Flameous

I'm not sure how it's upgrading. If I had the same hand without ♦K, it would still be a clear opener and you said 2♠ promises K extra. After 3♠, I'd follow with 3NT frivolous (or 4♦ if playing serious) Responder can follow with RKC, bid 5NT over 5♠ and then leave it to opener with 6♠. (If opener had ♦Q in addition, he'd have easy raise to 7)

I think X should be T/O of spades cause it's probably more frequent than penalty double and partner can always convert to penalty if RHO was fooling around. Spades then can be a real suit if you want to cater for LHO psyching or bidding some bad 4 carder. Or you can use it to show two-suiter. (I'd say any without both majors) Are you in a force here? Just thinking how strong pass can be. I guess it tends to show min bal or 31(54) sort of hands.

Generally you can count that 28 hcp makes a small slam when there is singleton opposite no wastage and 5-4 fit at least. If there is a ace opposite singleton, that ace should be downgraded since it would always be better elsewhere promoting other honors. AK is terrible, you essentially make your partner's shortness totally useless so you need sufficient extras outside, ie. you need some 32 hcp for the slam.

Note that he had his own way of counting "tricks" (Like AKQ points halved + distributional extra) As far as I understand, 1♣ is always balanced.

Han, do you always double with 4♥, even if GF? Cause if you don't I'd assume 3♥ to show a real suit. Blackshoe, 2NT rebid seems rather impossible as I assume it's not even forcing in this sequence. 2♠ and 3NT seem to be the only real options. After 3NT the sequence should at least be easy cause after 4♦ slam try, opener can just keycard and find out everything.

Seems like west is squeezed from Qxxx AKT Kx Axxx holding after 4th diamond pitching a club. Defense helping and not removing our spade entries we can actually pull this off.

And what do you suppose partner does with a hand like xxxxx x xx xxxxx? I'm pretty sure he is bidding 3♠ rather than doubling. Of course this is extreme, but assuming partner holds all the critical cards for his bids in this sequence seems to be expecting quite a lot.

I think the though that MPs involve more luck comes from people playing lots of BBO matchpoints, where the skill level and the amount of boards is so minimal that it's totally luck dependent. A long MP where you play 2-3 boards against each participant is probably the most skill testing form of bridge. At least for one pair, long BAM might be even better to test for whole team.

Just a quick remark, you should probably switch 2♠ and 3♠ bids, simply for frequency reasons. (And add some strong option for 2S bid) I haven't really played Fantunes, I don't have a good picture how they handle all those forcing openings. You have even more of them and really high too. Maybe they can work somehow but there's just no way to tell without any response structure. Also it seems to me that your 1♣ opening is quite open to pre-empts. Natural systems have 1NT to split the NT range so when you get pre-empted, if you double and hold the balanced hand, it's 18-19. You have constant trouble when it goes 1♣ (3X) P (P), when to double, when to not.

Should the same sort of tactics be used with 3541 or 4531? Unvul obviously. Here by bidding clubs we again manage to get the spades in to play what we don't get just by bidding 2♦. Psyche tactics are actually quite interesting, but there is sort of a fine line when they turn into psyche control so I guess they haven't really developed for that reason.

Partner opens 1♣ (2+), RHO pre-empts 3♦, what's your bidding plan holding QJTxxxx AKTxxx - -? 4♦ is majors or slammish clubs. And a side question, how many deals will it take for me to see 76 again? :blink:

2) I think ♦A lead stands out here. Partner doesn't hold much and we can easily lose our ♦ trick(s). Sure it might cost a lot if dummy tabled 03 minors, but besides that, the ace lead only seems to lose when partner holds ♣A+♦Q or KQ of ♣ and in both cases the minor suit lengths need to be right. We can go for the heart ruff also after the ace if it seems right.

Pass GF, X double negative. I don't know your whole structure but just from the top of my head I'd say split semipositives here by major between 1♥ and 1♠.

After that 2♣ sequence it's rkc for ♦ which doesn't work too well here. Don't I have an option of namyats+4NT?

Funny how such a simple hand caused so many problems. ♦8 even distracted Ken ;)

1. I'd love to but I just can't bring myself to do it. (No, I don't even know whether I mean bid or pass) 2. I was going with 6♦ but after I read kayins reply, I came to same conclusion that I should bid 6♣ since with anything better I have already supported. Only question is that did 4♣ set trumps which makes my 4♦ a cuebid in support of clubs, now I'd go back to 6♦ again. 3. I play that responsive double guarantees 4 card major (or gf strength) These hands are horrible for that style. This is quite alright still as it's not too hard to pass, but in a similar sequence I held Qxx xx xx AKTxxx and I just don't see a good solution. Of course it has its upsides that it's always 4 like here. Note that with limited openers I'd always bid 2M with these sort of hands as it could be quite weak raise so partner won't skyrocket and we can usually probe for NT. With unlimited openings it's bit harder as partner is more often bidding 4M, also on 5 cards.

