Bocchi-Duboin's 1S and 1NT answer to 1H opening

[lowerline]

Hi,

 

Anyone playing this?

 

1♥ - (p) - 1♠ = 6-11 0-4♠ F1

* if opener rebids 1NT he shows 11-15 with 4♠ (a Flannery hand!)

* any other rebid has the same meaning as after a forcing 1NT answer

 

Consequence:

1♥ - (p) - 1NT = 6+ 5+♠ F1

 

I have seen this on the CC of Bocchi-Duboin. Do you have any experience with this? How do rate this approach? Do you know whether this convention has a name?

 

Regards,

Steven

[mikestar]

Hi,

 

Anyone playing this?

 

1♥ - (p) - 1♠ = 6-11 0-4♠ F1

* if opener rebids 1NT he shows 11-15 with 4♠ (a Flannery hand!)

* any other rebid has the same meaning as after a forcing 1NT answer

 

Consequence:

1♥ - (p) - 1NT = 6+ 5+♠ F1

 

I have seen this on the CC of Bocchi-Duboin. Do you have any experience with this? How do rate this approach? Do you know whether this convention has a name?

 

Regards,

Steven

I played this back in the days when it was General Convention Chart legal in the ACBL. It is immensly superior to Flannery. Never had any problems with it and it made life a lot easier with those evil 4=5=2=2 hands. I would highly recommend it in any venue where it is legal.

 

As far as I know, this version doesn't have a specific name of it's own. The method where 1S shows 0-3 spades and 1N shows 4+ is called the Kaplan Inversion or Kaplan Interchange in the US.

[1eyedjack]

Also known as Granville, East of the Atlantic.

 

Shove it in Google, or Kaplan Inversion, and you will get several hits. Searching these forums under those keywords will also produce some hits.

[paulg]

I've never seen a convincing argument as to the benefits of this approach but I'd be happy to be enlightened :)

 

Why is the ability to show the 4-5-2-2 hand worth more than the downside of not being able to bid a natural 1NT after a standard 1♥-1♠ auction.

 

I would expect the latter, a 12-14 HCP 5332 shape, is greatly more probable than a limited 4=5=2=2 shape and thus you are overburdening the 2♣/♦ with little gain. Generally I believe that balanced hands should open or rebid NT and this goes against this philosophy.

 

p

[EricK]

I've never seen a convincing argument as to the benefits of this approach but I'd be happy to be enlightened :)

 

Why is the ability to show the 4-5-2-2 hand worth more than the downside of not being able to bid a natural 1NT after a standard 1♥-1♠ auction.

 

I would expect the latter, a 12-14 HCP 5332 shape, is greatly more probable than a limited 4=5=2=2 shape and thus you are overburdening the 2♣/♦ with little gain. Generally I believe that balanced hands should open or rebid NT and this goes against this philosophy.

 

p

When you open them with 1M you are already unlikley to be able to rebid 1NT (never if you the major is ♠).

 

If you want to treat them as balanced hands open them 1NT or 1m. Then, after 1♥ 1♠ (0-4♠), your rebids are all specific:

 

1NT = 4♠

2♣ = 4♣

2♦ = 4♦

2♥ = 6♥

 

and after 1♠ 1NT,

2♣/♦/♥ =4+ suit

 

This way, you never have to bid 2m on a 3 card suit.

 

Eric

[luke warm]

eric, what are your thoughts (using a 12-14 nt) of having 1c show either 15+ or a one suited club hand and 1d/h/s showing 5422 hands, bid canape style? exceptions would be hands with 4 clubs and 5 of another, the 5 card suit would be opened

 

i can see the logic of this for 2=4=5=2 or 2=4=2=5 hands (open 1h on those), and any hand with 4 or 5 diamonds and 4 or 5 clubs, but not so much if the 4 card suit is spades

[EricK]

eric, what are your thoughts (using a 12-14 nt) of having 1c show either 15+ or a one suited club hand and 1d/h/s showing 5422 hands, bid canape style? exceptions would be hands with 4 clubs and 5 of another, the 5 card suit would be opened

 

i can see the logic of this for 2=4=5=2 or 2=4=2=5 hands (open 1h on those), and any hand with 4 or 5 diamonds and 4 or 5 clubs, but not so much if the 4 card suit is spades

I haven't had much experience of canape systems at all, so I wouldn't like to comment.

 

I am not sure exactly what you are proposing:

 

Is 1♣ 15+ any shape, or 15+ balanced? If the former, why not put single suited ♣ hands into a 2♣ opening.

How do you differentiate between 2-5-2-4 and 2-4-2-5 hands?

 

On a related note, I have been trying to get a system like this working:

 

1♣ strong

1♦ a 5 cards major or 54 in the minors (so a sort of Multi!)

