effervesce

1♠ for me. Don't want to lose the spades. If the spades and diamonds were swapped I'd bid 2♣. 4 card overcalls common in our partnership.

Are you sure? Im thinking on our usual 15-17 as a typical 3-points ranger. 15, 16, 17. Not mentioning at all some also do upgrade good 14 points or downgrade bad 18-points... :) Btw. Do we have a Watercooler or OT-forum?? The bigger half of this thread belongs there, I think. Rofl. Aussies and New Zealanders have range drilled in as max-min during junior high school.

I don't know what "we" you are speaking for, but it doesn't include me. This discussion reminds me of old OKbridge group discussions where Carl Huducek argued that resticted choice does not exist. I am sure he understood and believed in restricted choice, but he had a lot of fun arguing that it didn't exist. Thing is, I think Cascade really believes in his position here. It would be much more amusing if he was just waving the carrot in front of jdonn. Hmmm.... and all this time I thought it was jdonn doing the carrot waving. Meh. Then again, if someone asked what the HCP range of a 15-18 1NT was I'd have thought it was 3.

For simplicity, let me make an extreme example. Instead of having a 12-14 balanced or 15-17 balanced hand, lets have a 2-4 HCP balanced hand, and make the partner of the balanced hand have most of the points. So say we have Kxxx xx xxx xxxx, and responder has the gigantic AQJxx AKx AKQJ x hand. Now, on this hand it is obvious who should be asking who-the strong unbalanced hand asking the balanced hand what he/she has-after a shape relay finding responder is 4234, and finding out he has a spade honor, there is no problem reaching 6S. If we make opener stronger, say KQxx Ax AQJ xxxx, and responder AJxxx Kxx Kxxx x, then we want to play transfers, as then opener can upgrade spade, heart and diamond honors while downgrading club honors. Finding out opener's shape is alot less useful, since the placement of the honors is critical-the more opener has, the more difficult they are to identify using denial cuebidding methods. By simple extrapolation, if relays work better on a 2-4 balanced hand and transfers on a 15-17, then similarly transfers work better on a 15-17 than a 12-14; if relays work better on a 2-4 then relays will work better opposite a 12-14 than 15-17. Now, it is obvious that relays are best opposite a 2-4; but whether they are better for a 12-14 than transfers is another question (I don't think relays are optimal-transfers are better opposite 12-14 to reach the best contract-but the competitive arguments may mean that non-transfer methods are better opposite a 12-14 NT).

Can you summarize it pls? A summary would probably take dozens of pages. Just the opening bids below (as played by Michael Ware and Andy Braithwaite in Maastricht in 2000): OPENING BIDS 1st & 2nd Seat Pass 0-4 HCP Any, or 5-6 HCP (not vul) or 5-7 HCP Bal (vul), or 15-20(21) HCP Bal or Minor(s) with no biddable 5 card Major 1C (10)11-20 HCP 5 Hearts or 4/4 Maj 3 suited, or Any Game Force 1D (10)11-20 HCP 5+ Spades, or (21)22-23 HCP Bal (May be any 5332) 1H 5-10 HCP Hearts or Diamonds Unbalanced, or 7-10 HCP (not vul) or 8-10 HCP (vul) Balanced or any 4441 1S 5-10 HCP Spades or Clubs Unbalanced but not 4441 1NT 11-14 HCP Balanced (May be any 5332). Occasionally singleton or off-shape 2C (10)11-14 HCP 5+ Clubs Unbalanced (Can be 4 if 1444 or 4144) 2D (10)11-14 HCP 5+ Diamonds Unbalanced 2H (3)4-7 HCP 5+/5+ S&D or H&C (Odd) 2S (3)4-7 HCP 5+/5+ S&C or H&D (Colour) 2NT (3)4-7 HCP 5+/5+ S&H or (5)6-9(10) HCP D&C (Rank) 3C/3D Std Preempt – may be a six card suit with good suit quality 3D/3H Std Preempt – may be a six card suit with good suit quality 3NT 4 Level minor Preempt 4C Namyats - A good 4H opening (8/9 PT) 4D Namyats - A good 4S opening (8/9 PT) 4H Preemptive 4S Preemptive 4NT Specific Ace ask 3rd / 4th Seat P 0-4 HCP 1C 5-17 HCP Unbalanced (can be 8-10 HCP with a 6 card suit or a 5/5 with stuff Outside suits) 1D 5-17 HCP Balanced (may have any 5332) 1H (3)4-7 HCP “Comic” Either 6+ card suit, or any 5+/5+ Unbalanced 1S 17+ HCP, Either a) Any GF (9+PT), :) Strong Two Suiter 1NT (17)18-20 HCP Balanced (May be any 5332). Occas. Singleton or off-shape 2C “Benji” 8 PT in any Suit or 21-23 Bal 2D (7)8-10 HCP Six card suit in either major (non-forcing – esp nv) 2H 8-10 HCP 5+/5+ Odd (S&D or H&C) 2S 8-10 HCP 5+/5+ Colour (S&C or H&D) 2NT 8-10 HCP 5+/5+ Rank (S&H or D&C) 3C/D 6-9 HCP, 7 card suit or 8-10 HCP Good 6 card suit 3H/S 6-9 HCP, 7 card suit or 8-10 HCP Good 6 card suit 3NT 4 Level minor Preempt 4C Namyats - A good 4H opening (8/9 PT) 4D Namyats - A good 4S opening (8/9 PT) 4H Preemptive – Good Suit 4S Preemptive – Good Suit

