A Gazzilli problem

[Poky]

1♠ 1NT

2♣* ???

 

* 11-15 with 5♠4♣ or 16+ any

 

♠x

♥AJxx

♦Jxxxx

♣xxx

 

You cannot rebid 2♦ 'cause this is artificial and promises 8-11 HCP. So, what do you bid and why?

[whereagles]

I guess I can't bid 2♥ either because that promises 5 cards, no? Well, I guess I'm left with 2♠.

[Cascade]

I change my Gazzilli and make 2♦ some sort of catch all including a minimum.

[Codo]

Wayne is right, my hand is so common, that any system, which will not work with this hand should be improved.

For now, I bid 2 ♥, lessest evil.

[Free]

2NT, showing minimum, short ♠ and denying 5♥...

[paulg]

2NT - minimum, 5+♦, short spades

 

When partner is weak gives us a chance of finding the best minor contract.

 

Paul

[Chamaco]

There are zillion of ways to play Gazzilli, just as there are many Stayman variants.

 

One of the bifurcation in Gazzilli is:

HOW DOES RESPONDER DEAL WITH WEAK MISFIT HANDS (WITHOUT DOUBLETON SUPPORT FOR THE MAJOR) ?

 

These hands are handled via 2NT and 3m.

 

But the problem is that there are too many hand type and sometime we need to pick the lesser evil:

 

a. 3-suiter short in opener's major. This includes 4441 and 5440 hands but also 5431 hands

 

b. one-suiter in a minor

 

c. minors two suiters

 

1. Some players use 2NT for the 3-suiter (type a), and 3m as natural 1 suiter. They give up the minors 2-suiters

 

2. Some players use 2NT for the minors 2-suiter (occasionally 54), and 3m as natural 1 suiter. They give up the 3-suiter hand-type

 

3. there must be many other schemes I am unaware of

[Cascade]

Maybe I don't play Gazzilli - I thought the ideas came from Mauro but i have probably modified them as I like to tinker - but this is what I do:

 

2♦ catch-all mostly minimum with without 2 spades although can have two spades with four or more clubs

 

2♥ five hearts

 

2♠ two (or three) spades

 

2NT max at most two spades

 

3♣ max (four or) five clubs

 

3♦ max six diamonds

 

3♥ max six hearts

[glen]

I believe the best rebid is the cheapest possible strain, here 2♥. Certainly playing Gazzilli you will drop into a 5-1 or 4-3 fits or worse from time to time, but the opponents don't know if your partnership has 24 points or 15, and don't know about the misfit. No double, no trouble, next hand please.

 

Note that playing 2/1 and forcing notrump, with a weak 1-4-5-3, you need to pass 2♣, which could be a 3-3 fit. If you play Bart, and move all relatively minimum balanced hands into opener's 2♣ rebid, so that 2♣ could be as short as 2, then passing could result in a 2-3 fit.

[awm]

This hand type is just problematic. Even if you reverse the meanings of responder's second call as Cascade does, you're bidding 2♦ relay and hearing 2♠ from partner most of the time (showing 5♠+4♣ 11-15). The basic problem is that you usually have no 8-card fit and the only 7-card fit you know about is clubs which you can't play at the 2-level. Of course, the same problem exists if you play 2/1 without gazilli. Now you can pass 2♣, but that bid only promised three cards so you might get to play the 3-3 fit. Bidding 2♦ natural isn't really a solution (you get to 5-1 fit with five ratty diamonds when opener passes).

 

In any case I would bid 2NT over 2♣, which I play as showing a weak hand and asking for opener's second suit. This means I get to play 3♣ instead of 2♣, but that's the price you pay on occasion for the convention.

[foo]

IMHO, if you are playing these methods, then Responder should foresee this sort of potential problem after 1S-?? with their misfitting 9 loser hand containing only 1 cover card...

 

...and pass

[whereagles]

IMHO, if you are playing these methods, then Responder should foresee this sort of potential problem after 1S-?? with their misfitting 9 loser hand containing only 1 cover card...

 

...and pass

You have to make a better case for passing, because right now that idea seems pretty ridiculous to me.

[foo]

IMHO, if you are playing these methods, then Responder should foresee this sort of potential problem after 1S-?? with their misfitting 9 loser hand containing only 1 cover card...

 

...and pass

You have to make a better case for passing, because right now that idea seems pretty ridiculous to me.

a= This whole thread is evidence that Responder has been backed into a no-win situation.

 

b= When the misfit light is out, hands of less than GF strength get worse.

x.AJxx.Jxxxx.xxx

is not a great minimum to begin with. The 1S opening makes it considerably worse.

 

c= J's are overvalued in the the standard Work count. In particular, Jxxxx may very well never take a trick on power.

 

d= Given that only the A is likely to cover a loser in Opener's hand, Opener needs a 4- loser hand for Us to make a suit game. In NT Opener is likely to only be able to get to our hand once; which means We have communication/transportation problems.

In short, Opener is highly unlikely to have a hand where We have play for game.

 

Overall, all the problems provide reasonable grounds to re-evaluate this hand as a sub-minimum.

 

 

I pass sub-minimums w/o support for Opener's first bid suit or a self sufficient descriptive bid (WJS, etc).

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

not playing Gazilli, I think I will bid 2S,

we will play in a 5-1 fit, but, anything

else is probably worse, ... I dont want

to play on the 3 level, and I want to

finish the bidding seq. as fast as

possible.

