1S-2D showing hearts

[straube]

How about this...

 

1H-

.....2D-constructive or limit raise, more likely 3 trump

.....2H-less than constructive raise

.....2S-WJS

.....2N-LR+ 4 trump

.....3C-WJS

.....3D-WJS

.....3H-mixed raise

 

 

1S-

.....2D-6 hearts or 5+ hearts GI+

.....2H-constructive or limit raise, more likely 3 trump

.....2S-less than constructive raise

.....2N-LR+ 4 trump

.....3C-WJS

.....3D-WJS

.....3H-WJS

.....3S-mixed raise

 

So with a weak preemptive raise, one would have to choose between 2 and 4. This is a loss.

 

OTOH, the mixed raise is pretty common and bidding 3M directly applies more pressure. We also get 1H-3D as a WJS and 1S-3H as a WJS. The latter may seem redundant, but now

1S-2D, 2S-3H is invitational

 

I don't even know if I like this.

[straube]

So I looked at a few hands and it became apparent that the really important decision was about how to separate the constructive from the simple raise. I had originally based the constructive raise on about 9 points and three trump and I now think this was too conservative. The best dividing line to get approximately equal raises of 2M and 2M-1 seems to be using loser count....9 or more losers for 2M and 8.5 or fewer for 2M-1.

 

So here's what I found for 1S responses

 

P-9

1N-18 denies 3 trump and promises 8 if vulnerable

2C-14 could have fit if GF, could have 5+ hearts

2D-4 shows 6 hearts or 5 hearts with GI+

2H-11 8.5 to 7 losers with three and occasionally four trump

2S-9 9 or more losers with three or more trump

2N-1 a limit raise of 7 or 7.5 losers with four+ trump

3C-1 a WJS

3D-0 a WJS

3H-2 a mixed raise with 8.5 losers

3S-1 a preemptive raise with 9 losers

4C-1 splinter

4S-3 wide-ranging

 

However we decide to use the 2N+ level is not nearly as important as our first few responses. I think including the 13 point hands with doubleton support into a 2C response is a winner. I was raising to 2S with all manner of crap which I wouldn't obviously do vulnerable. Any opinions about raising with Hx? not vulnerable?

[straube]

So we tried it out and I really like it. We did notice that

 

1S-1N, 2m-2H

 

can be used for a good raise of the minor. We play then that we're in a forcing auction until at least 3 of the minor.

 

That leaves 1S-1N, 2m-3m as a more distributional type raise.

[straube]

While on the subject of having distributional raises...the most important raise is for the major.

 

After 1S-1N, 2H

 

suggesting....

 

2S-constructive hand with 2S/4H (about a ten count hoping for a rebid)

2N-invitational, could have 4 hearts

3H-constructive raise with 5 hearts

4H-invitational hand with 5 hearts

[Fluffy]

Why are you playing this way?

 

Because it covers most of the 6-12 hands possible including weak 2 suiters and 3 raises than are allowed to stop at the 2 level.

[straube]

I like your structure. So how do you continue after each of these responses?

 

1S-2D

.....2H-doesn't like hearts?

.....2S-likes hearts but wouldn't move opposite 10-12 support?

.....2N-asking?

 

1S-2H,

.....2N-asking?

 

Any trouble in competition?

[Fluffy]

we 80% rebid the transfer and let the other explain. The aim is to stay in the transfer bid when partner is weak. But 2♠ over 2♦ is no heart tolerance, others show GF over invitational range and possible game opposite the weaker one.

 

In competition

 

1♠-2♦ Bidding later spades, double or no trumps shows 10-12, bidding a minor or hearts show 5-9

 

1♠-2♥ Bidding spades shows 8-10, bidding double, NT, hearts or a minor is 10-12. We are still testing them.

 

1♠-2♠ is kind of preemptive, hands that don't wellcome an invitation, to not make them a must for opps to compete with anything we want to seldom throw in some hands with doubleton honnor support also.

 

 

Over 1♥ We do the same with 2♣ and 2♦ both showing diamonds/heart support with cross ranges. But this is is only possible because our GF relay is 1NT wich won' fit in your system. Anyway having 2♦ as hearts constructive or real diamonds invitational is possible for you as well I think.

 

 

So far we haven't encountered much competition directly, but this is probably due to lack of preparation in casual online opponents.

