Response Scheme after precision 1C

[newchemist]

This is my idea: after 1♣: 16+ Unbal/17+ Bal you have:

 

1♦: 0-7 HCP or 13+ HCP unusual negative

 

1♥: 8-14 HCP, Balanced or any (4441), (5440), (5431) without 5cM

1

♠

: Relay

1NT: 12-14 HCP, balanced. Use standard NT methods.

2

♣

: 8-11 HCP, balanced. Use standard NT methods one step up.

2

♦

,

♥

,

♠

: 3-suited with singleton in higher-ranking suit, 8-14HCP. Opener relays by bidding singleton suit or 2NT after 2

♠

2NT and higher: 3-suited with singleton in diamonds, showing additional features.

 

1♠: 8+ HCP, 5+ Hearts

1NT/2

♣

/2

♦

: Same responses as after 2/1GF (1NT: Kaplan inversion, spades)

2H and higher: Sets Hearts as trumps, modified J2NT/slam tries/splinters/etc to taste.

 

1NT: 8+ HCP, 5+ Spades

2

♣

/2

♦

/2

♥

: Same responses as after 2/1GF

2S and higher: Sets Spades as trumps, modified J2NT/slam tries/splinters/etc to taste.

 

2♣: 6+ clubs or 5+/5+ in clubs and diamonds

2♦: 6+ diamonds

2♥,♠; 3♣,♦: Weak 4-7, long suit.

2NT: 15+ HCP, Balanced

 

The main idea is that after a positive hearts or spades response to a 1♣ opener, a (Semi)forcing NT is no longer neccesary since a positive response is already gameforcing, so why not just remove it and open hearts and spades hands one step up, freeing a 1♥ response to 1♣ as a catchall positive with enough space to unwind, thus simplifying other sequences?

 

Using 1♠ for ♥ and 1NT for ♠ also allows for right-siding of ♥ and ♠ contracts respectively while the 1♥ catchall positive response limits the hand nicely while offering ample opportunities for penalty doubles if opps interfere. 2♣ and 2♦ also now promise 6+ (or 5+/5+) in the suit which is a marked improvement over standard.

 

Overall this is similiar to simplified meckwell (1♥= 8-11 HCP, any while 1♠ and above = 12+ HCP) just that we limit by shape rather than HCP.

Any thoughts? :rolleyes:

[Zelandakh]

I think someone proposed almost exactly this idea about 2 weeks ago. It makes sense from a "simple system strong club" perspective although I do not think you should use "standard NT methods" over 1H then 1NT as this will wrong-side more often than not.

[newchemist]

oh. found it: http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/48144-1c-1n-in-precision/page__p__576152__hl__precision__fromsearch__1#entry576152

[Radrag]

It is very hard to come up with something completely new. Morath and Flodqvist came up with these responses to a strong club in 1971, but in their version 1D was 0-7 and 1H was unlimited.

[Zelandakh]

I am not claiming it to be completely new - it is just a rearrangement of TOSR responses - but can you give me a reference for anyone else that uses the following response scheme?

 

1D = most non-GF hands

1H = 4+ spades, GF (if balanced or 3-suited then also hearts)

1S = 0-3 hearts, 0-3 spades, GF

1N = hearts, or hearts and clubs (min 5-4), GF

2C = hearts and diamonds (min 5-4), GF

2D = balanced with hearts and not spades or 3-suited with spade shortage, GF

2H = balanced with spades and not hearts, GF

2S = 3-suited with short hearts, GF

 

Similarly for my immediate raises of 1M. Every response is used in some form by at least 1 expert pair but I do not know of any that use the complete scheme. Is this something new? Certainly not completely new anyway; and naturally it is difficult to match that definition because the problems in bidding are very old, very well know and are not changing very much. So almost anything you can come up with will address an issue someone else has tried to address and is therefore an extension of that process. You could say the same thing about science too I guess. The requirement for a PhD thesis is only something original which is a far lower standard than finding something completely new. Generally, researchers that match your criteria become something of celebrities in the scientific community.

[dake50]

Look at nightmare.

Try all transfer responses, D->H, H->S, S->C(or bal), 2C->D

then Herbert negatives on the second round.

And of course responses above 2D are picture bids.

[PrecisionL]

With one partner I play our version of Millennium Club (15+ hcp usually balanced, sometimes clubs primary, rarely very, very strong):

 

Responses to 1♣:

 

1♦ = 4+♥ & 0-8 hcp

1♥ = 4+ ♠ & 0-8 hcp

1♠ = rest and 0-8 hcp

1NT = G.F. with the majors 5-4 or better, or 4414 / 4441

2♣ = G.F. asking if balanced,

(2♦) and up are transfer Positives.

 

Edited: last line added: 8/27/16

[PrecisionL]

With my Tournament Partner (Keylime) I play Our version of Transfer Precision modeled somewhat on Sabine Auken's system:

 

Responses to 1♣:

 

1♦ = 0-7 hcp

 

The following responses are ALL G.F. 8+ hcp with an Ace or King

 

1♥ = (a) 4+♠,or (b) 11-14 balanced

1♠ = 4+♥

1NT = Majors: 5-4 or better, or 4=4=1=4 / 4=4=4=1 and 11+ hcp

2♣ = 1 or both minors and NO 4-cd M

2♦ = 8-10 hcp balanced a la Meckwell

2♥ = 5♥332 with good hearts, or 6322 with weak hearts: Jxxxxx or worse.

2♠ = 5♠332 with good spades, or 6322 with weak spades: Jxxxxx or worse.

2NT = 15+ hcp, forcing to 4NT

3♣ = 4=4=4=1 or 4=4=1=4 and 8-10 hcp

3♦ = 4=1=4=4 and 8-10 hcp

3♥ = 1=4=4=4 and 8-10 hcp

3♠ = AKQxxx in unknown suit with No extra A / K

3NT = AKQxxxx in unknown suit w / wo extra A / K

[akhare]

Playing a QP based response scheme, you can play the following in a symmetric relay framework:

 

1D: 6+ QPs, GF

1H: 3-5 QP, semi-positives

1S: 0-2 QPs, double negative

1N+: 6+ QPs, GF

 

Moscito has similar ideas as well, but uses some of the 1N+ responses to show more semi-positive hands (at the cost of ending up at symmetric+1 or symmetric+2 in some cases)...