Force Point system.

[Stefan_O]

> A=3, K=2, Q=1

 

Yes, i played such system in the 1980'ies, where strong opener or responder could both initiate relay sequence and find out abt pds exact QPs and hand pattern.

[Vampyr]

> A=3, K=2, Q=1

 

Yes, i played such system in the 1980'ies, where both strong opener or responder could initiate relay sequence and find out abt pds exact QPs and hand pattern.

 

Would you mind explaining briefly how it works?

[Stefan_O]

Would you mind explaining briefly how it works?

 

I sure wish I could give you the whole story in a bottle :)

 

Unfortunately, this was quite some years ago now, and it was my then pd who was the great designer behind this magic system...

I was one of few people who had the strong interest and enthusiasm required to study and learn such system (esp the relay-sequences)

-- while the system also kept changing from one week to the next :)

 

I still have some basic structure and concepts in the back of my head, of course...

will need to sit down and think if I can summarize them in a meaningful way.....

 

I remember this 3-2-1 scale, because it often gave you a very good picture when it came to slam-bidding, you could pinpoint the AKQ's in the weaker hand with high precision knowing the number of QPs.

And in response to a strong-opening, we would also use QPs to separate negative (like 1C-1D in precision) from positive hands, later specify the exact number of QPs if needed.

Other stages in the relays was first to find out about 4+majors in responders hand -- by transfer responses, of course! :) -- then classify distribution into balanced/unbalanced/two-suiter's, etc, then find the exact distribution and QPs.

 

In the original version (before such got banned) it was a strong-pass-opening system with a negative 1C-response, then followed up with 1D as strong relay.

While 1C in 1st and 2nd hand was the "fert" 0-X points opening, upon which responder with enough strength would start relays with 1D

and the continuations was then the same in both sequences.

 

Only to mention some random bits and pieces here... :)

 

Great fun, but all buried in the graveyard since long, I guess, because of all the restrictions around HUM, color-stickers, etc.

[hrothgar]

I sure wish I could give you the whole story in a bottle :)

 

Unfortunately, this was quite some years ago now, and it was my then pd who was the great designer behind this magic system...

I was one of few people who had the strong interest and enthusiasm required to study and learn such system (esp the relay-sequences)

-- while the system also kept changing from one week to the next :)

 

I still have some basic structure and concepts in the back of my head, of course...

will need to sit down and think if I can summarize them in a meaningful way :)

 

I remember this 3-2-1 scale, because it often gave you a very good picture when it came to slam-bidding, you could pinpoint the AKQ's in the weaker hand with high precision knowing the number of QPs.

And in response to a strong-opening or relay-initiation by pd, we would also use QPs to separate negative (like 1C-1D in precision) from positive hands, later specify the exact number of QPs if needed.

Other stages in the relays was first to find out about 4+majors in responders hand -- by transfer responses, of course! :) -- then classify distribution into balanced/unbalanced/two-suiter's, etc, then find the exact distribution and QPs.

 

In the original version (before such got banned) it was a strong-pass-opening system with a negative 1C-response, then followed up with 1D as strong relay.

While 1C in 1st and 2nd hand was the "fert" 0-X points opening, upon which responder with enough strength would start relays with 1D

and the continuations was then the same in both sequences.

 

Only to mention some random bits and pieces here... :)

 

Great fun, but all buried in the graveyard since long, I guess, because of all the restrictions around HUM, color-stickers, etc.

 

This sounds like pretty standard denial cue bidding with an option for reverse relays

[Stefan_O]

This sounds like pretty standard denial cue bidding with an option for reverse relays

 

Que? I didn't even mention cue-bidding :)

What do you mean?

[hrothgar]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=denial+cue+bid

[Vampyr]

Que? I didn't even mention que-bidding :)

What do you mean?

 

I love the term que bidding. I don't know what it means, but I imagine that is what characterises the bids too!

 

What does QP stand for?

[Stefan_O]

I love the term que bidding.

 

Was actually pure typo, but suitable one here :)

 

What does QP stand for?

