Wereagles responses to 1M-2C

[han]

Arend and I have been tinkering with our 2/1 sequences this week. What we have now is quite similar to what whereagles posted a while ago, although of course infinitely better. :)

 

I thought he and perhaps others too might like to see it, so here goes:

 

1S-2C shows either a balanced GF or an honest GF with clubs. Then:

 

2D = minimum but denies 4 cards in the other major.

...2H=ask, typically balanced. natural responses (2S showing 6).

...2S=artificial, honest GF with clubs, denies support.

...2NT=slam try in spades with honest clubs.

...3C = very good clubs.

...3D= at least 4-6 in diamonds and clubs.

...3H= at least 4-6 in hearts and clubs.

...3S= picture jump.

...3NT= 4333 choice of games.

...4S= sign off.

 

2H = catch all with extra values.

...2S = ask, often balanced. Then:

......2NT= any 6-4 (3C asks).

......3C,3D= exactly 5-4.

......3H= undefined for now.

......3S= 6-card major.

......3NT= balanced 17-19.

...2NT = slam try in spades with honest clubs.

etc.

 

2S = 5-4 in the majors, may or may not have extras.

... 2NT = ask, often balanced.

... 3C = very good clubs.

... 3D = at least 4-6.

... 3H = slam try in hearts with honest clubs.

... 3S = slam try in spades with honest clubs.

... 3NT = about 15-17 natural.

 

2NT = single suiter in spades, extras.

... 3C = 2+ spades, asks for shortness (no/l/m/h)

... 3D, 3H = at least 4-6.

... 3S = very good clubs.

 

3C, 3D, 3H = at least 5-5, extras.

 

3S = semi-solid spades, extras.

[irdoz]

Thanks for sharing your work.

 

One thing I found useful in Nightmare is that their sequences give you the ability to distinguish between balanced hands with 2 or 3 clubs on the presumption that responder will often have real clubs and knowledge of the 8 club fit will be useful. So for example 1s-2c-2h-2s(ask) then 3h could be 17-19 balanced with 3cl, and 3nt 17-19 balanced without 3cl.

[dake50]

Make the space-consuming 5-5 show expected short: 3m =oM; 3H =D. Other 5-5 in rebids allowing relay.

[whereagles]

Well, you let go a lot of naturality to accomodate for all sorts of hands. My scheme wanted to retain that naturality.

[han]

Yeah it is quite artificial right now. Maybe it will evolve into something more natural as we put more work into it. Still, I think that using 2D as some sort of catch-all is the way to go.

[jdonn]

Yeah it is quite artificial right now. Maybe it will evolve into something more natural as we put more work into it. Still, I think that using 2D as some sort of catch-all is the way to go.

I agree there. I use two versions of that. One with a partner who doesn't like to open 1NT with a five card major, so we use it to split up our balanced ranges (among other things.) The other with a partner who always opens 1NT with a five card major, so we incorporate transfers for openers third bid.