1♥ 4 or 6+ (with inverted 1♠/1NT response)

1♠ 4 or 6+ (with forcing NT response)

1NT weak NT

2♣ 6+ no 4 card major

2♦ 6+ no 4 card major

 

But I can't quite get the follow-ups to the 1♦ opening to work.

 

Eric

[Flame]

1♣ strong

1♦ a 5 cards major or 54 in the minors (so a sort of Multi!)

1♥ 4 or 6+ (with inverted 1♠/1NT response)

1♠ 4 or 6+ (with forcing NT response)

1NT weak NT

2♣ 6+ no 4 card major

2♦ 6+ no 4 card major

 

But I can't quite get the follow-ups to the 1♦ opening to work.

 

Eric

This might help in case you dont have it yet.

http://www.henry654.fws1.com/

[Flame]

When you open them with 1M you are already unlikley to be able to rebid 1NT (never if you the major is ♠).

 

If you want to treat them as balanced hands open them 1NT or 1m. Then, after 1♥ 1♠ (0-4♠), your rebids are all specific:

 

1NT = 4♠

2♣ = 4♣

2♦ = 4♦

2♥ = 6♥

 

and after 1♠ 1NT,

2♣/♦/♥ =4+ suit

 

This way, you never have to bid 2m on a 3 card suit.

 

Eric

Seems wrong to me that there is no bid for 5332, are you sure this is how boochi duboin play it ?

 

I think i understand now, maybe they just open 1nt and 1c-x -1nt even with 5332.

I think it might be great.

Edited September 17, 2004 by Flame

[hrothgar]

thought I had something, then I rememberd 5440s

[junyi_zhu]

I've never seen a convincing argument as to the benefits of this approach but I'd be happy to be enlightened :rolleyes:

 

Why is the ability to show the 4-5-2-2 hand worth more than the downside of not being able to bid a natural 1NT after a standard 1♥-1♠ auction.

 

I would expect the latter, a 12-14 HCP 5332 shape, is greatly more probable than a limited 4=5=2=2 shape and thus you are overburdening the 2♣/♦ with little gain. Generally I believe that balanced hands should open or rebid NT and this goes against this philosophy.

 

p

I agree with your point that 5-3-3-2 should either open or rebid NT. To play this style, you have to play 14-16 1NT and a semiforcing 1NT I think. So with 12-13, you open 1M and pass partner's 1NT. with 17-18, you bid 2NT over 1NT, with 19, you have to jump to 3NT which is no big deal in my humble opinion, although I am sure many modern experts don't like this treatment. Thus, 1M 1N 2m should show either unblanced hands with 3 cards or more or balanced, with 4 cards. You can also open 1NT with 4 S 5H to avoid rebid problem with 4-5-2-2 14-16 HCP. This would allow you to describe your balanced hand at a low level. Also, over 1S 1N, your two level rebid can guarantee 4 cards. Also, if you don't like to open 1NT with 4-5-2-2, you can also play flannery, and if you play flann and 14-16 1NT, you can guarantee 1H 1N 2x to show 4 cards as well.

[luke warm]

Is 1♣ 15+ any shape, or 15+ balanced? If the former, why not put single suited ♣ hands into a 2♣ opening.

How do you differentiate between 2-5-2-4 and 2-4-2-5 hands?

1c is any 15+ or 11-14/15 with clubs... i'd rather use 2c for something else, maybe a roman type bid... as for 2=5=2=4 and 2=4=2=5 hands, open both 1h... you need an asking bid for responder, to look for opener's 2nd suit.. if opener has no 2nd suit, he rebids his suit

 

just thinking out loud here :rolleyes:

[EricK]

Is 1♣ 15+ any shape, or 15+ balanced? If the former, why not put single suited ♣ hands into a 2♣ opening.

How do you differentiate between 2-5-2-4 and 2-4-2-5 hands?

1c is any 15+ or 11-14/15 with clubs... i'd rather use 2c for something else, maybe a roman type bid... as for 2=5=2=4 and 2=4=2=5 hands, open both 1h... you need an asking bid for responder, to look for opener's 2nd suit.. if opener has no 2nd suit, he rebids his suit

 

just thinking out loud here :rolleyes:

If we're just thinking out loud, then how about something like:

 

1♣ strong or 12-14 NT

1♦ 4, or 5+ with 4♣, or single suited

1♥ 4, or 5+ with 4 ♣, or single suited

1♠ 4 or single suited

1NT 5+♠ and 4♣, or ♣ single suited

 

If the opening is 1♦ or 1♥, then a rebid of 1NT shows the 4♣ hand.

 

Or you could make 1NT natural, and include the 5♠/4♣ hands in with 1♣

 

This leaves the whole 2-level to do with as you wish.

