opening, 1NT semiforcing with a partner. Our opening style is reasonally sound, we open most 12 HCP balanced hands unless the hands contain some big flaws. We also play benjamin strong two opening. That solves the 3NT rebidding problem. So 1x-1y-3NT shows 19 HCP, balanced. with a solid suit and about 8 tricks, we open bejamin 2C. So now 1x-1y-2NT just shows 17-18 HCP. This structure also requires sound response. We respond partner's opening bids with at least 6 HCP or good 5 HCP. We also play jacoby 2NT over 1M. Our systemic flaw is that with 3 card support, singleton somewhere, invitational hands, we might play 1NT here. I don't really think it is a big draw back. If the hand is very suit oriented, we still can try limit raise instead of 1NT semiforcing. Anyway, partner needs to know how to play 4-3 fit playing this system, that's also a lot of fun!

Playing 2/1 gameforcing, many players don't really have an agreement on the further development once responder makes a two over game forcing response. It's necessary to understand the basic principle of two over one gameforcing structure. Instead of the traditional fast arrival principle, two over one game forcing structure provides a new slow arrival principle. That means once the 2/1 gameforcing situation has been set up, all unneccessary jumps show extra value and mild slam interest. According to this first principle, the following statements are all induced from it. 1 a jump raise to opener's first suit shows slam interest and demands cuebid from partner. a serious 3NT convention may apply here, so 3NT shows serious slam interest, 4 level cuebids show minimum hand. example: 1S-2C-2D-3S: slam interest, inviting pd to cuebid. 2 a double raise to opener's first suit shows mild slam interest, denies side suit controls, 2/1 suit garantees a good 5 card suit. example: 1S-2C-2D-4S. SAKxx Hxx Dxx CAQJxx 3 a simple raise to opener's first suit shows either a minimum hand or a hand doesn't justify the above biddings. 4 a jump rebid shows solid suit and slam interest. (partnership agreement may also play it to show at most one trump loser? This bid sets up trumps and demands cuebid. serious 3NT also applies here. example: 1S-2C-3S: SAKQJxx HAxx Dxxx Cx 5 a double jump rebid shows solid suit, denies serious slam interest. (partnership may also play it to show at most one trump loser) this bid denies out side aces. may have side suit K or stiff, I recommend it denies two side suit controls. example: SAKQJxxx HQxx Dxx Cx, 1S-2C-4S. 5 a two level rebid shows either minimum or 6+ in suit. 6 a low reverse(reverse at 2 level) or a high reverse(new suit at 3 level) shows extra value. 7 a jumpshift at 3 level is splinter. 8 a 2NT rebid shows minimum, balanced or 18-19, balanced. 9 a 3NT jump rebid shows 15-17, balanced.(not good for 1NT opening) 10 a single raise shows either extra value or good support with minimum hands example: 1S-2C-3C: SAxxxx Hxx Dxx CAKxx, the quality of c suit justifies the raise. 11 a 2NT rebid by responder is just a relay, usually shows minimum hands or strong balanced hands. asking for more details. opener can bid naturally at 3 level. over 1S 2C 2S 2NT, 3 level the other major shows 6 card major suit and extra value. 12 a three level new suit by responder shows extra value. 13 a three level rebid by responder shows extra value. 14 a 3NT rebid by responder shows 15-17, balanced hands. 15 a 4th suit bid is natural and shows extra value. within this framework, we now may have a partnership agreement on how to stop at 4 level minor. When both sides show minimum, 4 level minor is passable: 1S 2D 2S 2NT(relay) 3D 4D(invitational) 1S 2D 2S 3D 4D(forcing! because 3D sets up gameforcing sequence) 1S 2D 2S 2N(relay) 3C 4C(invitational) 1S 2D 2S 3C 4C(forcing! because 3C shows extra) 1S 2D 2H 2N(relay) 3D 4D(invitational) 1S 2D 2H 2N(relay) 3C 4C(forcing! 4th suit by declarer also shows extra) 1S 2D 2S 2N 3D 3S 4D (invitational, because 2NT then 3S doesn't garantee extra) 1S 2D 2S 2N 3D 3H 4D(invitational, because 3H here doesn't garantee extra, it shows stopper in H and asking partner if 3NT is possible.) I have played this structure with Greg Hinze, it works well. the 2NT relay convention may have some drawback in positional issue for 3NT. However, the gain of bidding space is great.

In my idea, if you play 2/1 gameforcing, it's good to play 2NT rebid by responder as a waiting bid, 4th suit as a natural bid showing extra value. I'll post my 2/1 framework. I've played this framework with Greg Hinze, it worked well.