foobar

I had the same questions about the Open chart and Scamp (see related discussion on bridgewinners). What will be the definition of the 1♦ opening with this change, though? Is it 3+♦ with 4+♠ or something like that? Also, what will 2♦ show with the proposed option?

Is underarm truly legal? My impression is that it's the side arm deliveries that are permitted (within some limits). In that sense, it's closer to the ACBL definition of a 1N with a singleton, as opposed to the Oz version (which is the true equivalent of an underarm :D).

My rough rule of thumb is that you need about 19 QPs for a slam in a suit, but should explore with 18 and a 9-card fit. BTW, my recommendation is to use symmetric relays for the sheer mnemonic ease; everything else is so not worth it. There are many variants, including transfer based (example: TOSR), but the underlying principle is the same.

At that vul, surely not opening it 4♣ is giving up :)?

As others have noted, the methods described above are really dated, and the recommendation is to adopt something like Standard Modern Precision (https://bridgewithdan.com/books/).

Maybe an insect with an alternative spelling :D.

The reference to "quick in, quick out" is a little misplaced in the context of this specific auction, but it does apply to other situations like 1♦ (♥) - (2♣/2♦-1♥), where you may want to explore NFBs for example. For this particular auction, X should indeed promise at least invite+. Richard's suggestion of using 2N+ as a ♥ raise, with 3-level GF bids makes sense.

akashc@: The emphasis of Moscito is on "quick in, quick out" auctions. To that end, there's loss of precision in competitive auctions, and it can be difficult to tell the relative lengths of 5-4 suits in auctions like 1♦ (hearts) - (2♠) - X (takeout) - 3m. Note that the situation isn't that different from a 4-card major auction like 1♥ - (2♠) - X, except that Moscito openings can be lighter, and are limited. Perhaps, it's best to start off my asking what the X promises in terms of strength?

Can you please post an outline of the entire system, including the 1M, 1N, 2m, 2N, etc. openings?

Think that might offend some Moscito players :D. We always labelled the various (non-Moscito) variants as a strong ♣ system given that they were sufficiently different from the 1♦ = 2+, etc Precision.

1S probably shows a 4-6 hand. Regardless, passing and playing in 1S in a 4-3 opposite a likely 5-1 break doesn't seem like too much fun. 1N is ruled out, so we can bid 2H and hope for a 5-2, but the safer option seems to be 2C.

Seems like a different way of looking it is in terms of loser count and QPs. Given the constraint of a max of 10 QPs (A=3, K=2, Q=1), there's a maximum of 16 QPs between the two hands, which means that could be missing two Aces and a King. It seems like a partner will expect at least a K outside the actual holding based in case of a splinter. Note that a ♠ void might be make a more compelling argument for a splinter.

IMPs, Vulnerable vs. not, you deal and hold: [hv=pc=n&s=shaq9743dqcj98432]133|100[/hv] What's your strategy for bidding this hand? How would you bid it if your methods allowed you to show a 6-5 shape over a 2♥ opening? Edit: Added 1H and 4H by popular choice.

Out of curiosity, what is "FCVO" and what adaptations did you make? How do the GF relay and other NF (12+?) responses work?

This looks exactly like a the the post-2000 incarnation of Moscito. While echoing straube's assertion that 1♠ as an immediate DN is terrible, perhaps hrothgar@ might be able to shed some light on your questions. Note that since IMPrecision uses 1♣ - 1♦ (GF or DN) - 1♥ - 1♠ as DN in conjunction with relays for the GF hands, perhaps you can borrow a leaf from it?

Seems like 3N precludes the possibility of playing there unless the intent is to show a minimum GF hand. Also, since 2♠ is GF ♥ as well, does it deny a second 5-card suit (same for 2N with GF ♠)?

How do people treat hands like xxxx Kxxx x Kxxx over say 1♣ (16+) - (3♦) natural? Does X create a GF or it is just takeout shape with GI+ values?

Likely makes game opposite xxxx Jxxx xx xxx. Partner won't bid past 3♠ with that hand, but seems like a 5-loser hand must take some positive action, and opposite a better hand we might have even more. On a bad day, LHO will have the majors and we'll go down, but perfectly willing to pay off to worst case -500 in the very improbable 3♠-X.

Congratulations!!!

Well, assuming opener has a GF hand and slam interest only opposite a really shapely hand, can't one play something along these lines if this is a prime consideration? 1♣ - 1N (5+ ♥; 2-6 QPs) - 4♥ (12+ QPs; but hopeless opposite lower end of QP range and/or hands without shape): ....Pass: Nothing more to say ....4♠+: RKC responses or whatever else makes sense Playing something like it will probably require using 2♣ = 5+♠ or something, but it's a thought.

Is this a truly generalized situation? For example, what if the PCB for the longest suit (♣s), and relay captain was looking for AKQ♣ to determine whether to bid 6♣?

Can you please post some hands that were especially problematic? This should be general interest to this thread and we might get clarity on the refinements if Adam or Sam chime in. FWIW, having switched to PCB from DCB, it's definitely seems superior AFAICT, but it'll be good to have an objective discussion.

Another thing to consider is whether West was giving an honest count signal (assuming standard count), or whether ♦2 was a suit preference for clubs (since it's clearly hopeless to continue ♠).

Maybe we need a c) in the 1♣ - 1N response to handle the GF balanced hands (unless that goes in 2N)?