1C (1S)

[straube]

Our strong club coping mechanism for 1S overcalls is...

 

P-semipositive

.....dbl-GF, asks relay of shape

..........1N-unbal with spades

..........2C-various unbal without a major

..........2D-bal

..........etc-

dbl-double negative

1N-GF, unbal with spades

2C-GF various unbal without a major

2D-GF bal

2H-GF, H/C

2S-GF, 5+ hearts

etc

 

So what do folks think of this change...

 

P-semipositive

.....dbl-GF, asks relay of shape

..........etc

dbl-double negative OR GF bal

2C-GF various unbal without a major

2D-semipositive, 5+ hearts

2H-GF, H/C

2S-GF, 5+ hearts

etc

 

There'd be no way to relay the GF balanced shapes and these patterns are the least interesting anyway.

[akhare]

 

So what do folks think of this change...

 

P-semipositive

.....dbl-GF, asks relay of shape

..........etc

dbl-double negative OR GF bal

2C-GF hearts but not spades

2D-semipositive, 5+ hearts

etc

 

There'd be no way to relay the GF balanced shapes and these patterns are the least interesting anyway.

 

Off the top of my head, I don't see the need to split the hearts hands into SP / GF immediately. Getting 5+ hearts SP+ across immediately is important and there's need for bids that show (limited) takeout shapes and SP+ minor oriented hands...

[straube]

Off the top of my head, I don't see the need to split the hearts hands into SP / GF immediately. Getting 5+ hearts SP+ across immediately is important and there's need for bids that show (limited) takeout shapes and SP+ minor oriented hands...

 

Well, I made a mistake and have since corrected it. Except in the case of responder having H/C he can immediately show whether he has a GF with 5+ hearts or only a red reverser. I think this is pretty powerful for getting the heart message across. When responder has the minors...well we're set up for relays if opponents allow such but this information may not matter as much when competition breaks our relays

[akhare]

Well, I made a mistake and have since corrected it.

 

P-semipositive

.....dbl-GF, asks relay of shape

..........etc

dbl-double negative OR GF bal

2C-GF various unbal without a major

2D-semipositive, 5+ hearts

2H-GF, H/C

2S-GF, 5+ hearts

etc

 

You still have some typo in there -- there are two bids for 5+ hearts, unless one of them is meant for 4H/5C and another one is for the reds.

 

Also, by using transfers (say 2♣ as 4+D/4H) you can free up the bid as SP+ and use a similar trick with 2♥ / 2♠ to show 4+♣ / 4♥.

[PrecisionL]

Interesting. I played in the Vanderbilt opposite the Toad Club and we interfered with 1♠ and responder doubled (dbl negative) and opener rebid 2♥ and we doubled for penalty and +500 on a part score hand. Ever since, I have decided that I prefer a pass for the double negative and a double for the semi-positive without a 5-cd suit and that has worked out well. Opener has been able to pass the doubled overcall for penalty several times in part score situations.

[straube]

You still have some typo in there -- there are two bids for 5+ hearts, unless one of them is meant for 4H/5C and another one is for the reds.

 

Also, by using transfers (say 2♣ as 4+D/4H) you can free up the bid as SP+ and use a similar trick with 2♥ / 2♠ to show 4+♣ / 4♥.

 

 

No, I think it's right.

 

2H-H/C

2S-5+H single suited

2N-4H/5D

3C-5H/5D

3D-unreversed, higher

3H-2542

3S-3541

3N-2641 etc

 

Thanks for your suggestion, but what is it in its entire? For example 2C as 4+D/4H should hold more hand types. I have that pattern shown at the point of 2S.

[PrecisionL]

Barry Rigal in Precision in the 90s (Advanced) proposed the following scheme for dealing with 1 or 2-level interference over our strong ♣:

 

Double: 5-7 hcp & 3-cards in the suit bid (not necessarily shown)

I could never find anyone willing to try this out.