 

Queen-points (A=3, K=2, Q=1)

[Stefan_O]

This sounds like pretty standard denial cue bidding with an option for reverse relays

 

I guess you mean they have a common goal -- to pinpoint location of the honour cards.

 

The design and methods to get there seem disrelated to what I wrote.

[Zelandakh]

I guess you mean they have a common goal -- to pinpoint location of the honour cards.

 

The design and methods to get there seem[s to be] undisrelated to what I wrote.

There are basically 4 main approaches - asking bids, 4-suit RKCB, denial cue bids and parity cue bids. What you have written so far sounds like one of the last two and since DCBs are the simpler option it is logical to expect that to be what you are using. Of course you can get by without pinpointing honours at all, such as with most versions of the Roman strong 3-suited opening that use QPs, but that would not be particularly clever over a strong club given all of the space available.

[hrothgar]

There are basically 4 main approaches - asking bids, 4-suit RKCB, denial cue bids and parity cue bids. What you have written so far sounds like one of the last two and since DCBs are the simpler option it is logical to expect that to be what you are using. Of course you can get by without pinpointing honours at all, such as with most versions of the Roman strong 3-suited opening that use QPs, but that would not be particularly clever over a strong club given all of the space available.

 

FWIW, MOSCITO uses a combination

 

The relay captain has the option to use either a Q point ask followed by denial cube bidding OR a KRBC ask followed by asking bids...

[Zelandakh]

FWIW, MOSCITO uses a combination

 

The relay captain has the option to use either a Q point ask followed by denial cube bidding OR a KRBC ask followed by asking bids...

Yes, exactly. Many systems have 2 or more alternatives to choose from and several can also choose to switch to controls instead of QPs where that seems more advantageous. The OP seems to think they have something new and original though, which could possibly be true but it seems more likely on balance that it merely reflects a lack of knowledge about what has already been developed.

[Amonias]

I'm trying to figure out what SCOR-SCOR might look like over

 

1♠-2♣(GF relay).

 

Maybe

 

2♦ = 5S4+D

2♥ = 5S4+H

2♠ = 6 or 8 S, denies 4+ H (H is same rank as S)

...2N = relay

......2nd part of SCOR-SCOR:

......3♣ = 4+ C

......3♦ = 4+ D

......3N = 8 S, 1-suited

......other = 6 S, 1-suited?

2N = 7 S

...3♣ = relay

......3♦ = 4+ D

......3♥ = 4+ H

......4♣ = 4+ C

......other = 1-suited?

3♣ = 5S4+C

3♦ = ?

3♥ = 6S4+H or 8S4+H¹

 

+ lots of relays?

 

¹ "With 6 card suit you show your 5+ card Basic suit, then you show your side suits by 2nd part of scor-SCOR, thus informing your partner that you have 6 or 8 card suit, then you will show your 2nd longest suit naturally, revealing your exact shape, BUT if your side suits are RANK, you must immediately bid your 2nd longest suit by jump, despite that you will bid over the 6th step of SCOR-SCOR Convention! In this case, from 6th step and up, you will enter the Extended SCOR."

As I understand from what what I read

Opening 1S 5+ spades. Not5-5+

 

After 1sp-1NT Relay Scor-scor

2c shape h-c same or nearly the same length

2d colour h-d

2h rank d-c

2s 6sp shape h-c same or nearly the same length

2NT 6sp colour

3c 6sp rank

 

After 1sp-1NT-2cl-2di relay

2h 5413

2s 5323

2NT 7sp

3c 5314

3d 5224

 

After 1sp-1NT-2sp-2NT

3c 6304

3d 6142 or 6241

3h 6403

3s 6232

 

The above is how I interpret the scor-scor.

 

As I understand it the Force Point system sacrifies all preemptive opening bids (to 5-5 6-5 and 3-suited) .

Also no balanced light 1 openings in 1-2 seat.

What the system sacrifice in agressiveness it get back in precision on some hands.

