Bid these in your favorite system

[Gerben42]

Hi, here are two bidding problems from last weekend's league. How would YOU have bid them?

 

[hv=d=w&w=saxhaqxxdakqxckxx&e=skqxhkdt9xxxcajxx]266|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

[hv=d=w&w=saxhaqxxdakqxckxx&e=skqxhkdt9xxxcajxx]266|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

[erki_]

Moscito goes something like that:

1♣ (15+HCP) 1♦ (GF)

1♥ (18+HCP) 1♠ (2-suiter without spades or minor singlesuiter)

1NT (relay) 3♥ (3-1-5-4 distribution)

3♠ (QP ask) 3NT♣ (6QPs, not sure if singleton Ks are shown? somebody?)

7♦ (if singleton kings are really shown, then end of the bidding is 3♠-4♦-7NT)

 

2nd one:

1♥ (9-14HCP, 4+♠) 1♠ (inv+ relay)

2♣ (natural) 2♦ (relay)

3♣ (5-3-1-4 distr) 3♥ (QP ask excluding spades, well, let's see what happens)

3NT (6QPs) 4♣ (DCB, where are we going??)

4♥ (no AK♥) 6♣ (opener now knows xxxxx-Qxx-x-AKxx, must have A or K of spades also, or J♥ or singleton K♦ or J♣ or a combination of them, so slam has some decent chances, could also sign off in 5♣ or 5♦ if afraid of going down)

EDIT: ah, forgot that the contract is wrong-sided, so probably slam is too much

EDIT2: You are correct, Free. I think I counted A=3, K♠=2 and then switched back to HCP and added 2 for Q♠, anyway, this doesn't affect the bidding much

[Free]

Dunno how you count to 7QP's?? I only see 6, singleton K isn't counted, but if you do you count 8, so never 7 :lol: .

 

With Toothbrush:

1♣ - 3♦ (GF 3-1-5-4)

3♥ - 3♠ (6 SlamPoints; singleton K doesn't count)

7♦ - ... (maybe 7NT now with the singleton K, but usually should pass)

West knows that there are 2SP lost in ♥ (which partner has, but that's unknown) and 1SP lost in one of the black suits, so all spots are covered.

 

1♥ - 1♠ (4+♠ - inv+ relay)

3♦ - ... (5-3-1-4)

Very hard decision. 3NT seems laydown but wrongsided, 5♦ may be too high already, but that's probably my choice. If you look at both hands you might want to go on, but at the table seing East's hand, it's wishful thinking to go higher imo.

[Gerben42]

Free, In Moscito is there no way to exclude a suit from the control asking or something?

 

A bit of background on the hands: The first our opponents landed in 7NT after a bidding misunderstanding <sigh> with the other table in 6NT.

 

Nice to find out everything else, but singleton ♥K would be nice to know here.

 

On the second we reached 6♦ in our Relay Precision system using a special break out that rarely comes up but did this time:

 

1♠ (5+♠)

- 1NT (GF relay)

2♣ (4+♣ or 5440 exactly)

- 3♦ (sets ♦ as trumps with a void somewhere)

3♥ (forced)

- 3♠ (ace asking with ♦ as trumps, void in ♠)

3NT (1 or 4 key cards)

- 4♣ (asking for specific Kings)

4NT (♣K)

- 6♦

 

6♦ was not 100% safe bid but moderately safe I think. Maybe a different structure would be better here but since it does not come up that often we didn't think of one yet.

 

The first trick was helpful: ♣10, Ace, Jack!, small. So I refused the ♦ finesse and played ♦Ace and another. This left LHO on play with RHO out of trumps. And indeed, ♣ were 5 - 1 so a ♣ finesse to the 8 brought trick 12.

 

On a ♠ lead the contract is more interesting, I guess, maybe I should start another thread for that :)

[luke warm]

Hi, here are two bidding problems from last weekend's league. How would YOU have bid them?

