New system in developing

[Flame]

I would like to have your help devdeloping a new system, i have part of the basic structure but not all of it, i need advices for the missing part, and if anyone want to test it ill be happy to do it with him/her.

So this is what i got

1NT

-----

This is the part im most convinced about i was looking at luke's new system which use all the 2 level bids for a one suiter (6 cards) 11-16 and thought its a good idea, both constructively and distructively, but i find out i can get all those 2 level bids into 1 bid, 1nt, since those bids show a one suiter hand which is usually sufficent to play at the 2 level even vs a void, the 1nt will do the same job as 2c/2d/2h/2s together, which is a tehoretically(matematically) great. in relay thory its normally agreed that a bid of x is equal(or just abit better) to the x+2 and x+3 bids together, we are getting more here (Richard if you read pls dont luff at my ignorence in relay and explain, ill be happy to learn) this "more" is as i understanding due to the nature of the 6 card suit bid.

2c will be p/c (even with a void) 2D over 1nt will be a relay.

The range of this bid is something im not sure about, could be anywhere from 8 to 16. maybe 11-16 maybe 8-13 will be happy to get ur opining.

2c/2d/2h

------------

Those bids are brozel like, they show heart + the bid suit either 4-5 or 5-4

2H show 5H and 4S.

The idea of showing the heart at the 2 level, is to bypass the spade suit, when he got the hearts the opponents have the spades and we need to strick fast to deal with thier higher suit advantage. These two bids are unlike in the nunes will not cause the problem of losing a major fit, or getting too high when this fit isnt found, i also believe that the non set lengh of the two suits meaning eithr one can be the longer, will not be cause too many truble and will be benefitial as a distructive bid.

The range of this bid is the same as the 1nt.

1S

----

This is the paralel bid of the 2c/2d/2h bids ment to show 5-4/4-5 with spades and another suit, The range of this bid is currently the same as the 2 bids, although i have develop a way in the past to make this range bigger.

2S

---

I not fixed about this , but for now its showing 5-4 in the minors, the range is still same as before.

2nt and higher

-----------------

no idea about it

 

now we come to the part with most questions, we have 1c/1d/1h bids free to show:

1. all balanced hands, this can be seperate into balanced with 4 card major and balanced without 4 card major.

2. strong unbalanced hand too good for the higher bids.

I have some thought of how to use those bids, but would be happy to hear new ideas.

My current best idea is to use

1h - 4+ spade either balanced 12+ or strong (stronger then the range of higher bids) unbalanced.

1D - 4+ hearts 12+ balanced or strong unbalanced.

1C - balanced without 4 card major or minors strong unbalanced.

Other options which i didnt think about too much

1d - medium (stronger then range, if this option is selected then the range will be low something like 8-12) and this 1d could be 13-16

1c - strong higher then medium (soemthing like 17+)

1h - balanced 11-13 , or more if we take the balanced hands out of the 1d.

Well i had other options but ill end it here.

One last thought was to use 2H/2S to show 1 suiter (in the suit bid) with different range then the one showed by 1nt, this is based on the idea that with majors we dont have to rush like when we only add the heart suit and they had the spade.

This could be weak as premptive or maybe strong if its fit the system needs.

Thanks to anyone who wish to help.

[hrothgar]

Quick comment regarding bidding space.

 

If you are using standard relay methods, then bidding space can be modelled as a Fibonacci Sequence. The Fibonacci Sequence is a string of didgets such that each number in the sequence is equal to the sum of the two previous numbers.

 

0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, ...

 

The Fibonacci Sequences converges on the so-called "Golden Mean" = 1.618033988...

By this, I mean the following: Find the Nth number of the Fibonacci Sequence. Divide this by the (N-1)th number. For any reasonably size N, you'll get something very close to the Golden Mean. For example

 

The 16th number the Fibonacci Sequence listed above is 610

The 16th number the Fibonacci Sequence listed above is 987

The 16th number the Fibonacci Sequence listed above is 1597

 

1597/987 = 1.61803445

987/610 = 1.61803279

 

Fibonacci Sequences have LOTS of really interesting properties. For example

 

For Simplicity, we're going to refer to the number 1.618033988... as "Phi"

 

1/"Phi" = "Phi" - 1

"Phi" * "Phi" = "Phi" + 1

 

But, getting back to bridge... Mathematically, the maximum amount of information that can be compressed into a relay channel can be modelled as a Fibonacci Sequence. What this means is that your 1NT bid can substitute for your 2C opening + your 2D opening, however, it can't handle 2♣+2♦+2♥+2♠. Please, note, however, that a 1S opening could handle this whole sequence, with room to spare...

