foobar

The revised IMPrecision notes apparently use this response. What are the responses over 2N? Also, do the Jacoby 2N type hands now go via the strong relay?

This is a little tangential to the question, but awm's IMPrecision is arguably the base solution to to the problem of partitioning responder's strength (0-2 / 7+ QPs go into 1♦). In cases where responder does have 7+ QPs, we end up relaying opener's hand instead. IME, this works out great, but if you want responder to be able to show more 7+ QP hands, perhaps straube can chime in with his tweak of swapping the IMP responses of 1♥ / 1N over 1♣ - 1♦ (0-2 or 7+ QPs). Note in many case, shapes are resolved at +0, but some +1 are inevitable.

It would be interesting to know about the motivation for offloading these hands from strong club. Regarding methods over 2N, Miles' Unbalanced Diamond used 2C to describe similar hands IIRC, so if you can look it up, it might give some ideas (level notwithstanding). If I had to play such a method, perhaps, 4C as asking for a transfer, and 4D asking for best major? 3D similarly clarifies length, and 3C is some sort of strong ask for shortness, length?

Chalk me up for a club. We are unlikely to get more than one heart trick on this auction (if any), and it's unlikely to go away.

Thanks for the responses. When it was played, I was feeling adventurous, and tried 4♥, propelling the opponents to 5♦. The problem is that the auction for our side didn't end there :D , and now pard wanted to have a say with xxx xxxx xx Kxxx. Needless to say, it wasn't pretty, though they were cold for a ♦ grand with matching voids in the majors and K♣ in the slot.

On a tangential note, for those who have played both the classical weak-2 and these bids, it would be interesting to know about your experience with either version. awm, were you thinking of adopting these bids in the context of IMPrecision?

[hv=pc=n&s=sakq876hkt876dj2c&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=1c1s2dp3d]133|200[/hv]

Straube's suggestion makes sense. BTW, do you intend to handle psyches by trap passing?

This looks great, though the "Vegan Vegetarian" tautology and the description in parenthesis is rather amusing :ph34r: : "Vegetarian, Ayurvedic Healing Vegetarian, Vegan Vegetarian, Gluten-free (all four may be with or without Seafood)".

The annual India trip to see family, then off to Dresden for work. Heard that the latter is pretty dreary this time of the year, and that the vegan options are terrible, so hopefully BBO will be some solace :D.

Oh yeah ...MOSCITO for sure next year...am traveling through 1/20, so after that.

With more time, I would have suggested something adventurous, but headed out for a run right now, so strong ♣ (no impossible negative), with 14-16 NT (1st and 2nd), 15-17 (3rd/4th), 2♣ = 6+, UDCA, and whatever else you care to play. 1♦ as 0+ and 2♦ as 6+ is likely better, but am fine with whatever you prefer.

+1...hrothgar...if you need a pard I can pair you.

My recommendation would be use a meta-defence and focus on showing responder's hand instead of trying to untangle the meanings of their bids. Basically, the opponents may be: 1) Playing natural overcalls, but psyching 2) Unsure of the methods they are playing (several pairs discuss their methods over strong just in time) 3) Playing various versions of two-way exclusion bids (CRASH, Suction, etc.) 4) Playing something more sophisticated, like psycho-Suction In general, you should try to remain within the system for <= 1♥. Over their Xs, you can choose to either ignore them, or take advantage of the extra space by assigning a new meaning to Pass (say really awful hand). Over >= 1♠, you can use something like the defence suggested by awm for IMPrecision: 1) The cheapest NT calls are natural and GF 2) Doubles tend to be takeout oriented 3) 2-level bids are transfers, except that there can never be a transfer to a suit that couldn't be bid naturally at the 2-level over their overcall (for example, over 1♣ - (2♣), 3[♣] is a transfer to ♦s because we could have bid 2♦ naturally). In general, these bids promise at least competitive strength. 4) Pass tends to be weak, or a trap pass (rare)

Out of curiosity, can you please post an outline of your system?

Pass and hope to make 4♠...if pard holds the magical hand...c'est-la-vie and payoff to preempts.

I might be swayed to bid 3♦ with the 1=3=5=4 on occasion (values in hearts), but the general preference would be 2♥.

Hmm...I am allowed to cough up a ♥ to justify bid 2♥ :D? Assuming the answer is no, seems like the only non-facetious choice is A). As for the others, we might need some context around the differences between bidding 2♥ vs. 3♦ etc. My guess is that this is some sort of canape system.

Sure -- by pickle, I meant really awkward invitational hands with say 5=3=4=1 or similar that have to retreat to 3♣ over 2♣...2♦...2♠. In IMP, the bidding might have gone 2♣...2♠, giving an opportunity for opener to rebid 2N (presumably NF with misfit). Granted, it's debatable whether 2N plays any better than 3C with such a hand, and these corner cases likely aren't worth too much thought.

What I meant is that you don't really need to change 2D responses, but there might be merit to see if the new semantics (which free up the traditional meaning of 2S), lead to better auctions.

Ouch... mobile+spotty network equals multiple raises of the same post😁.

2H for both #1 and #2. Difficult to answer #3 without context, but my guess is that bidding 2H would be a deliberate systemic deviation as stated?

2H for both #1 and #2. Difficult to answer #3 without context, but my guess is that bidding 2H would be a deliberate systemic deviation as stated?

2H for both #1 and #2. Difficult to answer #3 without context, but my guess is that bidding 2H would be a deliberate systemic deviation as stated?

2H for both #1 and #2. Difficult to answer #3 without context, but my guess is that bidding 2H would be a deliberate systemic deviation as stated?