fromageGB

Hey, did you read my answer while I was still typing it? :)

OK, if I'm sitting there at the table and this happened, I can't just ignore it and move on to the next hand. I have to assume partner is still in possession of his faculties. He passed initially, so doesn't have an opening hand, he wants to get in a high level as a sacrifice, but didn't preempt. I would assume a preempt hand but with a side suit he didn't want to sacrifice potential prospects in. His main suit has to be hearts. It looks as if the 4♣ bid (sitting under his LHO's possible suit) was an attempt to get you to bid that didn't work, hence the first redouble, and your pick on diamonds was the wrong one. Hence the second redouble. So he has long hearts and a side suit in spades. Give him something like AJxx QJTxxxxx - x and that might explain the bidding. NO, this is what a final 4♥ would be. So he has AJxxx QJTxxxx - x. I would bid accordingly and let him buy me a pint when it all goes wrong.

I think the idea is sound and worthwhile, but it takes a better memory than mine. The published treatise over-elaborates, but a couple of years ago I spent some time with ice packs to head working it all through. I've never played them (both sides of a partnership would need to have nothing better to do with their lives) but I have tried to work it out when playing, saying "if we were playing it, what would partners sequence mean?" and found that halfway through a hand I was struggling to remember dummy's and my initial distributions, as well as still trying to remember what had gone in all the suits. OK if you are allowed pencil and paper as an aid to calculation, but you are not. If you've got the memory to cope with it all, and it's not taking you ten minutes a hand, it's got to be worth it. And yes, perfectly legal, there's no hidden information.

Many thanks for the contributions, and the interesting ideas. Like Skaeran I play a system of transfer responses to 1♣ so am happy to have semi-balanced hands in that, and the Ken approach seems good for my methods. Thanks Ken for all the details. I shall have to develop this with my partner of course, but look forward to trying it out. When I have given this some more thought I hope you don't mind if I come back with some follow up questions!

I have read a number of times how some people play a 1D open is either a six card suit or shows a singleton elsewhere. This sounds interesting and I would like to know more. The context is a 2/1 system, and you have no 5 card major and not the strength for 1NT. I assume that if 1D is either 6 card or a singleton elsewhere, then other hands open 1C. I am happy with that, as major fits are easily handled after a club open. But what happens after the 1D open? I assume natural replies ? 1♦ 1M 1NT = singleton in that major, diamond length unspecified? 1♦ 1M 2♦ = 6 card diamonds? 1♦ 1♥ 1♠ = 5+ diamonds, 4 spades, single/void club?? 1♦ 2♦ - what does this mean? Do you still open 1C if 3352 shape? Please tell me more.

Is Clee playing a multi 2D? Then 2NT. If, as I suspect, Clee is playing a natural weak 2 then pass every time and there's a good chance he makes it.

This sounds interesting, but what if opener has 3 hearts and responder has 5, and you play in 1NT missing the heart fit? Or if you always convert to 2H do you really want to play there in a 5-2 heart fit? Simpler to play opener rebid of 1H shows 3 hearts, rebid 1NT with 2. The spade fit is not missed if the other responses are 1H=4+spades, 1S=transfer to NT with invitational hands (including 4 or 5 majors) bidding further, and 1NT=weak with 4/4 both majors.

I'm in England playing 2/1 (5cM) with a mini NT 10-12, and that is very playable. You get the preemptive bid on weak hands. With 13+ you open 1♣ on balanced hands and never miss the 4/4 major fit. Add in a wide ranging 1NT rebid of 13-16 with checkback and it seems to cater for all possibilities. I can't see why more people don't try it. I think it is as you say, the standard in the US is 5cM and strong NT, so people erroneously think they have to go together.

Last night at the club there were 2 hands where a 4/4 heart fit was better in 2♥ than the vast majority of the field playing in 1NT. That's one reason a mini NT works well. With 10-12 you have the preemptive effect, and with 13-15 you open 1♣ and find these fits other (weak NT) people miss.

When my partnerships abandoned 4cM Acol in favour of 5cM we initially tried 2/1 responses as game invitational, but had huge problems coping with continuations. After a number of months we bit the bullet and played proper 2/1 GF. Much easier to handle. Incidentally, we play 2/1 with a mini NT, not strong ! As far as the initial question goes, though, I can't really see the problem with keeping 1M as guaranteed 5 card, and opening a club on those other hands. You can develop more complex methods of replies to always find the best major fit, we play a variation of transfer walsh, but the best pair in our club simply have an artificial diamond reply which denies a 5 card major, then opener bids his 4 card major(s) up the line. Having 1M as 5 cards guaranteed makes it much, much simpler to find the right contract, with or without opposition bidding. Constructive bidding and preemption are both pretty hit and miss if you don't know opener's length.

2♦ (multi) all the time. I don't class the call as a preempt, but as a descriptor of the hand. It is defined for us as 6 card 6-10 points, and while "points" may be varied in the light of shape and other values, this hand clearly fits the bill. One of a major we keep up to strength, defined as 5+ cards rule of 17 (points plus spade length) - add another spade and I would open 1♠ - so less than this with 6 cards is a multi. Less than this with a 5 card suit we open 2♠, so that is defined as 8-11. The tight definitions work well.

I've never played minorwood, but I see no technical advantage in it. There is a simplicity advantage in that the partnership playing kickback must be certain of its agreements as to what is ace asking and what is not, whereas minorwood needs no discussion. Kickback has the great advantage that it applies to all suits, so that, for example, whatever the response you can find out about the trump queen and stop at the 5 level. Kickback also has the advantage that sometimes you don't find the fit until you are at the 4 level, and then minorwood is too late.

Certainly not. North has a lousy hand. 2♠ is the right contract.