Thus, I currently favor transfers [6+ hcp] with a pass being the double negative and the double being the transfer to the next bid. However, this scheme is not forcing to game and asking bids aren't easily accommodated. However, responder can show his suit and opener can reject the transfer with 0-1 cards in the suit indicated.

[straube]

Interesting. I played in the Vanderbilt opposite the Toad Club and we interfered with 1♠ and responder doubled (dbl negative) and opener rebid 2♥ and we doubled for penalty and +500 on a part score hand. Ever since, I have decided that I prefer a pass for the double negative and a double for the semi-positive without a 5-cd suit and that has worked out well. Opener has been able to pass the doubled overcall for penalty several times in part score situations.

 

Doubling with a bad hand is dangerous, but is at least analogous to 2C (2S) dbl as negative where 2C is strong artificial...and that has its adherents. I'm not fond of doubling with the semipositive because we then have less room to sort out where we belong than we do for the double negatives. It robs opener of double and then he has (typically) to cue or jump to force.

[PrecisionL]

Doubling with a bad hand is dangerous, but is at least analogous to 2C (2S) dbl as negative where 2C is strong artificial...and that has its adherents. I'm not fond of doubling with the semipositive because we then have less room to sort out where we belong than we do for the double negatives. It robs opener of double and then he has (typically) to cue or jump to force.

Yes, I dislike the semi-positive double with unbalanced distribution also.

 

Thus, we have changed to conditional transfer bids by responder when he has a good 5 hcp or better. The double now is used to transfer to the next step in the bidding.

[straube]

Yes, I dislike the semi-positive double with unbalanced distribution also.

 

Thus, we have changed to conditional transfer bids by responder when he has a good 5 hcp or better. The double now is used to transfer to the next step in the bidding.

 

So in the case of spades, double transfers to 1N and 1N to clubs? Or is 1N natural and forcing or not forcing...and dbl a transfer to clubs?

 

What strikes me right away is (however it's arranged) the bid showing clubs is lower than the bid showing hearts and it ought to be opposite...because hearts are more important and if you are 5/5 in hearts and clubs you will want to show hearts first and not clubs.

 

We use transfers to 2M after 2C and 2D interference (following awm on this) and knowing whether pd has a 5-cd major seems very worthwhile.

 

After 1S interference when there's only one major available, I'm just not very interested in learning about responder's 5-cd minor semipositive. Perhaps we belong in 1N or perhaps opener wants to show that he has hearts. Also, there's a lot to unwind if pd shows 5+m with 5+ hcps....lots in terms of strength and the rest of his pattern. In fact, it's impossible to unwind.

 

The other thing is that it's tricky to decide what 1N should be since it potentially wrongsides NT contracts. I like it as natural (with a stopper) but we're using it to unwind all the spade or spade/other hands (including hearts) because we reason that responder is likely to have a spade stopper and advancer is likely not to raise spades knowing that responder has them and thus we get to enjoy all of our relay auctions.

[PrecisionL]

All valid points, David, thanks for replying.

 

Opener does not have to accept the transfer and responder would not transfer into a minor with 2-suited hands (5-5), thus the ♥ fit would rarely be buried.

 

Interference experience is low despite playing Precision variants for over 10 years. Conditional transfers with 2-suited hands needs more study and I lean toward a cue-bid for showing 2 or 3-suited hands.

[akhare]

The other thing is that it's tricky to decide what 1N should be since it potentially wrongsides NT contracts. I like it as natural (with a stopper) but we're using it to unwind all the spade or spade/other hands (including hearts) because we reason that responder is likely to have a spade stopper and advancer is likely not to raise spades knowing that responder has them and thus we get to enjoy all of our relay auctions.

 

The best use for 1N might be hands with 5+♥ since these are hands that are least likely to play in no-trump..