[hv=d=w&w=saxhaqxxdakqxckxx&e=skqxhkdt9xxxcajxx]266|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

1C : 3D (3154)

3H : 4C (4 controls)

7D

 

since responder has 4 controls, the stiff heart K must be one of them.. can keep scanning and find the spade Q i guess, for 7NT

 

[hv=d=w&w=saxhaqxxdakqxckxx&e=skqxhkdt9xxxcajxx]266|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

1S : 1NT (GF)

2C : 2D (relay)

3D : 3H (contrl ask)

4C : 5D (4 : scared of a later 6C response)

[csdenmark]

In Regres it will be:

 

1. Pass - 1♣ - 1♦ - 1♥ - ♠(slam force,any). Natural or art. continue. I prefer CAB + DELTA

 

 

2. Pass - 1♣ - 1NT(13-18HcP, 0-1♦ + a 5cd MAJOR)

2♣(ASK distrib) - 2♥(5♠ + 4♣)

2♠(ASK distrib) - 2NT(2-suiter, ♠+♣, 5-4 min/MAX or 6-4 min)

3♣(ASK distrib) - 3♦(min, 5-3-1-4)

 

Now responder has these options:

Pass=Signoff

3♥♠=Signoff

3NT=Signoff

4♣=Signoff

4♦=End Signal

4♥=SLAB13-18 in ♠

4♠=SLAB13-18 in ♥

[Sigi_BC84]

1S : 1NT (GF)

2C : 2D (relay)

3D : 3H (contrl ask)

4C : 5D (4 : scared of a later 6C response)

5♦ is not some asking bid in your methods?

--Sigi

[Sonny S]

Problem #1

 

I prefer Moscito with controls ask and denial cue-bids. A "super denial start relay" (step+1) ask for Queens (you know where the Aces and Kings are - se later).

 

1♣ - 1♦

1♥ - 1♠

1NT - 3♥ (3154 shape)

3♠(Controls ask) - 4♦(4 ctr.)

4♠(super-relay, ask for Queens) - 4N(no ♦Q)

5♣(ask again) - 5♦(no ♣Q)

5♥(ask again) - 5N(♠Q but no ♦J)

7NT!

:D

[Free]

Free, In Moscito is there no way to exclude a suit from the control asking or something?

Slamtools have nothing to do with MOSCITO... I still play SP ask and low level RKC. Dunno how the new toys work exactly.

[luke warm]

1S : 1NT (GF)

2C : 2D (relay)

3D : 3H (contrl ask)

4C : 5D (4 : scared of a later 6C response)

5♦ is not some asking bid in your methods?

--Sigi

no... it can be in some methods, i suppose, but there's also a need for responder to be able to sign off

[paulg]

[hv=d=w&w=saxhaqxxdakqxckxx&e=skqxhkdt9xxxcajxx]266|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

2♣ - 2♦ (Positive)

2NT (23-24 bal) - 3♠ (minor stayman)

4♦ - 4♥ cue agreeing diamonds

4♠ - 5♣

5♥ - 5♠

7♦

 

[hv=d=w&w=saxhaqxxdakqxckxx&e=skqxhkdt9xxxcajxx]266|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

1♠ - 2♦

2♠ - 4♦

5♣ - 5♦

Pass

 

Not a great auction but we'd find it difficult to bid the slam confidently.

 

p

[Sigi_BC84]

1S : 1NT (GF)

2C : 2D (relay)

3D : 3H (contrl ask)

4C : 5D (4 : scared of a later 6C response)

5♦ is not some asking bid in your methods?

--Sigi

no... it can be in some methods, i suppose, but there's also a need for responder to be able to sign off

Won't you be able to sign off using the 4♦ end signal? That would free the bids above 4♦ for further asking schemes. I was assuming that this is pretty standard for symmetric relay systems.

 

--Sigi

[akhare]

In Dejeneur (a Tresboof / Moscito FP variant) -- opener's bids are relays unless otherwise noted):

 

Note that it's quite nice when a new toy (step 2 as DCB for Q if controls are resolved at 3♠ or less) actually gets used:

 

#1:

 

P (14+) - 1♣ (GF)

1♦ - 1N (♣ or ♦ or both)

2♣ - 2♦ (both minors; 5+♦)

2♥ - 3♦ (3-1-5-4 exactly)

3♥ - 3♠ (3 controls; no discussion about stiff honours)

4♦ (Queen DCB!) - 4♥ (no Q♦)

4♠ - 4N (no Q♣)

5♣ - 5♥ (Q♠, but no J♦)

7♦ (can count 13 tricks!!!)