 

With this said and done, relatively few bidding systems make use of these principles. For example, if you are using 2♣/2♦/2♥/2♠ to show the same hand type (single suited patterns), then entire analysis goes out the window. MOSCITO's relay sequences are designed using Fibonacci encoding system. (The self similiar nature of the relays is these sequences are efficient and easy to remember)

 

Here is a simple illustration:

 

Using a Fibonacci Sequence

 

2H can substitute for 2S+2N

2S = 2N+3C

2N = 3C+3D

3C = 3D+3H

....

 

Using substitution:

 

2H = 2S + 2N which implies that

2H = (2N+3C) + 2N which implies that

2H = 2N + 3C + (3C+3D) which implies that

2H = 2N + 3C + 3D + (3D + 3H)

...

 

Hopefully, its clear where the idea of the "reverser" came from....

[MarceldB]

Quick comment regarding bidding space.

 

If you are using standard relay methods, then bidding space can be modelled as a Fibonacci Sequence.  The Fibonacci Sequence is a string of didgets such that each number in the sequence is equal to the sum of the two previous numbers.

 

0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, ...

 

I have made a biddingstep calculator based on Fibonacci, see my download page under "Various"

 

Marcel

[Flame]

Thanks for the explanations, i knew most of it, anyway that was exactly my point this 1nt is matematically a great bid, because its happend to be good enough to show all 4 bids above it, ofcourse this isnt some bug in fibonachi, its just that the nature of those 4 bids in luke's system (which i like) is special, showing 6 card suit and limit hcp, which make it possible to show them all with the 1nt.

You can say those 2c/2d/2h/2s in luke's systems are just bad and bad bids are easy to do better then, i dont think its true first because i think those bids are bridgly good, they mix constructive and discturctive power, and second i can give you an example very similar which happend to be in many systems, even today many plays 2h/2s as weak 2 suiter, and it happend to be that the 2d can show those two hands + more (strong alternatives) so its bypass the fibonachi limit. again you can say weak 2h/2s are just stupid bids, but fact is they are atleast playable.

[Flame]

I didnt want to get into this but i'll explain what i called "nature of the hands".

The idea is simple, the 1nt showing 1 suiters limit bid is good because the relay bid 2c, is passable, if we look at openers bids after 1nt-2c

Pass= show clubs

2d/2h/2s=show the suit bid

What happend here is we won another bid, the pass, so basically this 1nt 2c can show the same as 1sp-1nt where the 2c is replaced by the pass.

The idea is not new, there are uses in current systems, like the multi i mentioned before or the lebelzol kind of bids,keri's or 2 way stayman 2c, and maybe also Ben's 2c-2M which are passable.

[luke warm]

i've read and reread this thread and thought about it, and i think it has possibilities... i do think you need a strong bid though, other than 2c which works well showing 3 suiters...

 

since so much of my philosophy is geared toward a weak nt, with all the mechanisms afterwards to find almost any fit/strength, it's hard for my mind to envision anything else... this is why weak 2's have gone by the wayside, for me, because the intermediate 2 bids seem more frequent and seem to have a higher payoff.. the downside is obvious...

 

i like the 1 bids being guaranteed canape, which i've come to realize has a lot going for it... 1c=16/17 or 18+... 1d=4+ with 5+ somewhere else, etc... since all are limited strength, it's so much easier to get in and out

 

keep thinking on it, flame... a lot of systems took a decade or more to develop... but if you think it's worth the effort, by all means go for it

[DrTodd13]

It seems to me that there are so many hand types that reserving relatively low level bids like 2♣-2♠ to mean just one thing is necessarily stopping you from describing other hand types. How about this, use 2♣ to show 11-16 with ♣ or ♦ and use 2♥ to show 11-16 with ♥ or ♠. This at least frees up 2♦ and/or 2♠ to show weak two-suiters.

