2/1 GF or SAYC-style responses to limited 1M opening?

[akhare]

Given the following constraints:

 

• GCC
  
• Limited openings (10-15)
  
• 14-16 NT, with 5M332 systemically opened 1N if in range
  
• 2♣ response canonical GF
  
• Semi-forcing 1N response
  
• 3M preemptive
  
• One 3-level response reserved for a mixed raise
  

 

What would you choose for the 2♦ / 2♥ responses to a limited 5-card major opening?

 

1) GF showing (say) 14+

2) Not GF, showing (say) 11(12+)

 

What would the rest of your response structure look like?

[awm]

This may depend on how you play the 1M-2c sequences. My feeling is that the lighter the minimum for 1M the less immediate GF sequences you want.

 

How about a structure where opener usually bids 2M over and then:

 

2nt = 5+/5+ two suited invite (paradox responses)

3-lower = 5+/5+ GF

3M = GF with good side suit and fit

Jump or reverse = self splinter with great suit

3-suit = natural invite

 

This handles two of the more difficult invites to put thru 1nt (the unbal ones) as well as most of the GF where you don't want to relay or raise right off.

[straube]

Atul, not sure if you know but Meckwell uses 2m as GI+ responses and 2H as GF response. The question we're asking in this thread is backwards. The 2C response leaves the most room for sorting out GI vs GF auctions and the 2H response leaves the least. In a sense, the 2C response is very similar to a semiforcing NT...except that it is forcing. The fact that we're using 2C as GF is a holdover from what we're doing for Midchart because it handles all GF auctions. We don't typically break relay after a 2C response...which is wasteful in a sense...because the 2C response is required to be GF if artificial and because being so (GF) the most efficient thing for captain to do is to continue making S1 responses. But Meckwell use 2C as GI+ and after opener's mostly natural rebids, they use S1 to establish a GF relay. Unfortunately for them, their relay auctions are not as precise as they could be and that's because 1S-2C, 2D as 4+ diamonds is not as loaded as our 1S-2C, 2D sequence. Look btw how Adam has improved upon 1S-2D, 2H. At the same time, he has quite a lot of room after 1S-2C and my guess is that he's replying 2C with hands that we would respond 1N. Like I'd suggest 1N with x Kxx AQxx Kxxxx but I assume he bids 2C.

 

So the GCC being what it is allows for natural and GI+ club responses and it allows opener to rebid howsoever he chooses...even to prepare for a possible relay auction. But responder may initiate that relay at his next bid or depart from it. That's compensation for having to be natural. I think we should use it.

 

I'd like to think about this for the GCC...

 

For 1S....

 

3H-mixed raise

3D-wjs

3C-wjs

2N-limit raise

2S-simple raise

2H-GF 5+

2D-GI+ with 5+ or possible heart canape with GI values (e.g. Kx AKJxxx xxx xx)

.....get Adam's help for continuations based on Imprecision

2C-GI+ with 3+ but could be short with fit for opener's major. possible heart canape with GI values (e.g. Kx AKJxxx xx xxx)

.....use our normal relay structure though we might optimize this for relay breaks. Responder may break relay to show mostly GI club or heart hands

1N-semiforcing, could have GI club hands short in spades, could have weaker hands with 6+ hearts

 

So pondering some things. Like most likely responding 2D and then rebidding 3C would show GI 5/5 minors since GF minors would just respond 2C.

[rhm]

This may depend on how you play the 1M-2c sequences. My feeling is that the lighter the minimum for 1M the less immediate GF sequences you want.

 

How about a structure where opener usually bids 2M over and then:

 

2nt = 5+/5+ two suited invite (paradox responses)

3-lower = 5+/5+ GF

3M = GF with good side suit and fit

Jump or reverse = self splinter with great suit

3-suit = natural invite

 

This handles two of the more difficult invites to put thru 1nt (the unbal ones) as well as most of the GF where you don't want to relay or raise right off.

So what do you do with a strong semi-balanced but not so great one-suiter or a balanced or semi-balanced (5-4) game force hand with a doubleton or singleton in opener's major?

Rebid 3NT on all of them almost irrespective of strength?

What about 5-4-2-2 hands with a weak doubleton in the unbid suit?

 

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

Atul, not sure if you know but Meckwell uses 2m as GI+ responses and 2H as GF response. The question we're asking in this thread is backwards. The 2C response leaves the most room for sorting out GI vs GF auctions and the 2H response leaves the least. In a sense, the 2C response is very similar to a semiforcing NT...except that it is forcing. The fact that we're using 2C as GF is a holdover from what we're doing for Midchart because it handles all GF auctions.

It is of course a triviality to observe that a response of 2♣ leaves more room than any other 2 level response.

You can use this room in any way you like.

However, I have yet to see the response structure, where game and slam bidding will not suffer when GI and GF hands use the same 2/1 start.

This is most obvious when responder has a GI or a GF one-suiter. One rebid has to suffer unless you use a lot of artificiality.

If you have GI hands some sequences must be non forcing thereafter, which of course means strong hands have to do something else.

This invariably not only hurts your slam bidding but also finding the right game.

A typical example is 1♠-2♣-2♥-3NT because 2NT would not be forcing. Opener does not know what to do with 5-5 or 6-4 in the majors.

