Ultra Club Relay

[straube]

I hope you don't mind that I started a new thread for your system.

 

I also prefer strong positives. Keylime and I have a complete system which is Major Centric for bidding over 1♣ - 1♦ (0-7 hcp)! For those that use a 1♥ response for 8-11, the frequency is 65% whereas the 12+ other positive responses are only 12.5%. Is this the tail wagging the dog?

 

 

--------------------

Ultra ♣: See Daniel's web page:

 

http://bridgewithdan.com/systems/Ultra.pdf

 

Seems very complicated to me. What are your system's main selling points compared to say a vanilla symmetric system? Seems like you use lots of relay breaks.

 

Why do you use asking bids for majors after 1C-2C (showing a minor)? Why not just relay for responder's distribution? Are you trying to hide it or economize?

 

My understanding of Blue Team is that they used canape to differentiate strengths of the same pattern. For instance (and I'm forgetting what Blue Team actually plays)...they may open 1H and then rebid 2S to show a good 5S/4H hand while they would open 1S and rebid 2H with a bad 5S/4H hand. They also use jump canapes for the same sort of thing.

 

Does your system use canape to the same effect?

 

I'm not fond of Blue Team because I prefer to show the pattern first and then differentiate strength. Not saying that their way doesn't have its advantages, but I would imagine they would not be able to relay their opening hands as easily as I can over my 5-cd majors.

 

Have you thought of switching your 1C-2M responses around so that the strong hand gets to declare?

[PrecisionL]

Thanks, Straube.

 

Ultra was the next generation of Keylime Precision which Dwayne and I put together about 2006. We played it for 3 years and thought we could improve it. We liked Sabine Auken's One Club System so we put together C3 - Copious Canape Club. We will be playing it at the Reno, NV NABC in March.

 

Using Ruben's Useful Space Principal, we now play transfer positives into a 4-card major. 1♣ - 1NT is a positive with the majors, or 3-suited with 4-4 majors. 1♣ - 2♣ is a positive with one or both minors (excludes 5332 hands). 1♣ - 2♦ is 8-10 balanced per Meckwell. 1♣ - 2M is a positive with 5332 or 6322 with a weak major. 1♣ - 2NT = 11-13 hcp, balanced. The 14+ balanced hand is included in the 1♥ response (responder rebids 1NT to show this hand).

 

Now for your questions (not in order):

 

We changed our emphasis from strength in Ultra (Betas were early in the follow-ons) to distribution in C3 (Betas are now after distributional asks). We don't particularly like Symmetric and our scheme is logical and efficient. Relay breaks are designed for rare hands, we don't use them very much.

 

In C3 we usually relay for distribution except for one suited hands by opener (rare) when we might use a support asking bid (SAB). Distributional information frequently tells the opener within 1 card about support for other suits.

 

We do not use canape the way BTC did. Since 5-4 distributions are so frequent (almost 25%) we always use canape if the suits are worth showing.

 

We have considered reversing the 2♥ and 2♠ responses to 1♣ , but then we lose the 2♠ SAB when opener has 1-2 hearts and 5+ spades. Occasionally, we do have the strong hand as dummy, but it is rare and not a great issue.

 

Larry

[straube]

I think I see what you're doing. You're giving a lot of weight to describing your major suit hands and taking away from the minor suit hands. For instance, 1C-1N as majors (or 3-suited with majors) leaves you in the same space as standard symmetric (1C-1H, 1S-1N). However, you now have fewer hand types to describe with 1C-1H so you gain a step.

 

You lose on minor hands because 1C-2C doesn't leave you sufficient space to relay 2 minors and both minors which is why you have asks for 3-cd majors. You won't be able to relay these hands (I think) and you must consider this a good trade.

 

1C-2D comes up a lot. It seems intuitively wrong that a bid that uses up so much space should be so frequent, but it's obviously a very successful bid and opener is seldom interested in responder's exact shape. In a competitive auction, it's nice to know right away that partner has this bland hand and it gives opener the declaration.

 

Seems in general that you want the most practical information fast from responder...so you're showing more concern for contested auctions than does standard symmetric.

 

I still don't see the advantage of canape. I see how Blue Team used it to good effect, but would you explain what it gains for you?

[cloa513]

The graphics don't copy easily without editing the original post. What a pain.

[PrecisionL]

Five card majors and a Strong Club do not mix well, it leaves one with an ambiguous diamond opening.

 

So the options are:

 

(1) 1♦ = 2+ cards, artificial

(2) Diamond Major = 1♦ promises one or both 4-card majors, artificial

(3) Natural, all suits (except clubs) promise 4-cards

 

One can improve on (3) by removing the 4-card majors from the 2♣ opening and playing canape.

 

Thus 1M - 1X - 2♣ or 2♦ promises 4 of the major and 5 or more of the minor.

 

Likewise, opening 1♦ and re-biding either major promises 4 diamonds and 5 or more of the major. The rebid in the longer suit can be passed by responder, thus the only requirement is that both suits be biddable.

[PrecisionL]

The graphics don't copy easily without editing the original post. What a pain.

It is not clear what your complaint is. Repost and maybe we can address it.

[straube]

I like 5-cd majors with 1C. After opening 1M, I can relay the hand before 3N has been passed. With 4-cd majors there is not enough room. If allowed, 1D=4H and 1H=1S leaves room.

 

I also think 1D ambiguous is playable. It's preferable to 1D=4M because of (31)(54) hands. It's preferable to "promises 2 diamonds" because then opening 2D is restricted to 4 hand types (short diamonds). I like a combination of ambiguous 1D and opening 2D with 6 diamonds. A natural 2D opener shows many patterns. I prefer 6D or 6D/4C.

 

When your 1N shows 11-13, how do you handle 14-15 balanced 3-3-3-4 and 3-2-3-5 and 3-3-2-5?

 

After 1C-1D, is 1H natural? It seems like it is hearts or a bigger hand. What are the continuations after 1C-1D, 1H-1S (0-4)? What happens if hearts are raised and opener doesn't have hearts? Or does he promise hearts?

 

Meckwell played (plays?) 1C-1D, 1H-1S=0-7 with four+ spades. They obviously find their spade fits at the expense of narrowing responder's range. Do you think your method works better?

 

1C-1D, 1H-1N is 5-7 with or without spades? What are the continuations?

[akhare]

I also think 1D ambiguous is playable.  It's preferable to 1D=4M because of (31)(54) hands.  It's preferable to "promises 2 diamonds" because then opening 2D is restricted to 4 hand types (short diamonds).  I like a combination of ambiguous 1D and opening 2D with 6 diamonds.  A natural 2D opener shows many patterns.  I prefer 6D or 6D/4C.

I think a combination of 1D amorphous in conjunction with restricting 2D to 6+ ♦, 4♣ is very difficult to play.

 

Basically, it means that 1♦ is now:

 

Any 5m440

Any 4441

Any 5m431

Any 4432 / 5m332, 4333 hand outside NT range

Any 6D(4M) hand

 

As I see it, it will take some bidding gymanstics to unwind the 1♦ opening even in an uncontested auction.

 

Also, the sole purpose of restricting the 2♦ shape seems to be to resolve the shape completely by 3N, but it comes at a terrible cost.