[hrothgar]

It seems to me that there are so many hand types that reserving relatively low level bids like 2♣-2♠ to mean just one thing is necessarily stopping you from describing other hand types. How about this, use 2♣ to show 11-16 with ♣ or ♦ and use 2♥ to show 11-16 with ♥ or ♠. This at least frees up 2♦ and/or 2♠ to show weak two-suiters.

One very important issue regarding system design

 

There is an important realtionship between the strength of an opening bid, the level at which it is shown, and the number of hand types contained therein.

 

The stronger the hand, the more likely it is that our hand + partner's will produce game. Accordingly, with strong hands, the system needs to be optimized towards allowing sufficient room to determine strain without bypassing 3N / 4M.

 

For example, the Frelling Two bid style that I play is workable because the hand strength is sufficiently weak that it will seldom produce game...

 

Personally, I'd be worried about an intermeidate strength 2 bid, particualrly if this could be based on two suited hand patterns. I think that DrTodd's suggestion is suicidial.

[luke warm]

yeah, the 11-16/17 2 bids took the most getting used to... but since i've been playing them i've noticed that hands i now pass with, the weak 2 types, tend to be split badly... maybe i've just imagined it, who knows... but i agree, the higher the bid the fewer meanings it ought to have (unless, like richard says, it's relatively weak)

 

it does make sense to me to have the hand shape shown with the first bid, as long as there's a relatively low level bid that can be used to show strength... it's been nice knowing there's no longer a need for 'bid up the line' crap, the 4/4 fits aren't lost now... there is the one drawback on the 1d/h/s bids - a possible big fit in the 2nd suit can be lost if ops aggressively preempt... but that's the only bad thing i've seen, and it doesn't happen often

 

if i was designing a natural system, say based on 2/1, i'd insist that 1h be 4+ cards, not 5... that way i'd never have to open 1nt with a 5422 hand, playing walsh

[Flame]

About the range, i said the range will be somewhere between 8 and 16, it doesnt have to be strong, and im thinking 8-13, it can even be 8-12.

I dont like Todds idea because this system as you might have seen tries to use the 2 level to help the other bids rather then as a premptive, so i want it to be constructive and really dont like distructives only ideas.

This system use 1nt-2s to show all weak unbalanced hands, leaving the other bids to show the other hands. Oviusly it doesnt show all the hands but it show alot more then any other system i know (i mean alot more contructively)

I read pirenna club last night, its a cool system but they left with 1c and 1d to show almost the same number of hands as we left to show with the exptra spear 1H.

[DrTodd13]

I'm not saying I like the idea of 2C-2S being 11-16 with 6+ but I do know I don't like the idea of wasting all these bids and all this bidding space. Personally, I've had very little problem using the guessing principle in situations like this and I haven't put all that much thought into the follow ups over the suggested 2C and 2H ambiguous bids but I don't think the difficulties would be insurmountable.

 

Look at it this way, you are losing all the preemption you could be getting from weak distributional hands and so what if you can roll them up into 1N, you're still giving opponents all of the two level to interfere.

[hrothgar]

I'm not saying I like the idea of 2C-2S being 11-16 with 6+ but I do know I don't like the idea of wasting all these bids and all this bidding space. Personally, I've had very little problem using the guessing principle in situations like this and I haven't put all that much thought into the follow ups over the suggested 2C and 2H ambiguous bids but I don't think the difficulties would be insurmountable.

 

Look at it this way, you are losing all the preemption you could be getting from weak distributional hands and so what if you can roll them up into 1N, you're still giving opponents all of the two level to interfere.

Believe me, I am NOT suggesting that 1NT = any single suited hand would be better...

 

;-)

[Free]

I think if you really want to compress these bids and sacrifice a natural 1NT, why not use following scheme:

 

1NT = 11-16, 6+ ♣ or ♦

2♦ = 11-16, 6+ ♥ or ♠

 

Use 2♣ and 2M for something else.