 

I take it, that 2NT shows a weak hand,

since 2D already contains the 10-12 bal.

hand, which means they may start doubling

if given half the chance.

 

The adv. of 2S is, that it may still be based on

a fit (4-7 with 3 cards), so may not dbl for pen.

easily.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[DJNeill]

Hi all,

I've seen them bid 2S with this. Slowly, but 2S.

 

editing: Snabu and Papi

 

Thanks,

Dan

[whereagles]

a= This whole thread is evidence that Responder has been backed into a no-win situation.

 

b= When the misfit light is out, hands of less than GF strength get worse. x.AJxx.Jxxxx.xxx is not a great minimum to begin with. The 1S opening makes it considerably worse.

 

c= J's are overvalued in the the standard Work count. In particular, Jxxxx may very well never take a trick on power.

 

d= Given that only the A is likely to cover a loser in Opener's hand, Opener needs a 4- loser hand for Us to make a suit game. In NT Opener is likely to only be able to get to our hand once; which means We have communication/transportation problems.

In short, Opener is highly unlikely to have a hand where We have play for game.

 

Overall, all the problems provide reasonable grounds to re-evaluate this hand as a sub-minimum.

Foo, your reasons for passing are fine but they assume that by bidding 1NT you're going to hear the most inconvenient response: 2♣. Well, that won't happen all the time. Sometimes pard might rebid 2♦ or 2♥, not to mention strong bids such as 2NT/3♣/♦/♥.

 

In other words, by passing you're putting your eggs all in 1 basket: that pard will have a weak misfitted hand. And besides, there's no guarantee 1♠ is a decent contract. By bidding 1NT you might be making things worse, but in many cases you'll be making it better.

 

So I think bidding is a good idea, despite the danger of misfit.

[foo]

Foo, your reasons for passing are fine but they assume that by bidding 1N you're going to hear the most inconvenient response: 2♣. Well, that won't happen all the time. Sometimes pard might rebid 2♦ or 2♥, not to mention strong bids such as 2N/3♣/♦/♥.

 

In other words, by passing you're putting your eggs all in 1 basket: that pard will have a weak misfitted hand. And besides, there's no guarantee 1♠ is a decent contract. By bidding 1N you might be making things worse, but in many cases you'll be making it better.

 

So I think bidding is a good idea, despite the danger of misfit.

...IMHO in contrast -bidding- is putting all your eggs into one basket.

 

Let's see: Opener has 5+S and 8- other cards.

We hold x.AJxx.Jxxxx.xxx

Opener's most likely shape is =5323

 

2C isn't the most inconvenient rebid Opener could make.

 

Those strong bids you are mentioning are.

1S-1N;2N-?? Now we are playing 2N instead of 1N...

{I'm not accepting many invites w/ x.AJxx.Jxxxx.xxx}

1S-1N;GFJS-?? =Very= bad. Now We're forced to what is likely to be a bad game because Opener is expecting two power tricks from my hand and I only have one.

 

Worse, if I respond normally w/ a subminimum, GOP may later do some slam exploration that will =really= get Us in trouble.

 

It has been said the Limit Bid is the most important bid in bridge.

Limit your hand ASAP when you have the opportunity.

 

Especially if you are playing methods that are likely to make "the wheels come off" if you don't.

[whereagles]

hum... well foo, I don't agree with your analysis, but ok. You pass, I bid :unsure:

[foo]

hum... well foo, I don't agree with your analysis, but ok. You pass, I bid :rolleyes:

Fair enough.

 

Please note that if I did not have 1-S in this hand or if I had a shape that would allow me to bid it safely, say x.AJx.Jxxxxx.xxx or somesuch, I would happily bid 1N since I know I can handle any subsequent auction (and if GOP GF's, there's a much better chance of establishing a 6 card suit than there is of establishing a 5 card suit.)

 

As usual, one of the issues on minimum hands is "Do you have a reasonable rebid?"

 

When you don't, one caution light should be lit. When the hand is a misfit, that's another caution light. Etc, etc.

 

Too many caution lights, and I get, well, cautious. :)

[Poky]

1♠ 1NT

2♣* ???

 

* 11-15 with 5♠4♣ or 16+ any

 

♠x

♥AJxx

♦Jxxxx

♣xxx

 

You cannot rebid 2♦ 'cause this is artificial and promises 8-11 HCP. So, what do you bid and why?

What happenned?

 

I bid 2♥ and played there when partner held...

♠A10xxx

♥x

♦KQx

♣AKQx

...making almost a dummy reversal for 2♥+1 where 5♦ is the best strain and almost six can be made.

 

What do you think: should partner have bid 2NT as invitational 18-19 hand or is pass good (fearing a minimal 1633 hand)?

[glen]

Partner should bid again. Look at how much your partnership is ahead now compared to standard if you have a min 1-6-3-3, where it might go 1♠-1NT--3♣-3♥ forcing or 1♠-1NT--2♣-2♥--rebid.

 

So opener should bid again since the 2♥ bidder can have only 5♥s or even 4, and 2NT seems a nice call.

[paulg]

2NT - minimum, 5+♦, short spades

 

When partner is weak gives us a chance of finding the best minor contract.

 

Paul

I appear to be due a Coke :) :)