You have to learn RKCB to play with people who like it, but it is by no means my weapon of choice. You can quite simply construct hands where a partner may have either 0 or 3 (or 1 or 4) and using it is dangerous. If you are prepared to get to grips with the kickback concept of "the next step above 4 of the trump suit is the ace asking bid", then it is much better to remove the ambiguity and play simple steps, 1, 2, 3, with 0 logically being the sign-off in trumps. To allow for the next-step-ask for the trump queen you have to say 3 steps is 3 aces with the trump queen, and 3 aces without the trump queen gets lumped in with the first step, but the queen responses handle that easily. And if you have 4 aces you reply above the level of 5 trumps by showing your kings. So learn RKCB to be able to play with anyone, and just ask them whether they play 3041 or 1430 (or 1340!), but if you are learning with a partner, then have a look at http://www.bruntonbridgeclub.org/ygreen_aces.htm

I agree with everything mike777 has said in his posts (except that my ace responses are different) apart from this : 4♣ is a cue bid, and if you now bid 4♠ this is not, for me, denying a heart control, as 4NT is a higher bid. However, it does invite opener to show second round control by bidding 4NT.

As a decidedly non-expert, maybe I shouldn't be contributing here, but in 2 partnerships I play "next step over 4 of the trump suit is ace asking", whatever the suit, and have found it useful. We don't come unstuck because we have simple rules. If the suit is explicitly agreed, no problem. In a sequence like 1♠ 2♥ 3♦, where no suit is agreed, 4♥ is ace asking in diamonds, 4♠ is ace asking in hearts, and 4NT ace asking in spades. These are categorically ace asking (in our simple methods) because they are jumps. If we wanted to bid 4♥ to play, for example, we would bid something else first then rebid 4♥. If a suit has not been agreed, and you are bidding at the 4 level without a jump, then the rule is "if it could be ace asking, it is", as often it will be obvious that it must be or cannot be. For example, 1♥ 2♦ 2♠ 3♦ 3♠ 4♠ is to play, as heart support could have been shown earlier. 1♥ 2♦ 2♠ 3♦ 3♥ 4♥ is similarly to play because if responder wanted unilaterally to ace ask in diamonds he wouldn't have bothered with 3♦ first. If we are cue bidding below the level of 4, we still play the ace ask bid as ace asking, abandoning cues at that point, or if we bypass it we continue with cues, with 4NT being the cue for the asking suit. We also use NT as the displaced bid to show the king of that asking suit when we come to asking for specific kings by bidding 5 of the asking suit.

One of the good things about this discussion board is how it gets you to talk situations over with your partner that you have just not considered together. As a result we have now decided that after 1♣ 1♦ (showing hearts) 2NT, all bids are transfers so that : 3♣ 3♦ 3NT is slam invitational with 5 diamonds 3♦ shows 6 hearts, and 3♥ shows 4+ spades. Responder has not denied holding 5 spades, as our treatment with a less than invitational hand with 5/5 in the majors is to initially show the hearts, so opener treats this in a Walsh-like fashion. He bids 3♠ with a 3 card suit, bids 3NT with 2, and 4♠ with 4. Over 3♠ responder can convert to 3NT or 4♠ accordingly.

I play a simple 1♣ 1♦ 1♥ is exactly 3 cards in hearts, and forcing, unlimited. Additional strength is shown later. So 1♣ 1♦ 2NT is 17-18 with less than 3 hearts. In response to this, John's method above is better than mine, but yes, a retransfer is possible.

Isn't this a "fit non-jump" with spades and long diamonds, intended to show the shape in case opps go on in their suit? I bid 4♠.

Game forcing raise with any. I have counted four spades, haven't I ?

You asked for interesting transfer ideas - I'm actually playing transfers on some of your early sequences. 1S - (2D) - 2NT is a transfer to the other minor, as we have 3C and 3D as invitational support raises. Apollo emphasised the importance of distinguishing between 3 and 4 card constructive raises, and we use 3C and 3D for this. 1H - (1S) - 2NT on the other hand is natural, as we play 1NT as a transfer to clubs. X is a transfer to 1NT, and we could raise this to 2NT, so a direct 2NT implies really good spade stops. As you may surmise, we have given up on a double to find a 4-4 minor fit on this sequence, but if opener is unbalanced he can respond to the X by bidding a minor, as the transfer to 1NT is not obligatory.

OK, so my line is still the only one so far. It needs ♥K with south and either ♠AJ+any with N or ♠A singleton with S. I can't see another line.

I regret that this line is no good, either. South wins the ♠10 with A and exits with a club. You have 3 clubs, 3 diamonds, 3 spades, 2 hearts with the finesse, for 11 tricks and I cannot see a twelfth.

And if North inserts the jack, to jam our communications, we unblock th ♠10 on the diamonds. Having crossed to dummy with a helicopter? Ouch! I left the helicopter at home. If N plays ♠J on the 5, you play with the Q, and if S wins the A we are sunk. If N has the ♠A then we need the heart finesse. Maybe not such a good line. Maybe that's why I'm not an international B)

Agree with 2♣, disagree with 3NT and would bid 2NT, disagree with A♦. Effervesce has a fair analysis, you need the ♠J with north, but are the diamonds breaking? Doesn't look like it to me. So win trick 1 with the 10, then ♦AK. Now tempt them with the ♠K. This should win, else you are home with the spade finesse. So now ♠5 to the 8. If this loses to the A then (on a club return) ♠10 to the Q. Take the diamonds, then if spades don't drop take the H finesse. On a heart return, take the finesse at that point. If the ♠8 wins, take the diamonds then again fall back on the heart finesse if the spades don't break. So it boils down to a choice - diamonds dropping or heart finesse?