1N response as GF

[straube]

ok, the latest idea is to reserve bids higher than 2H for hands without four spades. After all, as both opponents have had the chance to bid 1S, the reason they haven't is either that they don't have spades or they don't have points. Partner has them. Chances are good that he wants to know our pattern or at least invite game. If he doesn't, then the opponents are asleep and are making a couple of spades.

 

1D-1H,

.....2D-5 clubs OR 3-suited short minor

..........2S-GF relay

...............2N-5 clubs

....................3D-1435

....................3H-2425

....................3S-3415, 6

...............3C-higher short

....................3H-4414

....................3S-4405

...............3D-4441

...............3H-4450

.....2H-bal, 4 hearts

.....2S-5+ diamonds

..........2N-GF relay

...............3C-higher short

...............3D-2452

...............3H-3451

...............3S-2461

...............3N-3460

...............4C-2470

...............4D-1471, 6

..........3C-game try

..........3D-sign off

..........3H-sign off

.....2N-5D/6C, max

.....3C-1-3-4-5

.....3D-3-suited short spades, max

..........3S-QP ask

.....3H-3-suited short spades, min

..........3S-QP ask

[awm]

Not clear to me this is better than something closer to what Sam and I play after 1♦-1♥:

 

2♦ = raise with singleton somewhere (and no 6-card diamonds); if 13(45) then max

2♥ = balanced raise including 24(25), or 13(45) min raise

2♠ = raise with 6+♦

2N = raise with a void

3♣ = good 6/5 in the minors (either way)

 

1♦-1♥-2♦-2♠:

 

2N = singleton spade with four-card support, resolves by 3♠ as 1435, 1444, 1453 (numeric)

3♣ = 13(45)

3♦ = singleton diamond with four-card support, resolves by 3NT as 3415, 4414 (numeric)

3♥/3♠ = singleton club with four-card support, resolves as 3451, 4441 (numeric)

 

1♦-1♥-2N-3♣:

 

3♦ = 04(45); 3♥ asks longer minor/strength

3♥ = 4405

3♠ = 4450 (zoom if you like)

 

We actually use 2♠ as the "raise with void" because our 1♦ doesn't include hands with 6+♦ and 4♥, which saves us a step there. We also use the direct 2N/3♦/3♥ rebids as very strong raises (4-card support, side singleton, and MAX).

[straube]

I've been looking at hands and I think we can be pretty bold when we're short in spades.

 

1D P 1H P and we're looking at --- Axxx AQxxx xxxx, I can be pretty sure that partner has some stuff. I'm actually proposing...

 

1D-1H

.....3D-1444 weak

.....3H-1444 strong

.....3S-0445

.....3N-0454

 

I think it's much safer than it looks. Plus that sequence will almost never occur because the opponents really will be bidding spades most of the time. I'm also happy with 1D-1H, 3C showing 1345. I wish I had the room to show min or max, but I think rebidding 2D or 2H will leave us ill-placed on those occasions where the opponents are making something in spades. We could have a 10-card club fit or something and only a 4-3 heart fit.

 

I'm more worried about 1D-1H, 2S if it showed 5+ diamonds which could be AQx xxxx Axxxx x. Now we're not short in spades and the 3-level may not be safe. I'm also not sure how responder invites intelligently here. He only has 3C and 3D to work with. Can you think of any good meaning for these bids?

 

I'm also wondering what happens after 1D dbl rdbl (showing hearts) P and what happens after 1D P 1H dbl or 1S. Do we try to relay? I'd guess not, but I'm wondering what you think.

 

I still like the last scheme I drew up. Partly because the short spade hands should be placed to take us past the 2-level (not to preempt the spades but because partner is likely to hold a good hand) but also because it seems easy to remember.

 

Atul, do you want to play something like this?

[straube]

1D-1H,

 

2D-singleton, 4 trump

.....2S-GF relay

..........2N-higher short

...............3D-1435

...............3H-1444

...............3S-1453

..........3C-middle short

...............3H-3415

...............3S-4414

..........3D-3451

..........3H-4441

.....2N-GI ask

..........3C-min, higher short

..........3D-min, middle short

..........3H-min, lower short

..........4H-max

2H-4 hearts, bal

.....2S-GF relay

..........2N-4 spades

..........3C-2434

..........3D-3424

..........3H-2443

..........3S-3442

..........3N-3433

2S-six+ diamonds

2N-void

.....3D-0445

.....3H-0454

.....3S-4405

.....3N-4450

3C-1345

.....3S-QP ask

3D-2425

.....3S-QP ask

3H-2452

3S-max, 5D/6C

3N-max, 6D/6C

[awm]

Not clear to me that you want to be forced to the three-level with 24(25) patterns. You can afford these in your relays over 2♥ (which don't seem very space-optimized) or put them in 2♦ while pushing some of the four-card-support-plus-stiff hands to the three-level.

