Little Kid

Oops, fixed it!

Thanks for your comments straube! I have been testing out the last structure I posted for the past hour or two and my feelings echo precisely what you have said. The hands with invitational+ values and 5+♥s aren't at all smooth, the 3♣ bid showing inv+ 5+♥s caused some messy auctions after opener showed a minimum. There is simply not enough room to explore both the degree of ♥ fit and combined strength all whilst trying to find best partscore if opener is minimum. Ending up in a 6-1♠ fit holding a 6-2♥ fit was one of the examples. It didn't look great when the ♠ suit was headed by the J and 4♥ was pretty much cold. So this definitely needs to be changed! Another problem hand was the (11)12-13 range hands with short ♠s. These invitational hands with short ♠s came up quite a lot and I would really like to be able to cater for them. Some form of Ogust seems ideal for this and I'll try it out. Alternatively 3♣ could be a natural feature asking bid or something with the 2NT-3♥ being the invitational raise with short ♠s. It might be a good idea to leave out the 6421 shapes and focus on 7222, 7321, 6332 and 6331 shapes. It will should improve the responses to 2M and cause less worries about 3m being a better contract to play in. I'm not sure what kind of implications this all has on the 1M-? structure but I will check that out once the 2M responses seem to work. 6+m GF (slam interest) hands didn't come up much, quite possibly due to low frequency of such hands in general. I'm going to scrap the 3♦/3♥ bids for the minors too and use things that come up more often. Then one could simply go through some relay/feature-asking/OGUST sequence with those hands instead as you suggested. To summarise, your arguments convinced me once I actually tried out the sequences and the next thing I'll test is something like: 2♠ .....2NT Asking shape ........ 3♣ No shortage ............ 3♦ Asking more ................ 3♥ Min ................ 3♠ Max 7222 ................ 3NT Max 6332 ........ 3♦ Low shortage ........ 3♥ Middle shortage ........ 3♠ High Shortage .... 3♣ Ogust ........ 3♦ Bad hand bad suit ........ 3♥ Bad hand, good suit ........ 3♠ Good hand, bad suit ........ 3NT Good hand, good suit .... 3♦ Inv+ 5+♥s ........ 3♥ Min: P/C with 2♥ ............ 3♠ To play ............ 3NT To play ........ 3♠ Min: ♥ shortage ........ 3NT Max: ♥ shortage ........ 4♥ 3♥s Note: The idea is that you punt game as opener over 3♦ with all hands that have 3♥, which should be a good contract most of the time anyway. That makes it easier for a responder with a ♥ slam try to determine degree of fit but also shape. This also takes pressure off responder regarding bidding over 3♥ with inv/GF borderline hands. .... 3♥ Invitational with short ♠s Despite the epic fail of the initial 3♣/3♦/3♥ sequences, the one thing that did work alright alright were the 2NT auctions with 2+♠ support. They came up with a high frequency (>50% of the time) and went pretty smoothly, working as well as normal 2/1 auctions if not better. A nice example was: ♠ AQ8653 ♥ 864 ♦ AQ2 ♣ 6 ♠KT9 ♥A3 ♦KJT9 ♣AK72 2♠-2N* 3♠**-4♣ 4♦-4NT 5♠-6♦ 7♠-7N * Asking ** ♣ singleton Might do some more tweaking on all this tomorrow and give the test-bidding another go. Thanks to everyone who has replied, trying to come up with a set of responses to a bid for the first time is harder than it seems! I would have probably given up in frustration on this already if it wasn't for the constructive help :unsure:

Inviting in oM will be quite important, totally forgot about it. Will definitely need to revise the responses I wrote again because I agree with all the points you make. If only there was room for more bidding! The problems I have with the min-max relay structure is that it takes up more room and that the High-Middle shortages are in the same bid. Maybe I could have a hand where I want to know about partner's shortage holding xxxx in a suit, but still want to sign off in 3♠ if the hands don't fit. Alternatively holding soft values like QJ/KJ opposite shortage may really be a reason not to go over 3♠. It is only a 3 hcp range so the extent to which a hand is min or max will depend largely on how well they fit. The advantage of your structure is that you can go through the relay with an inv hand and short spades, then make an educated guess after the response. I might change my mind on this once I start testing out some of the sequences with actual hands. Signing off in a better suit may be an issue but I'm less worried about that because the bid already does show 6-7M, which unlike the Fantunes 2-bids will usually be the best partscore to play in opposite a weak hand. I should probably use the 3♣ bid to cater for some of those holdings. Maybe using the inv+ oM is best bescause you need most room for that? 2♠ .... 2NT Asking shape ........ 3♣ No shortage ............ 3♦ Asking more ................ 3♥ Min ................ 3♠ Max 7222 ................ 3NT Max 6332 ........ 3♦ High shortage ........ 3♥ Middle shortage ........ 3♠ Low Shortage .... 3♣ Inv+ 5+♥ ........ 3♦ Min ............ 3♥ GF asking ♥ fit ................ 3♠ Singleton ................ 3NT 2♥ ................ 4♣/♦ Shortage and 3♥ ................ 4♥ 3♥ ............ 3♠ To Play ........ 3♥ Max 2♥ ............ 3♠ Sets ♥s ............ 3NT To play ........ 3♠ Max 3♥ ........ 3NT Max 1♥ .... 3♦ GF 6+♣ ........ 3♥ 3+♣ ........ 3♠ Hx in ♣ ........ 3NT x or xx in ♣ .... 3♥ GF 6+♦ ........ 3+ or Hx ♦ ........ 3NT x or xx♦