 

#2:

 

1♦ (9-13;4+♠ - 1♥ (artificial;inv+ relay)

2♣ - 2♦ (relay)

3♦ (5-3-1-4) - 3♥ (control ask)

4♣ (4 controls) - 4♦ (DCB)

4♠ (♠ control, either AK of ♣ or nothing) --

 

At this point responder can see K♠ and AK of ♣ and has to decide whether to continue or just sign off in 5♦

[Impact]

Hand 1:

 

1♣ 3♦

3♥ 3♠

3NT 4♦

4♥ 4♠

4NT 5♥

5♠ 5NT

6♣ 6♥

7NT

 

16+HCP 8-19HCP, 3-1-5-4, 2+ Blue Club Controls

Relay 12+HCP

Relay 4 Blue Club Controls (counting singK because 12+ shown)

Relay All or no D

Relay C cont, S cont no 2nd D Hon

Relay no CQ or 2nd Hon hence HK

Relay SQ but no DJ

conclusion hoping DJxxx is not offside.....

 

Hand 2:

 

1♠ 2♣

2♦ 4♦

5♣ 6♦

 

Very unusual sequences....

 

10-15HCP, 5+S Transfer to D, usually weak to Invit

no good fit!! Slam-try in D with self-sufficient suit and S shortage

cue as 10HCP outside S, denies DK S Conclusion as already denied fit

 

 

Impact uses transfers and jump later where natural bidding would suggest minimum jump shifts: self-sufficient suits but not enough to force to slam, and a hand which would not be comfortable with relays and DCB....

 

To my knowledge this structure is relatively unique and could be modified for more standard systems....

[luke warm]

Won't you be able to sign off using the 4♦ end signal? That would free the bids above 4♦ for further asking schemes. I was assuming that this is pretty standard for symmetric relay systems.

 

--Sigi

maybe i'm not understanding you.. take the bidding shown

 

2c : 2d

3d : 3h

4c showing 4 controls... now 4d starts spiral scan

 

and you're probably right as to what is standard and what isn't... i'm just unaware of it, that's all

[MarceldB]

In Regres it will be:

 

2. Pass - 1♣ -  1NT(13-18HcP, 0-1♦ + a 5cd MAJOR)

    2♣(ASK distrib) -  2♥(5♠ + 4♣)

    2♠(ASK distrib) - 2NT(2-suiter, ♠+♣, 5-4 min/MAX or 6-4 min)

    3♣(ASK distrib) - 3♦(min, 5-3-1-4)

 

Now responder has these options:

Pass=Signoff

3♥♠=Signoff

3NT=Signoff

4♣=Signoff

4♦=End Signal

4♥=SLAB13-18 in ♠

4♠=SLAB13-18 in ♥

Hi CLaus,

 

Are you mixing two approaches in Regres regarding the singleton treatment?

 

1NT= indeed s/v ♦, L= Major

 

a] 2♣= relay --> 2♥= 5+ card ♠

if an 1-suiter then a minimum, no 64 in the Majors, either any 5/5

 

b] 2♣= relay --> 2♥= 5+ card ♥ + 4c else 5431 +/- or 64 with a minimum.

this last one according the singleton scheme.

So here: 2♦= 5+ card ♠

 

Furthermore regarding the progress after full distribution is known:

Here with 3♦ --> all further bids are SLam Asking Bids and not up to 4♣ sign offs because you gave a positive 2♣ relay after the 1NT bid.

Bid otherwise 2♦= partner call your longest Major.

 

And finally 2nd SLab= ♣ because 2nd longest suit.

Besides the 1NT bid is limited: 13-16p. (17 if you wish, but not 18)

[csdenmark]

In Regres it will be:

 

2. Pass - 1♣ -  1NT(13-18HcP, 0-1♦ + a 5cd MAJOR)

    2♣(ASK distrib) -  2♥(5♠ + 4♣)

    2♠(ASK distrib) - 2NT(2-suiter, ♠+♣, 5-4 min/MAX or 6-4 min)

    3♣(ASK distrib) - 3♦(min, 5-3-1-4)

 

Now responder has these options:

Pass=Signoff

3♥♠=Signoff

3NT=Signoff

4♣=Signoff

4♦=End Signal

4♥=SLAB13-18 in ♠

4♠=SLAB13-18 in ♥

Hi CLaus,

 

Are you mixing two approaches in Regres regarding the singleton treatment?

 

1NT= indeed s/v ♦, L= Major

 

a] 2♣= relay --> 2♥= 5+ card ♠

if an 1-suiter then a minimum, no 64 in the Majors, either any 5/5

 

b] 2♣= relay --> 2♥= 5+ card ♥ + 4c else 5431 +/- or 64 with a minimum.

this last one according the singleton scheme.