 

Also not totally convinced about the 13(45) patterns; if you really can't put them elsewhere then bidding 3♣ on them is okay... but can't you squeeze one more pattern somewhere? Again, I'd rather have four-card-support-plus-stiff hands at the three-level than hands with no known fit.

[straube]

I still like showing the 1345 immediately (as long as partner doesn't have 4432) , but I agree all of your other criticism. I'm just willing to pay a premium for having a structure that is easier to remember. For this latest, we have to remember the initial rebids, but then things unwind in a way that is familiar to us. I think Foobar is following this thread occasionally and I'm wondering what he thinks of the tradeoffs here.

 

Btw, I'm starting to think ahead about when we would use this relay and when not. For instance, I'm thinking if we have a balanced GF, it is better to show four spades than attempt to relay...even if partner winds up raising with 3-4-1-5 (for example) and we have to sort this out later.

[akhare]

I still like showing the 1345 immediately (as long as partner doesn't have 4432) , but I agree all of your other criticism. I'm just willing to pay a premium for having a structure that is easier to remember. For this latest, we have to remember the initial rebids, but then things unwind in a way that is familiar to us. I think Foobar is following this thread occasionally and I'm wondering what he thinks of the tradeoffs here.

 

Using 3♠ / 3N bids for 6-5 in the minors is OK since they are so rare that it's really unlikely to matter one way or the other.

 

However, I do share awm's discomfort with being forced to the 3-level with 24(45) hands and it might be best to combine those hands into 2♥.

[straube]

We can do that. So right now we play...

 

1D-1H, 1S-2D, 2S is balanced and...

 

.....3C-4234

.....3D-4324

.....3H-4243

.....3S-4342

.....3N-4333

 

Obviously, the 3C and 3D are underloaded. So we could change to

 

.....3C-4 clubs or 4333

..........3H-4234

..........3S-4324

..........3N-4333

.....3D-4243

.....3H-4342

 

and now 1D-1H, 2H-2S

 

.....2N-4 spades

..........3D-4423

..........3H-4432

.....3C-4 clubs or 3433

..........3H-2434

..........3S-3424

..........3N-3433

.....3D-2443

.....3H-3442

.....3S-2425

.....3N-2452

 

which achieves a bit of symmetry although the latter's 2N is underloaded compared to 3C.

 

Or we can relay these hands out differently. Suggestions?

 

Or we can treat a 2452 as a 3442 making sure that the partner is aware of the doubleton minor so he doesn't mistakenly pick a 5-2 fit. Sorry partner, had a club in with a spade. This would rankle most relay enthusiasts, but we're relaying an awful lot of situations now. Actually, that's how I'd like to handle it.

 

And then we have to decide what to use our 3D and 3H rebids for. In fact, 3D on up bids are affected.

[benlessard]

The problem with 1H nat or GF is that many directors will consider it a relay. So its superchart not midchart. Other than that it make no sense to use 1Nt relay instead of 1H relay.

[straube]

The problem with 1H nat or GF is that many directors will consider it a relay. So its superchart not midchart. Other than that it make no sense to use 1Nt relay instead of 1H relay.

 

Rats. Is that right? I had thought this would be legal for midchart. I don't suppose it matters if the bid is constructive and promises 2+ hearts? Yeah, can't we argue that the bid is natural or GF balanced without a major and thus descriptive?

[straube]

So I read the Midchart and it says that relays are not legal unless they are game forcing. Isn't the idea that one can't bid 1H saying nothing about the hand, hear partner's response and then sign off somewhere shy of game?

But our bid would be either natural (4+) or artificial and constructive (2+). After opener's rebid, we make a GF relay bid or bid something else confirming hearts. Not that it really matters, but at the end of the auction the defense knows either responder has hearts or a balanced hand without a major. How's my logic?

[awm]

I wouldn't worry about this on the ACBL mid-chart. Logic doesn't really apply to these rules, but suffice to say the ACBL definition of "relay" is not the same as yours (or mine).

 

There is an issue with the general chart, in that 1♥ = "hearts or GF" is not allowed there, whereas 1NT = "any GF" would be.