Did 1♠ show 5+? So partner doesn't have three, support double or not. This is pretty annoying spot. Double seems bit scary since partner holds 4♥ and might try to penalize quite often in these zones and I don't like my defenses. I'm not actually quite sure what is 2NT here? Until I know, I go with double but I don't like it too much.

I think he meant reverse flannery, but because flannery is a banned word on these forums, he had to disguise it as drury :D

I wonder what 3NT bid from overcaller really is. In some constructive auctions it shows solid suit and something little on the side. I wonder if that would make any sense here. Some AKQxxxx Qx Kx xx or similar. If it was something like that, passing 3NT wouldn't even be so terrible. Of course there's a fine line when I have already bid 4♠ with that type of hand. If it's more like natural call, question is again when we start doubling first. 18, 19, 20bal ? Maybe there is some 18-19 balancedish hand that wants to blast game and possibly play in NT. With the hand in question, it's definitely invite, suggesting NT if possible.

My 1M openings include 5332 only with 10-11 pts so when they come up, the range is so accurate that it's probably better relay the balanced hand anyways :) I also want to have a natural way of bidding hands so that I can involve partner. Some marginal slams which involve a good fit are best found after natural bidding and I like to have that option. And I don't think that dropping those GF variants would make that structure any better.

Reading these it seems I'm not quite as bad a player I thought I am :lol:

I'm actually building a structure where I can use 1NT as GF relay. Finding the solution after that 2♦ response was the main part. I know that it looks rather strange and it does have it's problems. (Opener holds some 55 of his own or something) But it seems that this enables responder to describe his hand very accurately and doing it within invitational sequences. My whole approach was that 2♦ bidder wants to describe his hand and I first meant it only for 55+ or 64 and single suiters but being able to fit in 54 hands at appropriate lvl, it seemed to take burden off from other responses. I might go back to 2♦ being pure and distributional if testing seems to indicate that. Oh and I missed the 3NT response to 2♦ which shows quite exactly your second example hand :) Worth to gamble.

My new version aims for quite a different goals, I don't see much reason to try to stay on the 2 lvl with real invite. Misfits are tough but so they are for everyone playing some invitational jumpshifts or whatever. I also need a way to bid weak hands that want to bail off at 2H. 1♠ - 2♦ -> 2♥ = pretty much forced 2♠ = I'd really rather play spades (6+ and short hearts) Others show heart fit. 1♠ - 2♦ - 2♥ -> Pass = Want to play here, usually some KJ 6th. at least. 2♠ = Transfer to ♣, 54+ inv+ 2NT = Transfer to ♦, 55(4)+ inv+ 3♣ = Transfer to ♥, 6+, may have 3♠ inv+ 3♦ = 4♦, 6+♥ GF 3♥ = 4♣, 6+♥ GF Higher are just hearts showing shortness/no Over those transfers you bid next step with min and no fit, show the fit on 3lvl with min, others deny fit, show fit for minor, show fit for major in order. Will not handle 5♥332 invites. Also 1543 is bit tough as you are at 3♣ with no fit opposite minimum, so I'd show that as balanced invite too.

1♣ - 2♦ (16+ / 7-12, 5+♠, 4+♦) 2♥ - 2♠ (Heart shortness) 2NT - 3♣ (55+) 3♦ - 3NT (5062) 4♥ - 4♠ (♦ RKC / 1) 4NT - 5♠ (Asks Q, 7th diamond should do the trick) 6♦ - P I'm not quite sure if I really want to be in this but it's not too bad. After 2♣ opening: 2♣ - 2♥ (4+♠, unbal) 3♥ - 4♦ (No relay, so shows long good suit, often with spade shortness) 4♥ or 5♦, hard to say which one I'd bid. 5♦ might get raise to 6. After 1♥ opening (I'd probably choose this for the reasons the_clown said) 1♥ - 1♠ 2♣ - 3♦ (Gazzilli style / 46+ or something like that, haven't really figured a bid to show 56+ :D) 4♥ let's play.

Good point mycroft. We indeed have the exact same system whatever 1♠ means. Obviously if it doesn't promise spades, the T/O double even more suggests a balanced hand. We also have natural transfers to whatever the suits opps might have promised. Of course it would be optimal to have defense against every defense but that's just not practical.