relays - some technical Qs

[david_c]

I've been experimenting with a relay system over 1M. Finding opener's shape is the easy part: what I'm not happy with is what happens after this is complete. So I have a few questions for the dedicated relayers amongst you ...

 

:huh:

 

A common problem seems to be where relayer wants to try for slam, but has a holding like xxx or QJx in a suit where partner has shown two or three cards. Unfortunately, the bids which ask about this particular suit would usually take you past the 4-level. So you can end up playing in 5 of a major with a side suit of Qxx opposite xxx. Is it playable to have methods which specifically ask opener to sign off unless he has a control in a particular suit? Or, is there a better way of dealing with this problem?

 

B)

 

I'm using specific bids to set suits as trumps, e.g. 4♣ might show a slam try in hearts. How should these be played? Should opener be required to give key-card responses immediately, or should he have a way of indicating whether his hand is generally suitable for slam? (Note: relayer would already know at this point whether opener is minimum or maximum, but nothing more precise about the strength.)

 

B)

 

After a suit is set as trumps, we can ask about opener's holding in other suits. Should these asking bids confirm that all the key-cards are present? If not, is the ace one of the cards which we are asking about here?

 

:blink:

 

Opener usually shows 6M-3-2-2 shape by bidding 3♠. Assume for the moment that by choosing a relay sequence, responder is promising at least a doubleton in partner's major. Given this, what should responder's 3NT bid mean?

(i) Absolutely to play.

(ii) Choice of games. (How does opener decide?)

(iii) Some sort of slam try.

 

:)

[hrothgar]

Its ALL a matter of available bidding space:

The more space you have, the more questions that you get to ask.

 

It might be helpful to consider a specific example:

Assume that relay responder has just bid 3[♥], showing 6=2=3=2 shape.

 

Playing MOSCITO, the relay asker has the following response available:

 

3♠ = Slam point ask

3N = To play

4♣ = RKCB for Spades

4♦ = Terminator puppet

4♥ = RKCB for Diamonds

 

Note that this auction termination system is based on the assumption that the Relay Asker needs to be able to set any suit as trump. From the sounds of matters, your relay sequences are based on an assumption that the Relay Asker has 2+ card support for responder's major. Personally, if I had this luxury, I'd probably gimmick the response schedule by assuming that RR's long suit is trump. I'd keep 3♠ as the Slam Point ask and use other bids as Control Asking Bids.

 

One important comment: I play relay because its EASY. A properly implemented relay scheme like Symmetric significantly decreases memory load because its based on a few basic rules which are consistantly applied. The more baggage that you drag in attempting to tweak the system, the worse the memory load. For what its worth, I consider systems in which you only relay holding 2+ card support to be problematic, because you need to special case all your strong hands laking 2+ card support. In a simialr fashion, if you special case auction termination with a 6+ card suit, you need to learn another system when RR holds 5332 shape. Its unclear whether the costs with repsect to complexity necessarily compensate for the constructive gains.

[Robert]

Hello everyone

 

You might want to try using a 4D* puppet to 'sign off' bid. If you want to sign off, bid 4D* forcing 4H and either pass or bid any other game.

 

Bids higher than 4D* can be used in a number of ways. One method uses them as RKC in the suit bid. Another method uses them as RKC in corresponding suits(using the longest suit as the lowest step)

 

POWER even uses size asking RKC! It seems funny when I first saw it, however, it is a good bidding method.

 

As far as cue bidding goes, you might want to try 'negative' cue bids, you bid suits that you do not have a control in. Bypassing a suit 'shows' a control in the suit.

 

3NT used as 'serious' major slam try or used as 'weak' slam try are both good methods. I prefer the 3NT serious slam try, since it saves space and you have extra controls to show.

 

Relay methods may benefit from 'breaking' the relay chain to bid naturally with certain hand types. If you do not know what to do with the relay information, you might want to 'break' from relays into natural bidding. The ULTIMATE Club uses negative cue bids, relay chain 'breaks' and natural bidding.

 

Regards,

Robert

[DelfinoD]

A common problem seems to be where relayer wants to try for slam, but has a holding like xxx or QJx in a suit where partner has shown two or three cards.

 

I think first of all you should always have a possibility to bid by relays or natural. Some hands are just not proper for asking for example hands with no holding in a suit or with a singleton or void. They should be bid naturally.

 

I'm using specific bids to set suits as trumps, e.g. 4♣ might show a slam try in hearts. How should these be played? Should opener be required to give key-card responses immediately, or should he have a way of indicating whether his hand is generally suitable for slam?

 

I think most people show key cards. If you want to check if the hand is just proper for slam bidding without much risk, you could just invite somehow.

 

After a suit is set as trumps, we can ask about opener's holding in other suits. Should these asking bids confirm that all the key-cards are present? If not, is the ace one of the cards which we are asking about here?

 

I think it depends on the level of the bidding. But anyway one thing should be sure: opener should have no right to change the contract selected as final by asking player.

 

Given this, what should responder's 3NT bid mean?

 

Well it depends on the system I think. I play that 3nt should always be passed.