 

Eric

[xx1943]

Consequence:

1♥ - (p) - 1NT = 6+ 5+♠ F1

Hi

 

Giving up forcing NT is the disadvantage.

 

I can't imagine how to bid 2/1 without forcing NT.

 

cheers

 

Al

[EricK]

Consequence:

1♥ - (p) - 1NT = 6+ 5+♠ F1

Hi

 

Giving up forcing NT is the disadvantage.

 

I can't imagine how to bid 2/1 without forcing NT.

 

cheers

 

Al

But after 1♥, 1♠ is the forcing "NT" response (slightly improved because of the extra step it allows).

 

Eric

[laughter]

I quite like this toy, though it is not without drawbacks.

 

The main benefit over a standard forcing NT (or semi-forcing) is that responder can safely bid 1S (equivalent to 1NT forcing) with any weak 4S and would not get into a terrible 4-3 spades fit.

Playing standard, opener may stretch to raise a standard 1S response on 3 trumps (a winning style, imo, it is much better than raise promising 4 trumps).

The 4-4 spade fit can be uncovered efficiently as opener would rebid 1NT to show spades (a bit clarification here, i think 1NT shows less than a reverse, which is 11+-17-, as if medium 16-17 reverse 2S may get overboard easily).

 

1NT response promising 5S is also good, as it enables opener to raise with 3 trumps, even with 6 hearts.

 

The drawbacks:

 

1. You lose the natural sequence of 1H-1S; 1NT. Opener can't show a balanced hand cheaply after the artificial 1NT response (he has to stall with 2C).

 

2. When responder is uninterested in spades, and only wants to know opener's minor length, he may not be pleased to hear a 1NT rebid over 1S:

Holding x-xx-KJ10xx-Kxxxx, playing forcing NT, you may try 1NT response to 1H to force a preference of 2m by opener. No matter his distributions is 4=5=1=3 or 4=5=3=1, you can get to the best fit.

Playing Granville, you would not like the 1NT rebid as you can't determine which minor to play.

 

3. Opponents may get in more easily over the 1S response (like doubling to show spade overcalls).

 

All in all, it is a fine convention to play when you are unpassed hand.

If you are passed hand, reverting to standard method may be better (you can stop in 1S with spade fit and min, and you need not rebid over 1NT with 4=5=2=2).

A good question to ask is whether this toy is in play when responder is a passed hand.

[1eyedjack]

The drawbacks:

 

1. You lose the natural sequence of 1H-1S; 1NT. Opener can't show a balanced hand cheaply after the artificial 1NT response (he has to stall with 2C).

Perhaps a drawback using standard rebids. It may be better for

1H-1S-2D = 4 card Spade suit

1H-1S-1N = Diamonds or balanced.

[Poky]

Seems wrong to me that there is no bid for 5332, are you sure this is how boochi duboin play it ?

 

I think i understand now, maybe they just open 1nt and 1c-x -1nt even with 5332.

I think it might be great.

This is one of the best convention I ever played and it works very well with Gazzilli.

 

Duboin-Bocchi are playing it generall this way:

 

1♥-1♠

1NT= 4♠ or 3523 (2♣=asking)

2♣= Gazzlli (5♥4♣ 11-15 or some strong hands, 2♦= asking)

2♦= 5♥4♦ or 3532/2532

2♥= 6♥

Other= as you wish...

 

1♥-1NT

2♣= Gazzilli (could be 16+ with 3♠/4♠)

2♦= 5♥3+♦

2♥= 6♥

2♠= 3+♠, min

3♠= 3+♠. inv

Other= as you wish...

 

Playing this way you can:

a) Play 1♠-1NT as natural

:rolleyes: Play 1NT when the bidding goes 1♥-1♠-1NT

c) Play always in 5-3♠ fit where the bidding in SAYC goes 1♥-1♠-1NT-pass

d) Hide the right lead to opponents when bidding goes

1♥-1♠

2♣-2♦

...

3NT

Cause opponents don't know if you have 4♠ or not.

[Poky]

Perhaps a drawback using standard rebids. It may be better for

1H-1S-2D = 4 card Spade suit

1H-1S-1N = Diamonds or balanced.

4513 vs. 3253

 

1♥-1♠

1NT-pass

 

1♥-1♠

2♦- pass/2♥/2♠

 

I think the 1st approach is much more flexible.

[1eyedjack]

Perhaps a drawback using standard rebids.  It may be better for

1H-1S-2D = 4 card Spade suit

1H-1S-1N = Diamonds or balanced.

4513 vs. 3253

 

1♥-1♠

1NT-pass

 

1♥-1♠

2♦- pass/2♥/2♠

 

I think the 1st approach is much more flexible.