 

You can then use to construct something along the following lines that combines the flexibility of transfers and preserves relay possibilities:

 

1N: SP+, 5+♥

2♣: SP+, 4+D, 4H

2♦, SP+, 4+C, 4H

2♥: SP, three suited takeout

2♠+: TDB

[PrecisionL]

The best use for 1N might be hands with 5+♥ since these are hands that are least likely to play in no-trump..

 

You can then use to construct something along the following lines that combines the flexibility of transfers and preserves relay possibilities:

 

1N: SP+, 5+♥

2♣: SP+, 4+D, 4H

2♦, SP+, 4+C, 4H

2♥: SP, three suited takeout

2♠+: TDB

Excellent idea! I once proposed this for T-Precision with the exact same reasoning.

[straube]

The best use for 1N might be hands with 5+♥ since these are hands that are least likely to play in no-trump..

 

You can then use to construct something along the following lines that combines the flexibility of transfers and preserves relay possibilities:

 

1N: SP+, 5+♥

2♣: SP+, 4+D, 4H

2♦, SP+, 4+C, 4H

2♥: SP, three suited takeout

2♠+: TDB

 

You need to flesh it out. What are pass, double, and 2S+? What do you do with all the GF hands? The DN hands? The SP balanced and non-heart hands? I think you'll find that you can't afford all of this room for the heart hands.

[akhare]

You need to flesh it out. What are pass, double, and 2S+? What do you do with all the GF hands? The DN hands? The SP balanced and non-heart hands? I think you'll find that you can't afford all of this room for the heart hands.

 

None of the bids set up an immediate GF (and I don't really see the need for it).

 

You can think of 1♣ - (1♠) - 1N as analogous to the IMP 1♣ - 1N response (which doesn't set up a GF either).

 

 

P: SP, likely balanced, unsuited for takeout

X: DN or GF balanced

1N: SP+, 5+♥

......2D: H+C

......2H: Single suited hearts

......2S: H+D, LL

2♣: SP+, 4+D, 4H

2♦, SP+, 4+C, 4H

2♥: SP, three suited takeout

2♠: SP+ minors / GF clubs

3♣: SP+ diamonds

[straube]

None of the bids set up an immediate GF (and I don't really see the need for it).

 

You can think of 1♣ - (1♠) - 1N as analogous to the IMP 1♣ - 1N response (which doesn't set up a GF either).

 

 

P: SP, likely balanced, unsuited for takeout

X: DN or GF balanced

1N: SP+, 5+♥

......2D: H+C

......2H: Single suited hearts

......2S: H+D, LL

2♣: SP+, 4+D, 4H

2♦, SP+, 4+C, 4H

2♥: SP, three suited takeout

2♠: SP+ minors / GF clubs

3♣: SP+ diamonds

 

Thanks for posting more of it.

 

So it goes 1C (1S) 2C P and now I probably need a 20 ct to relay with 2D and then suddenly find that we're at -1...which seems like too much of a good thing. The thing I like about IMprecision is that most of the semipositives are contained within 1H or 1S responses...which means that opener can pretty easily decide not to relay and show a balanced hand (1N) or sometimes (over 1H) a minor-based hand (2m). In this, space is tight from the spade overcall and you're setting up many of responder's responses for relays at -1. We really should be +1 or +2 if anything...and the only hands that can guarantee a successful relay auction (i.e. opener has no reason to break relay) are the GF hands. I do like that 1C (1S) P P 1N gets the declaration for NT right most of the time and makes subsequent bidding easier I think.

 

As a practical matter, I can see making an exception for semipositive hands with 5+ hearts...which is why I posted the thread. I tallied 100 hands and found they came up 9 times so we might get some value out of a 2D bid reserved for that. Not bad, but not clear to me that it's worth the change either. It does foul up the balanced hands quite a bit and they are common. It also means that we don't really have meanings for 1C (1S) P P 1N P 2D/2H as play in either major doesn't seem possible. I.e. our auction is too far along really for where we ought to be.

 

Maybe folks aren't interested in either structure I presented, but would you rather 2D show semipositive hearts or GF balanced hands (gun to your head and all).