First of all thanks for the responses! Having said that I'll try to give some more information on why I'd like to try this bid, as suggested already the intent of the bid will affect its responses: The idea is to put pressure on the opponents to decide whether or not to compete for the partscore after we have reached what is likely to be our PAR contract immediately. It should be harder for them to compete when it is right because we have more strength than over the traditional weak 2 and their hands may just be unsuitable to make a bid. It will also be more dangerous for them to bid if it is wrong because we may well have hands suitable to find a penalty double when they are too high. With that purpose in mind, suit quality will not really be a big criterion for bidding 2M and hopefully the edge in hcps vs. weak 2s will make penalty doubles here quite rare. To answer The Hog's question, weak 2s now go via a weak variant only of multi. Admittedly this means they will lose a lot of their potency because the only times I've seen weak 2s get good results against good opponents recently is if it goes 2M-(?)-3M. The Gazzilli variant Ulven mentioned looks very interesting and is something I will check out B) So to summarise, 2M includes all (9)10-13 hands with 6(7)M where you expect 2M to be the final contract opposite a weak responder in your regular 2/1 auction (don't want to lose accuracy vs std. bidding). Probably something like 7222, 7321, 6322, 6331 and 6421 (not 4oM) shapes. Any ideas on other shapes to include/exclude in order not to lose much accuracy in exploring strains? Combining the suggestions from the post, maybe something like this: 2♠ .... 2NT Asking shape ........ 3♣ No shortage ............ 3♦ Asking more ................ 3♥ Min ................ 3♠ Max 7222 ................ 3NT Max 6332 ........ 3♦ Low shortage ........ 3♥ Middle shortage ........ 3♠ High Shortage .... 3♣ GF 5+♥s ........ 3♦ 1♥ ........ 3♥ 2♥s ........ 3♠ 3♥s .... 3♦ GF 5+♣s ........ 3♥ Don't like ♣s ........ 3♠ Like ♣s .... 3♥ GF 5+♦s ........ 3♠ Don't like ♦s ........ 3NT Like ♦s .... 3♠ Preemptive, to play .... 3NT To play .... 4♣/♦/♥ Splinter

1♦ then 2N. Why is it that some would open 1♣ vs 1♦?

Playing 2M as 10-13 with 6M in 1st and 2nd seat, does anyone have suggestions for follow-up bids? The overall system is 2/1 based. Any comments on how you have found this treatment to work if you have played it would be very welcome too! Thanks! EDIT: Structure currently being tested: 2♠ .....2NT Asking shape ........ 3♣ No shortage ............ 3♦ Asking more ................ 3♥ Min .................... 3NT To play, P/C ................ 3♠ Max Bad ♠ suit ................ 3NT Max Good ♠ suit ................ 4♠ Max 7♠ ........ 3♦ Low shortage ........ 3♥ Middle shortage ........ 3♠ High Shortage .... 3♣ Ogust ........ 3♦ Bad hand bad suit ........ 3♥ Bad hand, good suit ........ 3♠ Good hand, bad suit ........ 3NT Good hand, good suit .... 3♦ Inv+ 5+♥s ........ 3♥ Min: P/C with 2♥ ............ 3♠ To play ............ 3NT To play ........ 3♠ Min: ♥ shortage ........ 3NT Max: ♥ shortage ........ 4♥ 3♥s ........ 4♠ To Play: Long good ♠s Note: The idea is that you punt game as opener over 3 with all hands that have 3♥, which should be a good contract most of the time anyway. That makes it easier for a responder with a ♥ slam try to determine degree of fit but also shape. This also takes pressure off responder regarding bidding over 3 with inv/GF borderline hands. .... 3♥ GF+ 6♥ and 1♠ ........ 3♠ 0-1 ♥s, suggests responder bids 3NT ........ 3NT Agrees ♥s .... 3♠ Preemptive, to play .... 3NT To play .... 4♣/♦/♥ Fit, secondary good 5+ suit 2/3 top honours

This convention seems awesome! There have been so many times I wanted to enter the auction but simply couldn't conjure up a double (which I already do much more readily than most). Maybe now I could possibly restore some of the integrity of my regular take out doubles :) . At favourable vulnerability it would be perfect on things like 5440 or 4441 even if you have virtually no hcps, without excessive risk. Although I wouldn't be able to muster up the courage to bid on ♠xxx ♥xxx ♦Axx ♣Txxx vulnerable, I could definitely see this working if you adjust your shapes and strength of the bid according to vulnerabilities! Maybe some criteria like hcps in the suits when vul but not in the t/o suit might make it a little safer because it might be harder for opps to find penalty doubles. Anyway, along with another cool convention I found I'm going to try this out!