To compensate for this 1 club opening in 3-4 seat is only 8+hcp.

 

A good hand evaluation system for unbalanced hands.

[Zelandakh]

As I understand from what what I read

The problem with using 1NT as a GF relay does not come on those hands but rather than invitational and weak ones. There are methods around to deal with this but none are fully satisfactory. The most interesting part of this system is probably here if there is actually something new at all. To avoid this I actually use 1NT as an invitational or better relay in my system, giving less space on GF hands but more for the weak ones since these are the hands that cannot afford to get too high.

 

The relay structure you provide is of course horribly inefficient, so I hope there is some mistake there. Assigning a single shape to 2♥ is just not going to work. It is essentially this inefficiency that forces the loss of the preemptive openings. Use a better relay structure and there is plenty of space over 1NT for everything. That you are basically gaining nothing on the GF hands versus other relay structures but losing out heavily on weaker hands should tell you immediately that this is likely to be a poor system design. I will leave that fo you to discover in time though; I am sure it is perfectly playable in the meantime and it will not hurt to have played around with it.

[Fluffy]

QPs?, I though they were called slam points. But a couple of pairs in WBGs used them after strong club opening, they called them "zz"

[Amonias]

The problem with using 1NT as a GF relay does not come on those hands but rather than invitational and weak ones. There are methods around to deal with this but none are fully satisfactory. The most interesting part of this system is probably here if there is actually something new at all. To avoid this I actually use 1NT as an invitational or better relay in my system, giving less space on GF hands but more for the weak ones since these are the hands that cannot afford to get too high.

 

The relay structure you provide is of course horribly inefficient, so I hope there is some mistake there. Assigning a single shape to 2♥ is just not going to work. It is essentially this inefficiency that forces the loss of the preemptive openings. Use a better relay structure and there is plenty of space over 1NT for everything. That you are basically gaining nothing on the GF hands versus other relay structures but losing out heavily on weaker hands should tell you immediately that this is likely to be a poor system design. I will leave that fo you to discover in time though; I am sure it is perfectly playable in the meantime and it will not hurt to have played around with it.

 

Sorry for not being clear in my earlier posting.

 

My earlier unclear posting should have been

After 1sp-1NT Relay Scor-scor

2c shape h-c same or nearly the same length

2d colour h-d same or nearly the same length

2h rank d-c same or nearly the same length

2s 6sp shape h-c same or nearly the same length

2NT 6sp colour h-d same or nearly the same length

3c 6sp rank d-c same or nearly the same length

 

2h not only 1 shape (Can be seen from Pavels post earlier in this thread )

1s-1NT-2h (rank d-c same or nearly the same length) - 2sp relay

2NT 7spades

3c 5134

3d 5143

3h 5422

3s 5233

 

My earlier post was a try to answer nullve trying to figure out SCOR-SCOR.

 

I do not play this system and the info I have about this system is from this thread and what i have found on internet.

[nullve]

Thanks, Amonias. It looks like I misread

 

In general, when you have odd number card suit (5, 7) you show your 5+ card Basic suit, then you show your side suits by 1st part of SCOR - SCOR, then if you have 5 card suit you will show directly your 2nd longest suit naturally, revealing your exact shape, BUT if you have a 7 card suit, you will bid NT to show that you have the next odd number of cards in your suit, thus postponing the answer for the 2nd longest suit, and on the next Relay you will show your 2nd longest suit naturally.

as

 

In general, when you have odd number card suit (5, 7) you show your 5+ card Basic suit, then if you have 5 card suit you will show directly your 2nd longest suit naturally, revealing your exact shape, BUT if you have a 7 card suit, you will bid NT to show that you have the next odd number of cards in your suit, thus postponing the answer for the 2nd longest suit, and on the next Relay you will show your 2nd longest suit naturally.

,

i.e. with the red part omitted.

[Zelandakh]

2h not only 1 shape (Can be seen from Pavels post earlier in this thread )

Perhaps you missed the part to which I was referring:

After 1sp-1NT-2cl-2di relay

2h 5413

 

That is very efficient if you happen to hold a 5413 hand opposite a game force but not so good for the other parts of the system.