Link? I've been looking for a good structure, and I can't seem to find this thread. See http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...=0entry238456, copied below: Quote Mikeh: ---- The approach I favour is: 1♣ 1♦: 1♥ 2 or 3 ♥s, balanced or semi-balanced, usually a weak 1N rebid type of hand 1♠ natural, unbalanced, fewer than 4♥s 1N 17-19 (in a 14-16 1N, if 15-17 1N, then this is 18-19) 2♣ natural 2♦ natural, reverse 2♥ 4 card support, minimum opening 2♠ natural, game-force 2N 6+ clubs, 3♥s, 18+ The main followup over the 1♥ 'acceptance' is: 1♠ natural, non-forcing (allows backing into 4=4 fits) 1N natural, non-forcing 2♣ puppet to 2♦, to play or invitational 2♦ artificial gf 2♥natural, constructive, but non-forcing, less than invitational The same scheme applies over 1♣ 1♥ Over 1♣ 1♠: 1♠ shows either ♦s, unlimited, or a notrump hand either too weak to bid 1N in response to 1♣ (8-10) or too strong. And we play transfer jumpshifts over 1♣: 1♣ 2♦ is ♥s, weak or strong 1♣ 2♥ is ♠s weak or strong 1♣ 2♠ is limit or better in clubs ----

Well if this was available, I would pick the best player in the world, and then ask "what system partner?" Pooh-the question asked was best system. However, I doubt anybody in the world would be capable of playing such a best system. Oops. Nevermind-the question was about best published system.

For me, an essential component of a fun system is that it is effective. If a system consistently brought bad results, I wouldn't find it fun at all.

My take on the options: Polish Club - I like the 11-17 limited openings. The 1♣ opening works reasonably with and without interference, but without interference seems (from my experience at least) to perform significantly worse than precision or relay auctions. Precision - Even more limited openings than Polish, which is good. The 1♣ opening tends to get interfered with ALOT, but works extremely well if there is no interference (especially if you play relays). SAYC - the standard system for most players. 2/1 - Mainly gains over SAYC on slam bidding, but performs worse on invitational hands. ACOL - Never tried it so I can't comment. forcing pass - Takes alot of work to get off the ground, and can't be used in alot of events. The lack of experience makes hand evaluation difficult. The 8-12 openings are a major plus, especially with a relay and non-forcing responses in place. The pass opening works without intervention, but with intervention is even worse than a precision 1C. How the fert works depends on the opps (despite the supplied suggested defense) - bashes bunnies but is so-so against good players, and hampers own constructive bidding after a fert. relay system - eg MOSCITO. Good with limited openings and extremely accurate in slam bidding without interference. The 'fast in fast out' bidding approach has its pluses and minuses. Again, may suffer from hand evaluation problems if not played frequently. La Majeure Cinquième - What is this system?

Partner is very likely then to have a doubleton in hearts, probably Ax. Give him one natural trump trick, 2 nat heart tricks + heart ruff, we only need 1 trick in the minors to set. Then again, would partner lead A from Ax in hearts? Meh. I double. +100 (or -140) is a bad score as I think we can make 3♣. I wouldn't be that surprised however if they make it doubled, since partner doesn't know about our huge club fit.