[akhare]

Thanks for posting more of it.

 

So it goes 1C (1S) 2C P and now I probably need a 20 ct to relay with 2D and then suddenly find that we're at -1...which seems like too much of a good thing.

 

The GF relay here is 2♠. Both 2♦ / 2♥ show minimal hands with no better bid, so we aren't at -1.

[relknes]

Our typical agreement for an unpassed hand is that pass shows a double negative (0-4 or possibly a bad 5), simple overcalls are semi-positive (a good 5-8), and a double shows either a semi-positive with support for all the unbid suits or a GF hand. Jump overcalls show a 7+ suit and a semi-positive hand.

Over 1♠, a 2♠ cuebid shows a semi-positieve with 4+ hearts and a 5+ minor, and a 2N bid shows a semi-positive with 4+ diamonds and 5+ clubs, so simple overcalls deny a higher ranking 4+ suit and deny being 3-3 or better in the unbid suits.

[Zelandakh]

I am currently playing:-

 

P = 4+ spades, any

X = no 4M, <GF

1NT = 4-5 hearts, <INV

2♣ = bal or diamonds, GF

2♦ = 4+ hearts, INV

2♥ = (5)6+ hearts, <INV

2♠ = clubs, GF

2NT = 4 hearts, longer minor, GF

3♣ = 5 hearts, 4+ diamonds, GF

3♦ = 6+ hearts, GF

3♥ = 5 hearts, 4 clubs, GF

3♠ = 5 hearts, 5 clubs, GF

 

On the subject of your main question, I prefer 2♦ as the SP. Would you be able to gain something elsewhere if you made it SP with 4+ hearts, as in my structure? I have not gone through all the other structures (sorry) so if there is a specific one that interests you then do point it out.

[straube]

I am currently playing:-

 

P = 4+ spades, any

X = no 4M, <GF

1NT = 4-5 hearts, <INV

2♣ = bal or diamonds, GF

2♦ = 4+ hearts, INV

2♥ = (5)6+ hearts, <INV

2♠ = clubs, GF

2NT = 4 hearts, longer minor, GF

3♣ = 5 hearts, 4+ diamonds, GF

3♦ = 6+ hearts, GF

3♥ = 5 hearts, 4 clubs, GF

3♠ = 5 hearts, 5 clubs, GF

 

On the subject of your main question, I prefer 2♦ as the SP. Would you be able to gain something elsewhere if you made it SP with 4+ hearts, as in my structure? I have not gone through all the other structures (sorry) so if there is a specific one that interests you then do point it out.

 

I always appreciate that you answer the specific question.

[Zelandakh]

I always appreciate that you answer the specific question.

Actually, not to derail your discussion, but I have a question for you too. I keep going back and forth on where to put the GF 5♥332 hands. They can be put under either 2♣ (GF Balanced, current solution) or 3♣ (making this 5♥4♦ or 5♥332, original solution). It could also be put in as a special case for 2♦, although I think this bid is probably loaded enough. What do you think?

[straube]

Actually, not to derail your discussion, but I have a question for you too. I keep going back and forth on where to put the GF 5♥332 hands. They can be put under either 2♣ (GF Balanced, current solution) or 3♣ (making this 5♥4♦ or 5♥332, original solution). It could also be put in as a special case for 2♦, although I think this bid is probably loaded enough. What do you think?

 

That's a tough call. My first reaction was to put them in 3C. I'm not so worried about not having a 4th diamond as I am preempting opener when he has clubs. If I knew advancer would pass, I'd put them in with 2C for sure as you have ample room to sort this out. I think I'll stay with 3C.

 

Have you thought about switching 2C and 2D around? 2C as GI+ 4+ hearts then. 2D as GF bal or diamonds feels not too bad. Often opener will rebid hearts and you have fairly natural rebids (2S or 2N for the bal without 3 hearts and 3C minors and 3D diamonds for the other without 3 hearts).