[Amonias]

Perhaps you missed the part to which I was referring:

 

 

That is very efficient if you happen to hold a 5413 hand opposite a game force but not so good for the other parts of the system.

Thank you for specify what you mean.

I agree with you , if 1NT was a GF and ask about openers exact distribution is it not optimal to have early responsen mean only 1 exact pattern.

It is more optimal to let the first respons-steps have multiple meanings to get more information out of the relays . You can balance it out with the fibonachi-series.

 

As I understand the system the 1NT relay is not GF (maybe after the second relay it is GF).

And to a non GF-relay you can not have to many different pattern. I am not sure how easy it is to do intelligent relay break after first scor-scor relay.

[Zelandakh]

As I understand the system the 1NT relay is not GF (maybe after the second relay it is GF).

And to a non GF-relay you can not have to many different pattern. I am not sure how easy it is to do intelligent relay break after first scor-scor relay.

If 1NT is not GF then it starts to look a little like my system. I use 1NT as INV+ and use the relay breaks to handle the invitational hands:-

 

1♠ - 1NT

==

2♣ = min with 0-3 hearts

... - 2♦ = GF relay (response structure identical to 2♥+ directly over 1NT)

... - 2M, 2NT, 3m = nat, INV

2♦ = 4+ hearts

... - 2♥ = GF relay

... - 2♠, 2NT, 3m, 3♥ = nat, INV

2♥ = extras, 4+ clubs, GF

2♠ = extras, 6+ spades, GF

2NT = extras, 5 spades, 4 diamonds, GF

3♣ = extras, 6043/6142, GF

3♦ = extras, 6241, GF

3♥ = extras, 6340, GF

3♠+ = extras, 7+ spades, 4 diamonds, GF

--

 

The later relay breaks I use primarily for stopper asks as this is otherwise awkward to handle in relay methods. Other common alternatives there are shortage-showing or for various slam purposes. Relay breaks for whichever 4-level bids that are available after sign-offs should be slam-oriented, whether that be RKCB, asking bids or giving alternatives between QPs and CPs. You can look through some threads discussing my system or, probably better for your purposes, Adam's IMPrecision for more ideas in this area. The Non-Natural Systems forum is for the most part the best place for such threads or for any questions that come up.

[Fluffy]

Invitational+ undescriptive relay looks highly vulnerable to overcalls, have you tested it against real opponents yet Zel?

[Zelandakh]

Invitational+ undescriptive relay looks highly vulnerable to overcalls, have you tested it against real opponents yet Zel?

Yes, but generally not high level ones so it is perhaps not a fair comparison. The system was worth close to half an IMP per board over Acol with the same partner and the same standard of opponents despite my partner still being in the learning phase. I have not had the opportunity to test it further since we stopped playing together though. Most of all it was fun. So much so that my partner actually went and learned Polish Club (and the Polish language) afterwards as that was the most similar mainstream method available. Maybe one day I will tidy up my system file and start playing it again, perhaps even against some better opponents. Not for a while though as I am just too busy for the time being to devote so much time and effort to it.

[Pavell]

$44 is a lot of money for a bridge book.

 

- The black & white book on Amazon, Barnes & Noble & bookstores cost $20, the black & white book .epub version on XLibris.com (the Publisher) & Google (for tablets, telephones) cost 10, the color eBook on http://bull-bridge.com cost $13.5 (tax included) and goes with free .epub version.

- The bundle of the color e-Book & the Sysnotes computer program for playing Fp on Internet cost $44, and it can be found on Shopify store on Facebook even for 20% OFF through January 8, 2018 (you can find any of them by looking for "Slam after Slam with Force Point")

- By the way, the system is a combination of natural & relay bids and is not banned (and can not be banned) on any Tournament. For most of the Opponents it may be difficult for understanding, just because it is a new system, but they always can ask & ans will receive complete explanations.