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=saj7hadak843cat53]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] You bid in first seat, what will it be?

so looks like people bid 3♣, what do you do next with partner's hand: [hv=s=sqj5hqt7dkcak8752]133|100|[/hv]

2♦ was 5+♦ and is usually unbalanced.

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sa4hada976543cj96]133|100|Scoring: XIMP 1♦-2♣* 2♦-2NT ? *2♣ is GF[/hv] You deal and open in 1st seat, the auction proceeds without inteference from the opponents. What do you think is the best bid now?

Do you play 3♥ as a slam try here? I would have thought it is just patterning out and still looking for best strain? 1NT bidder could still have something like KJTx♥ and 3NT might be best spot? I posted this hand for a friend and for what its worth, I wouldn't super accept myself. Partner will probably upgrade a couple of hands to 3NT where it has little play simply because we won't be able to set up the diamonds in time. If he has a good ♦ suit chances are he would have bid game himself. It is a nice hand with lots of controls, but if we only have one stopper in ♥s or ♣s it could get tricky to get 9 before they get 5. Change the ♠Q and ♦Q and I'd be all over it. Perhaps another tiny argument against trying to right-side 3♦ here could be that partner might be weak with 5-5 in the minors, in which case you want to play in ♣s. Thanks for for responses! :)

[hv=s=sakqhaxxdxxxcktxx]133|100|Scoring: XIMP 1NT-2NT* 3♣**-3♥*** ? * ♦ transfer ** Not a super accept *** ♥ Shortage[/hv]

3NT for me. Would accept on decent 16-counts so this is not quite good enough for 4NT. If you only accept on nice 17-counts or primed 16-counts then I suppose I would invite.

4♦, wouldn't consider any other bid.

1♠ and 2♣ rebid here too, not happy to upgrade this to a 2N rebid over 1N. Still have a few descriptive options left after partner responds to 2♣.

[hv=d=s&v=b&n=sa82hkjt76dk854c7&w=s974h92dajt6cqt32&e=skq3hq854d72ckj64&s=sjt65ha3dq93ca985]399|300|Scoring: South[/hv] South being dealer auction proceeds: Pass-(Pass)-1♥-(Pass) 1♠ - (Pass)- 2♦-(Pass) 2NT-AP Who is at fault for getting too high? 3rd/4th seat openers can be light (4cM possible) and we 2way reverse drury.

[hv=d=s&v=e&s=skt876hkq97d3cqt3]133|100|Scoring: IMP Pass-(Pass)-Pass-(1♦) 1♠ - (X) - Pass- (4♥) All Pass[/hv] You pass in first seat. What do you lead against 4♥? If you disagree with the 1♠ feel free to comment on that too =)

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=skht52da8765cqj42]133|100|Scoring: IMP (Pass)-Pass-(1♠)-Pass (2♠) - ?[/hv] You're in 2nd position, do you move over 2♠ or await developments?

Wouldn't ever dream of passing 2♠ with North hand, nice 4card support and not a minimum response. Even if you are thinking of limiting partner to 17 or so, game could still easily make opposite an unbalanced hand with ♣ shortage or so. Blaming the missed game on opener's failure to rebid 2♠ seems like resulting. Even if game is not going to make, 2♠ by responder rates to be a good competitive decision. Don't see anything wrong with 1♠ rebid, its not the best 19 ever with the (singleton honour in partner's suit, scattered values, no texture, no source of tricks, etc). Maybe it is is worth a GF, but I certainly prefer 1♠ because it leaves more room to explore and partner shouldn't pass it on hands like this, making 1♠ safe.

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=s76532h9dkq73ckjt]133|100|Scoring: IMP (Pass)-Pass-(Pass)-1♥ (Pass)- 1♠-(Pass)- 2♣ (Pass)- ?[/hv] You pass in second seat and auction proceeds... What do you do here?

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=saq7hakt6dj43caq7]133|100|Scoring: XIMP (2♦*)-Pass-(Pass)-X (Pass)-2♥- (3♠) - ? *2♦: weak in a major[/hv]

Cool, thanks for the quick responses! I was in the 2♣ seat a few minutes ago with a limit raise in spades and had no clue what to do. Ended up bidding 2♣ because I also held 5♣s, not being 100% sure what it would mean. I was certain there must be some "standard" way to show a good ♠ raise. Never knew that people play 1N as a limit raise here but it makes more sense than giving up the natural club bid :)

(1♣)*-1♠-(Pass)-2♣? *1♣ is strong, 15+ What does 2♣ mean?

If the opponent with 6♠s also has 3/4♦s you may have trouble cashing your ♠Ace if he ducks your ♠ to the 8 (if he has any ♦s left he's not endplayed and if he doesn't you have no entry to dummy). That's why you need to unblock the ♠8?