[Flame]

I think if you really want to compress these bids and sacrifice a natural 1NT, why not use following scheme:

 

1NT = 11-16, 6+ ♣ or ♦

2♦ = 11-16, 6+ ♥ or ♠

 

Use 2♣ and 2M for something else.

You mean why waste only one bid when you can waste two ?

I really dont understand you.

[Flame]

Its funny you call these bids a waste , as my intentions were just the opposite, the all phylosoffy here is not to waste bids on premptives and distructive, and use it for us, for something that will help to take the presure off the 1 level bids.

But its just our different style, for you bridge is first to make your opponents not find thier bids, for me the first thing is to make my side find the bids.

Your guessing 2c/2h suggested is just a good example.

So in your eyes losing the premptives is a waste, for me using those for more contructive is exactly the opposite, its taking a bid out of the garbage and use it for good perpose. yet i do it with pretty weak hands which will have a distructive effect as well.

[Free]

I think if you really want to compress these bids and sacrifice a natural 1NT, why not use following scheme:

 

1NT = 11-16, 6+ ♣ or ♦

2♦ = 11-16, 6+ ♥ or ♠

 

Use 2♣ and 2M for something else.

You mean why waste only one bid when you can waste two ?

I really dont understand you.

Perhaps you should read the previous posts carefully, then you might start to understand something about my suggestion.

If you want to keep the same accuracy as all 2-level bids seperatly, you'll NEED at least 2 bids. After these enormous explanations about relays and bidding space and stuff, I think it should be clear.

 

However, IF you want the exact same accuracy, you might consider following option (I think it's better than my previous suggestion, and better than Todd's as well):

 

1NT = 11-16, 6+ ♦, ♥ or ♠ (2♣ = relay, 2♦ = P/C)

2♣ = 11-16, 6+ ♣

 

Just for the record: it's not my choice to play such system! You ask for suggestions and opinions, this is it. But since you really don't understand me, I think it might be better for me to just ignore this thread and spend my time on useful things.

Just for the record 2: I wasn't the first person to come up with the idea of using 2 bids for these hands. I don't know how much accuracy in bidding you realy want, but since you want to use all 2-level bids for constructive purposes I think you want to maximize it...

[Flame]

Free your suggests are very welcome, i said i didnt understand you and im sorry i still dont. What i do understand is that because of the limit set by fibo you "know" you cant show all the bids accuretly with only 1nt so you wanted another bid, but as far as i could see you or anyone else for that matter didnt give me any example of a problem with such 1NT,except the one i agree with, it wont be as good competitively. I feel abit like someone who find something great but ppl telling him its not possible without looking at it, just because something previously told them its too good, so i explained why this is not in contradiction to that fibo rule but it didnt help.

[MickyB]

In uncontested auctions, responder not being able to bid a suit naturally without forcing to the 3 or 4 of opener's suit could be a problem. There is also the rare case when you want to play in eg 2♦ opposite diamonds, but 5♣ opposite clubs.

 

Most of the losses would be in contested auctions:

 

The opps jam the auction and you lose your fit.

They have two opportunities to bid a suit - on the first round, showing strength and looking for game, or on the second round, just competing for the part-score.

They also get to bid 2 of a suit over your spade single suited opening bid. Obviously this is the case in standard systems too, but then you have the constructive advantages of the 2 level to work with.

 

I think the idea can work, but you will need to find gains with the other bids. I dislike 2♣ and 2♦ being 5-4 either way around, I would rather it was something like 2♣ = 5♣, 4 of a major suit.

[Flame]

In uncontested auctions, responder not being able to bid a suit naturally without forcing to the 3 or 4 of opener's suit could be a problem. There is also the rare case when you want to play in eg 2♦ opposite diamonds, but 5♣ opposite clubs.

 

Most of the losses would be in contested auctions:

 

The opps jam the auction and you lose your fit.

They have two opportunities to bid a suit - on the first round, showing strength and looking for game, or on the second round, just competing for the part-score.

They also get to bid 2 of a suit over your spade single suited opening bid. Obviously this is the case in standard systems too, but then you have the constructive advantages of the 2 level to work with.