Opener ... Responder

choose .....choose

from ..... from

3-5-2-3 ... 4-2-3-4

3-5-3-2 ... 4-2-4-3

2-5-3-3 ... 3-2-4-4

 

Mix and match from the above and it goes

1H-1S-1N

 

I think the 2nd approach is much more flexible.

[junyi_zhu]

Consequence:

1♥ - (p) - 1NT = 6+ 5+♠ F1

Hi

 

Giving up forcing NT is the disadvantage.

 

I can't imagine how to bid 2/1 without forcing NT.

 

cheers

 

Al

forcing 1NT is not a must for 2/1 GF system. More and more are playing semi-forcing 1NT actually. Forcing 1NT is a must for bergen raise, otherwise, you may not be able to play bergen raise with distributional invitational hands 3 card support.

[Beto]

great part of brazilian top players use this approach

 

here is the first rebids and some considerations that the responder should hv in mind

 

 

1♥ 1♠ = like 1NT forcing, 0-4♠

 

1NT = shows 4♠ non - reverse hand

2♣/♦ = may be 3- card only on balanced hands (12-17)

2♥ = 6♥

2♠ = reverse, 4♠

2NT = GF, balanced

3♣/♦ = natural GF

 

responder must hv in mind that 2♣/♦ may be bid with 3-card only,

therefore he must prefer the 2♥ bid on hands like

♠ Kxx ♥ Kx ♦ xxxx ♣ QJ10x

after 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♣

 

if anyone wants the full sequence used by brazilians just email me rbello@ufrj.br

 

Beto

[Poky]

Opener ... Responder

choose .....choose

from ..... from

3-5-2-3 ... 4-2-3-4

3-5-3-2 ... 4-2-4-3

2-5-3-3 ... 3-2-4-4

 

Mix and match from the above and it goes

1H-1S-1N

 

I think the 2nd approach is much more flexible.

So, in your system it will go...

1♥-1♠

1NT-pass

...and everything will be OK when the opener has the (5332) variations.

 

But what about?

1552... 4243

2551... 4243

 

Dosn't seem to me that playing 1NT is a superior partscore when we have 5-4 diamond fit available.

[1eyedjack]

Opener ... Responder

choose .....choose

from  ..... from

3-5-2-3 ...    4-2-3-4

3-5-3-2 ...    4-2-4-3

2-5-3-3 ...    3-2-4-4

 

Mix and match from the above and it goes

1H-1S-1N

 

I think the 2nd approach is much more flexible.

So, in your system it will go...

1♥-1♠

1NT-pass

...and everything will be OK when the opener has the (5332) variations.

 

But what about?

1552... 4243

2551... 4243

 

Dosn't seem to me that playing 1NT is a superior partscore when we have 5-4 diamond fit available.

In the first case, opps have two 8 card fits in the blacks. In the second they have a 9 card club fit. Granted that Diamonds outrank Clubs it remains far from certain that playing in 1NT is going to be worse than getting into a partscore bidding war that may get to the 4 level and is certain to get to the 3 level. And if they don't leave you in 1NT then they give you the opportunity to find the D fit.

 

The way I play it, the 1NT rebid is 15-17 (1NT opener 12-14) or D, and that may make a difference. Responder rebids 2C with game interest opposite 15-17 bal and opener rebids 2D with a minimum opener (which then must have D).

 

But I am not swayed by arguments that generalise a perceived problem by highlighting particular examples. I never claimed that there were no problem hands for the method. Any method that tries to pinpoint 1NT v 2m as the optimal contract after the auction has already started at 1H is going to run into bad hands for the adopted method that might work out better with an alternative.

 

Given the absence of bidding space and accepting that no method is perfect, I start with a simple philosophy: As a priority, find the major suit fit and, lacking such a fit, get into 1NT if you cannot find the minor, and if you can find the minor as well then that is a bonus. The classical method simply changes the priorities in favour of finding a playable minor, possibly a 7 card fit, and stopping in 1NT only when there is a known misfit. I just happen to believe that this is not the winning strategy, because balanced hands (particularly in light of opponents' silence) are more frequent than distributional ones. But I would also accept that there is not a lot in it. If there was then everyone would have ditched it by now.

[laughter]

Ooops, one serious drawback of Granville that I reckon lately:

 

The 4-4 spades fit can be buried easily in competition.

 

1H-1S-(3C);??

 

Holding AQxx-KJ10xx-Kx-xx, opener can't investigate the possibility of spade fit as he is only minimum, and he is forced to pass. You can't be sure whether there is a good fit in spades or not.

If responder has started with a standard 1S, then you can give a raise here.

 

Maybe opener should play takeout double when the opponent sandwiches. It can help somehow, but you would probably perform less well than the standard bidders when there is a 4-4 spade fit and competition.