Abstain, ditto Richard.

Auto-pass. Move a heart to a spade and I'd double.

It's when partner's a passed hand that makes it even BETTER to preempt than worse - because you are so much more likely to a) not have game b ) partner is more likely to have a fit given he did not preempt himself c) the opps are more likely to have game/slam

2♦ for me. Things in favor of bidding: -3rd seat. You know it's the opp's hand, and want to preempt them from the right place -6/4 shape against bidding: -poor suit at adverse vul We may go for a number, but the 3rd seat and 6/4 tilt it enough to make bidding outweigh the sizable risk of going for a large number.

5♦. Can't tell if partner has much wastage in hearts, so it's all a guess. The opp's lead may be a guess, too, however, and that tilts it for me.

Are you seriously considering stopping short of slam on the first hand? I'm not willing to play below slam on the first hand-its simply too good, and got even better after the intervention. For the 2nd hand, you require all of the remaining tricks, as it appears that at least 11 tricks will be made in NT. I like Codo's line for this hand. On the third hand, I pass. With 4-4 shape opposite a balanced hand, you will have an 8 card fit in one of the two suits about half the time. However, one of these suits is a minor; although 1NT and 2m both exactly making are scored equally, 1NT making 2 will outscore 2m making three; this tilts the balance in favor of staying in 1NT. Hopefully RHO does not have a running suit-if RHO simply as a balanced hand with points, I think 1NTXX will make more often than not, given declarer advantage and also the more even division of points between you and partner.

*wonders if there would be any correlation with the political compass thread: do libertarians vote for anything goes, and authoritarians for banning it? :D http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=28393 FYI, I voted for team matches of 8 boards or longer. Though I imagine if HUM systems became mainstream (I wish!) people might possibly get familiar enough with the diversity of HUM systems to be able to wing it in a pairs event.

1) 2♦. 2♥ here promises 5. 1) 2♥. You have 5 hearts.

4♠, "to play" if they play takeout Xes at that level; if double of 4♠ is cardshowing I bid 4♥.

Can't criticise your auction much. Your only possibility to reach 3NT was to rebid 2NT over partner's 2♦ - but given the opp's bidding, how likely are you and partner to hold the strength for 3NT?! Your opps pushed you from being able to find 3NT. Congrats to them. The 1♠ opening worked this time. Next time it may backfire horribly for them.

Everything but (1). (2) is close, but the rest are clear-cut openers IMO, and passing such hands is losing bridge. With hand (2), how happy would you be with the auction p-(1♠)-p-(2♠/3♠)? Double is possible, but partner wouldn't know you have 5 hearts. Playing 2/1, I think it is far better to open lighter hands and GF as responder with stronger hands, than to open with sounder hands and GF with lighter hands.

3♣ rebid is fine. With a 3-4-3-3 surely partner could have bid 3♦, given 3♣ is game-forcing anyway. When partner bid 3NT, he's showing a crappy hand. You're basically forced to pass 3NT, since you've already shown your game forcing hand and partner said he wanted to play in 3NT opposite you having diamonds and clubs. A 3NT rebid is a misdescription but isn't bad either.

I bid 3♥. The opps are almost certain to have at least an 8 card spade fit. If partner can bid 3♠, then 3NT is probably right. If he can't, he will either have heart support, or club support, or a chunky diamond suit. 3154, 3263, 3064 are probable hand shapes for partner.

Given you said partner either has 6 hearts or 5 very good ones, I think 7♥ is the place to be. Good chances in the spade suit to get a 13th trick. Besides, partner may also have the J of clubs. I must say, though, if partner has Kx AQxxxx xxx Axx or so I'm a bit surprised partner didn't cuebid 4♣, given if you held AQJxx Kx Ax xxxx 7 is good. Hmmm.... actually now that I've thought about it a bit more, 7 is less likely given partner should have cuebid with 6 hearts, K spades and A clubs. I'm more inclined now to put partner with say K AQxxxx xxxx Axx or K AQJxx xxxx Axx I guess I change my mind and leave it in 6♥.

I double. 7NT requires waaay too much from partner - he most certainly has the A of spades for the 7♥ bid, but even with hearts running we need 4 more covers for the minors. AQ diamonds, AQ clubs may do it; Axx Kxxx AQx AQx is possible but is it likely?