 

I think the idea can work, but you will need to find gains with the other bids. I dislike 2♣ and 2♦ being 5-4 either way around, I would rather it was something like 2♣ = 5♣, 4 of a major suit.

Yes i agree, you wont get 100% power even in uncontested, but you get close to that. In contested you are in a problem, but you have the little advantage that the opponents are in abit of dark.

About the 2 bids, the initial idea was to use it to show 5-4 in a known order, but i thought if the range is not to big, playing it either way can work, this is because in a two level partscore it doesnt matter to much if you know which is the 4 and which is the 5, with 3-3 you will bid 2h and in the worth case play 4-3 major when you have 3-5 minor, at the 3 level or higher you will know which suit as the five level, since after the relay partner will tell you , something like: 2c-2d-2h= 5 card heart, any other = 4 cards heart. 2d-2s-2nt= 5 card heart, any other 4 card hearts.

I dont like the idea of the suit with either major, because partner has a big problem eveluating his hand, say he got 5 card major, if i got a 4 game is possible, if i dont, 3 level might be too high, this is one good point in what richard said, those freling 2 bids are better when game is rare.

[hrothgar]

About the 2 bids, the initial idea was to use it to show 5-4 in a known order, but i thought if the range is not to big, playing it either way can work, this is because in a two level partscore it doesnt matter to much if you know which is the 4 and which is the 5, with 3-3 you will bid 2h and in the worth case play 4-3 major when you have 3-5 minor, at the 3 level or higher you will know which suit as the five level, since after the relay partner will tell you , something like: 2c-2d-2h= 5 card heart, any other = 4 cards heart. 2d-2s-2nt= 5 card heart, any other 4 card hearts.

If you are going to use relays to straighten out the hands, then the best scheme is probably something like the following

 

Assume a 2♦ opening, showing ♥+♦

 

2♥ = Relay and then

 

2♠ = 4 Hearts and longer Diamonds

2NT = 5+ ♥ and 5+ ♦

3♣ = 4♦ and 5+ ♥, High shortage

3♦ = 2=5=4=2 shape

3♥ = 3=5=4=1 shape

3♠ = 2=6=4=1 shape

...

 

Personally, I think that you're going to run into a alot of trouble with these methods.

Most significantly, I think that you are going to have a lot of trouble straighteng out range in addition to shape. With this said and done, if I were trying to design a relay structure arround these principles, I 'd suggest the following

 

3♦ = 6+ Diamonds

3♣ = 6+ Clubs

2NT = 5+ Clubs and 5+ Diamonds

2♠ = 4 Hearts and 5+ Spades

2♥ = 5+ Hearts and (4+ Spades)

2♦ = 2 suited with Diamonds and Hearts

2♣ = Two suited with Clubs and Hearts or three suited with ♣+♥

1NT = 2 suited with Spades and Diamonds OR

2 suited with Spades and Clubs OR

Single suited with Spades

 

This scheme provides a completely symmetric scheme that can be used to show most two suited and single suited hand patterns. Equally significant, the openings are non-forcing. Responder has the option of passing with tolerance in one of opene's suits.

 

There are some exceptions

 

1. There is no opening to show 5/4 or 4/5 with the minors

2. There is no opening to show a single suited hand with 6+ Hearts

3. The 2♣ opening could be based on a 3 suited pattern. If you prefer, you could subsititue a single suited hand with long 6+ Hearts. However, in this case, the 2♣ opening wouldn't promise clubs.

4. Single suited hands with the minors are shown at the three level and should not be resolved using a Symmetric scheme. (I've seen some Aussies playing that 3♣ = 6+ clubs, single suited, 3♦ might be playable)

[Flame]

Thanks, ill look into it, I agree about the range, i might narrow it o something like 8-12 or 9-13, or arange depend on vul.

[hrothgar]

Thanks, ill look into it, I agree about the range, i might narrow it o something like 8-12 or 9-13, or arange depend on vul.

Personally, I think that you'll need a 4 point range - (10-13) maybe (11-14)

Even here, I'd be worried...

[Flame]

Assume a 2♦ opening, showing ♥+♦

 

2♥ = Relay and then

Is it really wise to play the 2h as a relay and no preference ?

Isnt it better to use 2s as a relay ?