[benlessard]

The stronger the field the more they will let you roll with it, not finishing late every round will also help and giving clear explanations is always a must. But Nat or GF, Weak or GF, is not the same as a pure GF relay and if a knowledgable opps call the director, he might easily rule against you and you will have no recourse available. In practice it depend on where you play and it might easily be ok, but im not as confident as AWM.

[awm]

If you need a logical explanation it goes like:

 

"The 1♥ bid is not a relay." (this will be enough for most directors but if you must continue...)

 

"Responder was not forced to bid 1♥, and will not bid 1♥ on all or even a majority of hands. The 1♥ bid does not force opener to make any particular call, and in most cases opener's next call will be natural. After opener's rebid, responder's next call will usually be natural unless he is willing to force game, so there will never be a sequence of relays that is not game forcing."

[straube]

If you need a logical explanation it goes like:

 

"The 1♥ bid is not a relay." (this will be enough for most directors but if you must continue...)

 

"Responder was not forced to bid 1♥, and will not bid 1♥ on all or even a majority of hands. The 1♥ bid does not force opener to make any particular call, and in most cases opener's next call will be natural. After opener's rebid, responder's next call will usually be natural unless he is willing to force game, so there will never be a sequence of relays that is not game forcing."

 

I like it. I just copied it into our system notes.

[Zelandakh]

1D

==

... - 1H = INV+ relay

... - 1S = weak, 4+ spades

... - 1N = weak, 4+ hearts, <4 spades

... - 2C = weak, 5+ clubs, no 4 card major

... - 2D = weak, 3+ diamonds

 

1D - 1H

=======

1S = unbal min (then 1NT GF relay, others = nat invites)

1N = 11-13 bal

2C = max, both minors

... - 2D = relay

... - ... - 2H = 4 diamonds

... - ... - 2S = 5-5 or more

... - ... - 2N = 5 diamonds, 4 clubs

... - ... - 3C = 6 diamonds, 4 clubs, 0-1 spades

... - ... - 3D = 2164

... - ... - 3H = 3064

... - ... - 3S = 1174

2D = max, 4 hearts, 4+ diamonds

... - 2H = relay

... - ... - 2S = 6+ diamonds

... - ... - 2N = 5 diamonds, no void

... - ... - 3C = 1444

... - ... - 3D = 0445

... - ... - 3H = 0454

2H = max, 4 spades, 5+ diamonds

... - 2S = relay

... - ... - 2N = 5 diamonds

... - ... - 3C = 6 diamonds, 0-1 hearts

... - ... - 3D = 4261

... - ... - 3H = 4360

... - ... - 3S = 4171

2S = max, 4 spades, 4+ clubs

... - 2N = relay

... - ... - 3C = 3-suited

... - ... - ... - 3D = relay

... - ... - ... - ... - 3H = 4144

... - ... - ... - ... - 3S = 4045

... - ... - ... - ... - 3N = 4054

... - ... - 3D = 4135

... - ... - 3H = 4225

... - ... - 3S = 4315

2N = max, 4 hearts, 5 clubs, no void

... - 3C = relay

... - ... - 3D = 1435

... - ... - 3H = 2425

... - ... - 3S = 3415

3C = max, 4414

3D = max, 4441

3H = max, 4405

3S = max, 4450

 

Of course you may run into ACBL regs trouble with this. You could describe the 1H response as a range/shape ask since the most common responses are 1S = unbalanced min and 1NT = natural. I have no idea if this is enough to get past TDs over there since I have yet to understand exactly what they mean by "relay responses". It certainly does not match with any other definition I have come across.

[awm]

1D

==

... - 1H = INV+ relay

... - 1S = weak, 4+ spades

... - 1N = weak, 4+ hearts, <4 spades

... - 2C = weak, 5+ clubs, no 4 card major

... - 2D = weak, 3+ diamonds

 

1D - 1H

=======

1S = unbal min (then 1NT GF relay, others = nat invites)

1N = 11-13 bal

.......

 

I've never really understood this type of method. Finding a good fit is really important in this game. Aside from landing in much better partials, you can quite often make a game on less than "full values" when you have a nice major suit fit. Here neither the response (1♥ INV+ any) nor opener's rebid (1♠ unbalanced min) really says anything about shape. Suppose you have this sequence and responder holds a 2434 invite, what is his next call? He could easily make game opposite a shapely min with four hearts, but there's no particular guarantee of game opposite a 4144 minimum (for example). And this was on invitational hands; the weak ones are even worse. How do you find your heart fit with 1453 opposite a weak 4423 after 1♦-1♠? How do you find any reasonable spot with 4414 opposite 2344 after starting presumably 1♦-2♦? It just seems much better to have a method where opener shows shape.