So here: 2♦= 5+ card ♠

 

Furthermore regarding the progress after full distribution is known:

Here with 3♦ --> all further bids are SLam Asking Bids and not up to 4♣ sign offs because you gave a positive 2♣ relay after the 1NT bid.

Bid otherwise 2♦= partner call your longest Major.

 

And finally 2nd SLab= ♣ because 2nd longest suit.

Besides the 1NT bid is limited: 13-16p. (17 if you wish, but not 18)

Marcel this is not right place for a discussion of details of Regres. You know quite well Regres book is open for interpretations here and not at all clear. I use Delta but anti-delta is also a possible solution. Peter Koch Larsen uses another option which I am unable to look through but it looks to be a possible correct interpretation too.

 

Your private interpretation in Regression may have something too.

 

Acc. to Lukasz Slawinski natural methods will do too.

 

But 4♠ is NOT SLAB in ♣. There are no high-level SLAB in minors. So it is not only in Regres but in all bridge systems.

[MarceldB]

>Marcel this is not right place for a discussion of details of Regres.

 

This is the non-natural system forum section. People discuss f.e. Moscito details too, so I do not see any ground in such thrifty occasions that Regres is the subject in a bidding not to discuss the sequence and specially in case the reference to that system is completely wrong.

So if you allow me:

 

>You know quite well Regres book is open for interpretations here and not at all clear. I use >Delta but anti-delta is also a possible solution. Peter Koch Larsen uses another option which I >am unable to look through but it looks to be a possible correct interpretation too.

 

>Your private interpretation in Regression may have something too.

 

>. to Lukasz Slawinski natural methods will do too.

 

I know the details are not worked out completely, specially the continuations of (forcing) relay breaks. But the basics are very clear and without any questionmarks.

 

The 2♦= unlimited relay, asking for the Major, whilst 2♣= the g.f. forcing relay (can have sometimes an exit to play 3x in the 4-card) belong to those basics.

When I see your sign offs, it is a complete waste of bidding space in case you want to investigate for slam. Therefore after 1NT those 2 original different relays, apart of the fact to be able to sign off/invite.

 

>But 4♠ is NOT SLAB in ♣. There are no high-level SLAB in minors. So it is not only in >Regres but in all bridge systems.

 

That's completely new for me. :o

I see that you don't like minor-slams.

But seriously Claus, this is not correct. I estimate that you have this treatment because of the "mistreatment" of how to sign-off properly.

It's a cooperation between R and RR.

In other sequences f.e.: give 1 positive relay, break and RR proceeds with a maximum. Normal treatment.

 

I have posted this because people who are not familiar with Regres could get a completely wrong view.

If you like your own method, that's up to you, but it has nothing to do with the original Regres cq. relay-methods, either privat-versions/interpretations of the original Regres.

 

Best regards, Marcel

[csdenmark]

Marcel - There is not one Regres. It is a basic method developed by several young polish students 35 years ago. Much of the stuff is optional and most of it not written to the end. Probably because pairs played different versions. That is not exactly the same as private systems - but of course have the same negative implications.

 

You know quite well I try to play not only Regres but all systems best possible according to origin. Nothing in bridge is 100%. I correct bugs quick as possible.

 

You have rejected to play bridge for many years now. I don't understand why. I have no interest in theorethical discussions of questionable features.

 

If you want to play bridge Marcel - I am ready. But more discussions of hypothetical details is not interesting to me. I prefer to avoid de-railing of threads, so this is last posting here.

 

I am ready to discuss Regres features with partners!

[inquiry]

[hv=d=w&w=saxhaqxxdakqxckxx&e=skqxhkdt9xxxcajxx]266|100|Scoring: IMP

2♦ - 2♥

2NT - 3♠

3NT - 4♣

4♦ - 4NT

5♦ - 5♥

6♣ - 7NT

[/hv]2D - multi, 2H pass correct, 2NT bal (22)23-24, 3S-force 3NT, 4C = minor smolen, showing 4C and longer D, 4D = set trumps, 4N = RKCB, 5D = 1 or 4 keycards, 5H trump queen ask, 6C = yes, plus the club king.

 

7D = you have SA, HA, DAKQ, and CK that is 20 points. you need 3 more (23-24) or you have to like your 22. With 22 you are unlikey to have two jacks (not a good 22) so you will have ♥Q or ♣Q, so 7NT should be laydown. And you can have more than 22....should you have 23 hcp with 3 jacks, then at worse it maybe on the club hook if you don't have 4 spades and squeeze in hearts and clubs might exist as well.