[Zelandakh]

I honestly cannot understand why you would want to play 1♠ - 2♣ as INV+ rather than using 1♠ - 1NT for this. You have so many hand types here you want as much space as possible to unravel everything. If using 2♣ as a power bid I think it is better for it to be GF. Hanlon-McGann is a good model in that case (over 1♥, 1♠ nat, 1NT semi-forcing, 2♣ GF, 2♦ ♥ raise and over 1♠, 1NT semi-forcing, 2♣ GF, 2♦ hearts INV+, 2♥ ♠ raise). This looks to be fairly close to what you are moving towards anyway.

[straube]

1S-2C will be either a GF or a 13-ct with two spades. When opener is balanced, has four+ clubs, or five+ diamonds he will rebid 2D which allows for an easy relay break of 2S. When opener has four+ hearts and rebids 2H, we have an easy relay break of 2N. My only concern is when opener has exactly four diamonds (and then we have a relay break of 3D or 3S). In a contested auction, we'll be in a GF. So I'm not very worried about the invitational hands...we're mostly trying to avoid not getting to game with 13 opposite 13.

 

If 1N is a GF relay, then responder has to start describing his hand at the 2-level and this doesn't make sense to me. Why reverse course and have responder interrupt opener's description with his own? We have, in effect, a weak relay (1N) which allows opener to continue to describe his hand and a strong relay (2C) which also allows responder to continue to describe his hand.

 

Do you have a link to Hanlon-McGann?

[mgoetze]

What's wrong with the following simple structure for opener's rebids:

 

2♥ = 0-2♥ not qualified for higher bids, or 3♥ in a min balanced hand

2♠ = very short hearts, 6+♠, not enough for 3♠

2N/3m = same hand that bids these over 1♠-1NT, with the additional inference of less than 3♥

3♥ = 3♥ and not a balanced min, or 4♥ with a very min/flat hand

3♠ = same as 1♠-1NT-3♠, but also denies 3♥

4m = splinter with 4(+)♥

 

Am I missing something or do you not have a bid on 5422 hands?

[straube]

Am I missing something or do you not have a bid on 5422 hands?

 

He was suggesting a 3H rebid with that.

[mgoetze]

Ah so that was supposed to read "very min OR flat"? But then the bid effectively becomes forcing and you end up in some extremely thin games, non?

[straube]

Ah so that was supposed to read "very min OR flat"? But then the bid effectively becomes forcing and you end up in some extremely thin games, non?

 

I think the idea is that with a 5S332 12-13 point hand, opener will rebid 2H. With most 5S3H41 or 5422 he'll rebid 3H. With a 5S4H31 he'll splinter. I'm not sure what we'll do with a maximum 53H41 but most likely bid 4H. I suppose we'll misjudge and get too high sometimes when responder has only six hearts and like six points, but with that sixth heart, it seems like we ought to usually have a play for game.

[awm]

There are many ways to raise hearts here. I didn't list them all. Basically:

 

2h does not deny 3-card support, but if it has such a fit it will be a bad hand.

3h shows a fit and a decent hand (any hand with four card support upgrades to a decent hand). Generally the expectation is that an INV hand bids game over this (fit is a mild upgrade and you know opener isn't a flat min).

3nt,4m,4h are all raises. Usually they have four hearts, but in any case they want to be in game opposite 6h and 6 points.

[Zelandakh]

1S-2C will be either a GF or a 13-ct with two spades. When opener is balanced, has four+ clubs, or five+ diamonds he will rebid 2D which allows for an easy relay break of 2S. When opener has four+ hearts and rebids 2H, we have an easy relay break of 2N. My only concern is when opener has exactly four diamonds (and then we have a relay break of 3D or 3S). In a contested auction, we'll be in a GF. So I'm not very worried about the invitational hands...we're mostly trying to avoid not getting to game with 13 opposite 13.

 

If 1N is a GF relay, then responder has to start describing his hand at the 2-level and this doesn't make sense to me. Why reverse course and have responder interrupt opener's description with his own? We have, in effect, a weak relay (1N) which allows opener to continue to describe his hand and a strong relay (2C) which also allows responder to continue to describe his hand.

 

Do you have a link to Hanlon-McGann?

Sorry, I missed this, Hanlon-McGann is here.

 

The max invite hand with 2 spades should be specific enough not to worry too much about. Seems funny that you do not have space for it somewhere else though. I was not suggesting 1♠ - 1NT as a GF relay; I think this is problematic on too many hands. 2♣ GF or 1NT INV+ are both better overall imho. From your initial description it sounded like the 2♣ response covered a wider array of invitational hands.