 

I wouldn't be worried about the ACBL mid-chart regulations though. Again, any sequence of relays is game forcing. And ACBL doesn't exactly mean the same thing we do by relay anyway. Josh Sher got a similar relay structure (min step = any inv+, relays only continue if we are GF'd) ruled legal on the mid-chart a while back, and while some things have changed since then I doubt this has.

[straube]

I think what you've effectively done is traded constructive (6+) fit-finding for being +0 on relay auctions (we are +2 now). I think it's a bad trade. Find the fits, then invite or relay as strength permits.

[akhare]

1D

==

... - 1H = INV+ relay

... - 1S = weak, 4+ spades

... - 1N = weak, 4+ hearts, <4 spades

... - 2C = weak, 5+ clubs, no 4 card major

... - 2D = weak, 3+ diamonds

How does this scheme locate a 4-4 heart fit after 1D - 1S?

[straube]

So partner and I decided to collapse the 5m4H22s into the balanced hands.

 

How about then.....

 

1D-1H

 

1S-four spades or 3145

.....2D-GF relay

.....2H-5D

.....2S-bal

..........3C-4234

..........3D-4324

..........3H-4243

..........3S-4342

..........3N-4333

1N-bal

2C-5D/4C

.....2S-GF relay

..........2N-5/4 only

...............3D-1354

...............3H-2254

...............3S-3154

2D-4 hearts, singleton somewhee

.....2S-GF relay

..........2N-higher

...............3D-1435

...............3H-1444

...............3S-1453

..........3C-middle

..........3D-3451

..........3H-4441

2H-4 hearts, bal

.....2S-GF relay

..........2N-4 spades

...............3D-4423

...............3H-4432

..........3C-2434

..........3D-3424 or 2425

..........3H-2443

..........3S-3442 or 2452

2S-6+ diamonds

.....3C-higher shortness

.....3D-2461

......etc

2N-void

.....3D-general invite

.....3C-GF relay

..........3D-higher

...............3S-0445

...............3N-0454

..........3H-4405

..........3S-4450

3C-1345

3D-5D/6C, 13-15

 

No use for 3H. Seems a waste.

[Zelandakh]

I've never really understood this type of method. Finding a good fit is really important in this game. Aside from landing in much better partials, you can quite often make a game on less than "full values" when you have a nice major suit fit. Here neither the response (1♥ INV+ any) nor opener's rebid (1♠ unbalanced min) really says anything about shape. Suppose you have this sequence and responder holds a 2434 invite, what is his next call? He could easily make game opposite a shapely min with four hearts, but there's no particular guarantee of game opposite a 4144 minimum (for example). And this was on invitational hands; the weak ones are even worse. How do you find your heart fit with 1453 opposite a weak 4423 after 1♦-1♠? How do you find any reasonable spot with 4414 opposite 2344 after starting presumably 1♦-2♦? It just seems much better to have a method where opener shows shape.

 

Let me see if I can help. I agree wholeheartedly in the importance of fit-finding. This is essentially the point of bidding suits up-the-line with weak hands - it maximises the chance of finding a fit. For example, Opener has 1453 and Responder has a weak 4423. The bidding starts 1D - 1S; 1NT where 1NT shows hearts. Responder will now bid 2H with most hands, or with a super-max can jump to 3H. No game will be missed and the fit is found. This is also the answer to akhare's question - 1NT in weak auctions (from either player) shows hearts.

 

The 4414 (Opener) opposite 2344 (Responder) is a different matter. In my system diamonds are always real so it does not come up. Here where 1D can be short you have to respond 2C (non-forcing) on this. However, I agree that that creates something of a problem with 4441 (Opener) opposite a weak 3325 (Responder). This is one of the reasons I use this method in conjunction with an unbalanced diamond and traditional Precision 2C shapes. It still works when Opener is "diamonds or clubs but not both" but it is a little more awkward.

 

For invitational hands you are bidding shape too. Your example of a 2434 invitational Responder opposite a minimum Opener runs 1D - 1H; 1S - 2C. You can afford to search for the heart fit at the 2 level because both hands are limited and so this does not show extras. Simple natural bidding! If there is no fit you just finish in the "bucket" of 2NT. If there is a fit then either player can upgrade their hand to bid game.