 

[hv=d=w&w=saxhaqxxdakqxckxx&e=skqxhkdt9xxxcajxx]266|100|Scoring: IMP

2♦ - 2♥

2NT - 3♠

3NT - 4♣

4♦ - 4NT

5♦ - 5♥

6♣ - 7NT

[/hv]

2♠ = 5/6 spades and 4/5 clubs, 9 - bad 15 hcp (better shape, fewer top hcp, worse shape higher the minimum hcp). 2NT = forcing asking bid, 3♥ = 5-3-1-4 so minimum closer to 11, max of 15, 4♦ = diamonnds may have undisclosed heart suit and hand will be in hearts, forcing, 4♥ = (only three despite rebid), 5♦ my suit, pass.

[Sigi_BC84]

2D - multi, 2H pass correct, 2NT bal (22)23-24, 3S-force 3NT, 4C = minor smolen, showing 4C and longer D, 4D = set trumps, 4N = RKCB, 5D = 1 or 4 keycards, 5H trump queen ask, 6C = yes, plus the club king.

This is nice. Can you give the full structure after 2NT that you are playing? Our system sucks in this regard, so we need help for improvement.

 

Thanks,

Sigi

[hrothgar]

Playing MOSCITO

 

Hand 1

 

1♣ - 1♦

1♥ - 1♠

1N - 3♣

3♦ - 3♥

3♠ - 3N

4♣ - 4♦

4♥ - 5♣

5♦ - 5♥

5♠ - 6♦

7♦

 

Here's the critical information

 

1♣ is strong and 1♦ establishes a game force and denies a 5440

1♥ is a relay showing a non-minimum opening.

Shape is resolved with the 3♥ bid showing 3=1=5=4 shape

 

At this point in time, opener has a choice of bidding 3♠ asking for AKQ slam points or bidding 4♣ as RKCB in Diamonds. There are advantages to either path. Responder is marrked with a minimum of 6 slam points in his long suits. At a bare minimum, he must have the Ace of Clubs and King of Spades and at least one Black suit Queen. The grand is looking reasonable, regardless of whether responder holds any thing extra. The 4♣ bid allows you to ask about the King of Hearts. The 3♠ lets you focus on Black suit Jacks. Jacks are more likely that a stiff King, so I prefer 3♠

[Sigi_BC84]

1♣ - 1♦

[...]

7♦

 

Here's the critical information

 

1♣ is strong and 1♦ establishes a game force and denies a 5440

1♥ is a relay showing a non-minimum opening.

Shape is resolved with the 3♥ bid showing 3=1=5=4 shape

You've placed all the controls including Jacks. Why do you have relay responder declare 7♦ instead of declaring 7NT yourself (with the obvious advantages)?

--Sigi

[hrothgar]

1♣ - 1♦

[...]

7♦

 

Here's the critical information

 

1♣ is strong and 1♦ establishes a game force and denies a 5440

1♥ is a relay showing a non-minimum opening.

Shape is resolved with the 3♥ bid showing 3=1=5=4 shape

You've placed all the controls including Jacks. Why do you have RR responder declare 7♦ instead of declaring 7NT yourself (with the obvious advantages)?

--Sigi

I haven't placed the King of Hearts

 

Once I make the decision to ask for slam points, I can't ask about the stiff King of Hearts. Accordingly, I want to reserve the possibility of a dummy reversal.

[inquiry]

2D - multi, 2H pass correct, 2NT bal (22)23-24, 3S-force 3NT, 4C = minor smolen, showing 4C and longer D, 4D = set trumps, 4N = RKCB, 5D = 1 or 4 keycards, 5H trump queen ask, 6C = yes, plus the club king.

This is nice. Can you give the full structure after 2NT that you are playing? Our system sucks in this regard, so we need help for improvement.

 

Thanks,

Sigi

I think this 2NT structure is ripped off from Chris Ryal of the paradox bid pages on his cavendish pages or maybe from Glen Ashton from his www.bridgematters.com site. Actually it is probably Chris, because I play Glen's 1NT structure and it is much more complicated than what I play for 2NT.

 

Here is a link to a web page with this structure. I use kantar RKCB so strong hand and weak hand responses to blackwood are different. That played a role on this hand.

 

2NT structure