1S-2D showing hearts

[straube]

In the context of 1S showing 5 spades and 10-15 pts

 

1S-2D showing GI (only) with 5 hearts

 

.....2H-would pass opposite 6 hearts

..........P-GI 6 hearts

..........2S-2S/5H

..........2N-15(43)

..........3m-5m

..........3H-6+ hearts, second try

.....2S-minimum or medium, 6 spades

.....2N-artificial GF

.....3m-5m, GF

.....3H-medium, 3 hearts

.....3S-GI

 

Thinking that creating a GF forces us to 3N or 4m

[akhare]

Why does one need both 2N *and* 3m as GFs? Over 2N, there's plenty of room to figure out what kind of GF opener has, including hands with a long minor...

[awm]

I think you have too many ranges. Within 10-15 there are really just minimums and maximums. You can therefore simplify to:

 

2♥ = not accepting invite

2♠ = not accepting invite, but a reasonable 6+ card spade suit and very short hearts

2NT = accepting invite, nothing particularly special to show (lets pd pattern out)

3m = accepting invite, a good 5-5 or better shape

3♥ = minimum values but a nice fit, asking if partner wants to upgrade to game

3♠ = accept invite with 6+ very good spades and very short hearts

4m, 4♥ = maximum with a fit, 4m is splinter with 4-card support in case of a great fitting slam

 

In fact, you could even allow 2♦ bids with 6+♥ and a weak hand if you let the 3♥ rebid be NF even over the invite-accepting options. This occasionally cramps you a little bit on your choice of game sequences but it shouldn't be too bad.

[straube]

I think you have too many ranges. Within 10-15 there are really just minimums and maximums. You can therefore simplify to:

 

2♥ = not accepting invite

2♠ = not accepting invite, but a reasonable 6+ card spade suit and very short hearts

2NT = accepting invite, nothing particularly special to show (lets pd pattern out)

3m = accepting invite, a good 5-5 or better shape

3♥ = minimum values but a nice fit, asking if partner wants to upgrade to game

3♠ = accept invite with 6+ very good spades and very short hearts

4m, 4♥ = maximum with a fit, 4m is splinter with 4-card support in case of a great fitting slam

 

In fact, you could even allow 2♦ bids with 6+♥ and a weak hand if you let the 3♥ rebid be NF even over the invite-accepting options. This occasionally cramps you a little bit on your choice of game sequences but it shouldn't be too bad.

 

Thanks. We're not very far off. I was thinking of rebidding 2H with KQxxx Jxx xxx AJ. Would you recommend raising with this? Probably splitting hairs here.

 

I do think 2D needs to show values. If not, opener is not empowered to bid much without a fit and we have difficulty establishing a GF.

[wclass___]

2♥=minimum with 2♥+

2♠=not maximum; wrong for ♥; 5+

2N=artificial maximum;

3m=55 max

3♥=average hand

 

Structures seem very similar. Still, I found it is best for 2♥ to promise 2 card fit, 2♠ including 5♠431♥ minimum and most maximums.

 

I was thinking of rebidding 2H with KQxxx Jxx xxx AJ. Would you recommend raising with this?

No.

 

I do think 2D needs to show values.

Yes, but there are some great 6-7 counts.. I play it as (6+) 8-11.

[straube]

I'd hate to rebid 2S with a 51(43) after learning that I don't have a spade fit. I want a sixth spade.

 

I'm also thinking of 2D as much more constructive. We typically invite 2N with a 12-13 which might seem hefty except that we're opening many or most of our 10 cts and pretty much all 11 cts. I think it's a general rule of thumb to avoid 2N unless you have a reasonable expectation for 23 hcps.

 

That said, I know it's not about points but about tricks. When I say 12-13 I'm thinking of a 5332 pattern or perhaps a 15(43) with no spots or reasons to upgrade. If I had a 5/5 or six or more hearts I'd certainly bid 2D with fewer or a lot fewer points depending on the trick-taking strength of the hand.

 

There ought to be some minimum pt count but I wouldn't know what that would be. I'm thinking that 1S-2D, 4S is a possible auction for us. We have 1S-4H to play available and that mostly promises hearts and not necessarily points.

[Flameous]

My new version aims for quite a different goals, I don't see much reason to try to stay on the 2 lvl with real invite. Misfits are tough but so they are for everyone playing some invitational jumpshifts or whatever. I also need a way to bid weak hands that want to bail off at 2H.

 

1♠ - 2♦

->

2♥ = pretty much forced

2♠ = I'd really rather play spades (6+ and short hearts)

Others show heart fit.

 

1♠ - 2♦ - 2♥

->

Pass = Want to play here, usually some KJ 6th. at least.

2♠ = Transfer to ♣, 54+ inv+

2NT = Transfer to ♦, 55(4)+ inv+

3♣ = Transfer to ♥, 6+, may have 3♠ inv+

3♦ = 4♦, 6+♥ GF

3♥ = 4♣, 6+♥ GF

Higher are just hearts showing shortness/no

 

Over those transfers you bid next step with min and no fit, show the fit on 3lvl with min, others deny fit, show fit for minor, show fit for major in order. Will not handle 5♥332 invites. Also 1543 is bit tough as you are at 3♣ with no fit opposite minimum, so I'd show that as balanced invite too.

[straube]

My new version aims for quite a different goals, I don't see much reason to try to stay on the 2 lvl with real invite. Misfits are tough but so they are for everyone playing some invitational jumpshifts or whatever. I also need a way to bid weak hands that want to bail off at 2H.

 

1♠ - 2♦

->

2♥ = pretty much forced

2♠ = I'd really rather play spades (6+ and short hearts)

Others show heart fit.

 

1♠ - 2♦ - 2♥

->

Pass = Want to play here, usually some KJ 6th. at least.

2♠ = Transfer to ♣, 54+ inv+

2NT = Transfer to ♦, 55(4)+ inv+

3♣ = Transfer to ♥, 6+, may have 3♠ inv+

3♦ = 4♦, 6+♥ GF

3♥ = 4♣, 6+♥ GF

Higher are just hearts showing shortness/no

 

Over those transfers you bid next step with min and no fit, show the fit on 3lvl with min, others deny fit, show fit for minor, show fit for major in order. Will not handle 5♥332 invites. Also 1543 is bit tough as you are at 3♣ with no fit opposite minimum, so I'd show that as balanced invite too.

 

I can see how this can win, but you are treating the spade opener like a NT opener and that feels wrong to me. When I open 1S, I could have anything from KQxxx Jx Axx Jxx to AKQxxxx x Ax xxx and I want leave to describe my hand. I guess I know what to do with the latter, but the ones in the middle are what concern me. I think there should be more branching after an important sequence like 1S-2D.

 

Also, we have 1S-1N, 2m-2H to show 6 hearts. 1N isn't forcing, but often opener will rebid. Wondering if you use that sequence to show 5 hearts or something artificial.

[Flameous]

I'm actually building a structure where I can use 1NT as GF relay. Finding the solution after that 2♦ response was the main part.

I know that it looks rather strange and it does have it's problems. (Opener holds some 55 of his own or something) But it seems that this enables responder to describe his hand very accurately and doing it within invitational sequences. My whole approach was that 2♦ bidder wants to describe his hand and I first meant it only for 55+ or 64 and single suiters but being able to fit in 54 hands at appropriate lvl, it seemed to take burden off from other responses. I might go back to 2♦ being pure and distributional if testing seems to indicate that.

Oh and I missed the 3NT response to 2♦ which shows quite exactly your second example hand :) Worth to gamble.

[straube]

Well that makes a lot more sense in the context of the rest of your responses. You'll have wonderful auctions after 1S-1N and maybe some uncomfortable auctions after 1S-2m.

[straube]

I'm actually building a structure where I can use 1NT as GF relay. Finding the solution after that 2♦ response was the main part.

I know that it looks rather strange and it does have it's problems. (Opener holds some 55 of his own or something) But it seems that this enables responder to describe his hand very accurately and doing it within invitational sequences. My whole approach was that 2♦ bidder wants to describe his hand and I first meant it only for 55+ or 64 and single suiters but being able to fit in 54 hands at appropriate lvl, it seemed to take burden off from other responses. I might go back to 2♦ being pure and distributional if testing seems to indicate that.

Oh and I missed the 3NT response to 2♦ which shows quite exactly your second example hand :) Worth to gamble.

 

I've been thinking, and if you are playing 1N as GF relay, you might consider using 1S-2D for only hands with less than GF values. The next step would be for your 1S-1N, 2C to include your balanced hands (5332 if your 1S can hold that pattern). After 1S-1N, 2C you can then reverse relay (have responder pattern out various hands like your 5H/4m hands).

 

So for example

 

1S-1N, 2C-2S, 2N-3C, 3D-3H might show that responder has 1-5-2-5

 

Obviously, when opener has an unbalanced hand and bids something higher than 2C, you can't reverse relay as much (might not want to at all), but at least an unbalanced hand is being described.

[Flameous]

My 1M openings include 5332 only with 10-11 pts so when they come up, the range is so accurate that it's probably better relay the balanced hand anyways :)

I also want to have a natural way of bidding hands so that I can involve partner. Some marginal slams which involve a good fit are best found after natural bidding and I like to have that option. And I don't think that dropping those GF variants would make that structure any better.

[Zelandakh]

I'm actually building a structure where I can use 1NT as GF relay. Finding the solution after that 2♦ response was the main part.

I think the biggest obstacle to the 1NT = GF approach is the weaker hands which end up having a very wide range and become very difficult to handle. I still think 1NT = INV+ is far superior. For example, 1S - 1NT - 2C (any min without 4 hearts) - 2H = "invitational hand with 5+ hearts" achieves the design goals for this hand type perfectly. Similarly you get 1S - 2H = weak with 5+ hearts, a non-forcing bid which can create pressure on 4th seat with a good hand. Problem hands for relay methods can be handled comfortably using relay breaks - if there is a big fit set the suit and make a slam try, for example. FWiiW I prefer Adam's structure here opposite a limited Opener.