 

My personal preferences:

 

2♣:game forcing, not promising clubs, but denying a good 5 card diamond suit. Opener has to rebid 2♦ with all balanced or semi-balanced hand. After 2♦, 2♥ (after 1♠) by responder shows a game force with at least 5 hearts.

2♦:game forcing with a good 5 card diamond suit or better

2♥: GI with hearts, not forcing. I do not like to bid 1NT (semi forcing) with game invitational hands holding a heart suit.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[straube]

 

My personal preferences:

 

2♣:game forcing, nor promising clubs, but denying a good 5 card diamond suit. Opener has to rebid 2♦ with all balanced or semi-balanced hand. After 2♦, 2♥ (after 1♠) by responder shows a game force with at least 5 hearts.

2♦:game forcing with a good 5 card diamond suit or better

2♥: GI with hearts, not forcing. I do not like to bid 1NT (semi forcing) with game invitational hands holding a heart suit.

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

1. Your preferences would be fine for Midchart but not GCC. If you respond 2C with Ax AKQxxx Qxxx x then your 2C fails the natural test.

2. We're able to relay after 2C and opener's first rebid. I'm suggesting that we include a few GI hands in that response that are shown by not relaying. When responder wants to GF his first bid is S1. In this respect, we would be similar to what Meckwell are doing.

[rhm]

1. Your preferences would be fine for Midchart but not GCC. If you respond 2C with Ax AKQxxx Qxxx x then your 2C fails the natural test.

I am not an expert for GCC and I admit I do not care since I rarely play in the US.

Nevertheless my understanding is that 2♣ as a game forcing artificial response is allowed as long as you do not play a relay system thereafter.

The GCC is not clear what relay means in this context. Some call Stayman a relay bid.

Taking your example Ax AKQxxx Qxxx x: If I bid 2♣, that is certainly artificial and if I show my hearts over 2♦ (balanced or semi-balanced, call that a default bid like rebidding a major in Lawrence style) and opener continues with natural bids over 2♥ that is not what I would consider a relay system.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[straube]

I am not an expert for GCC and I admit I do not care since I rarely play in the US.

Nevertheless my understanding is that 2♣ as a game forcing artificial response is allowed as long as you do not play a relay system thereafter.

The GCC is not clear what relay means in this context. Some call Stayman a relay bid.

Taking your example Ax AKQxxx Qxxx x: If I bid 2♣, that is certainly artificial and if I show my hearts over 2♦ (balanced or semi-balanced, call that a default bid like rebidding a major in Lawrence style) and opener continues with natural bids over 2♥ that is not what I would consider a relay system.

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

2C as an artificial GF is only legal for the Midchart and it "may not be part of a relay system". I understand why you wouldn't care about US regulations, but the OP is specifically looking for a GCC legal structure.

[straube]

Any suggestions along these lines, Adam?

 

1S-

.....2C-GI+ 3+

..........2D-bal, 4+D or 5+C

...............2H-artificial GF relay

...............2S-GI side diamonds

...............2N-GI w/5+ clubs

...............3C-GI, better clubs

...............3D-?

...............3H-GI canape (6H)

..........2H-4+H

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

...............2N-nf

...............3C-GI clubs

...............3H-nf, likely four hearts

..........2S-4 only clubs (this is a switch)

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

...............3C-nf

...............3H-GI canape (6H)

..........etc-6S and 12+ hcps

 

.....2D-GI+ w/ usually 5 diamonds but can be canape. May be GF but more often GI hands

..........2H-other

...............2S-artificial GF

...............2N-GI

...............3C-GI

...............3D-GI

...............3H-GI canape (6H)

..........2S-4+H

...............2N-GI misfit

...............3C-artificial GF

...............3D-GI

...............3H-nf

..........2N-6S?

..........3C-max fit?

..........3D-min fit?

 

.....2H-GF 5+H

 

.....2S-simple raise

 

.....2N-limit raise

[rhm]

2C as an artificial GF is only legal for the Midchart and it "may not be part of a relay system". I understand why you wouldn't care about US regulations, but the OP is specifically looking for a GCC legal structure.

I looked at http://www.acbl.org/assets/documents/play/Convention-Chart.pdf

 

There it says under

 

ACBL GENERAL CONVENTION CHART

 

* * unless specifically listed below, methods are disallowed * *

 

RESPONSES AND REBIDS

 

3.CONVENTIONAL RESPONSES WHICH GUARANTEE GAME FORCING OR BETTER VALUES. May NOT be part of a relay system.

 

It says under

 

ACBL MID-CHART

 

**unless specifically listed below, and (for 6-20) on the ACBL Defense Database site, methods are disallowed**

 

1. All of the ACBL General Convention Chart.

2. Relay (tell me more) systems that promise game-forcing values.

 

What do I misinterpret?

 

Rainer Herrmann

[glen]

... What do I misinterpret?

Nothing, you are correct

 

One scheme:

1M-2♣: any GF without 3+ in M

1M-2♦: any GF with 3+ in M

1♠-2♥: 6+♥s, invitational or constructive

[straube]

I looked at http://www.acbl.org/assets/documents/play/Convention-Chart.pdf

 

There it says under

 

ACBL GENERAL CONVENTION CHART

 

* * unless specifically listed below, methods are disallowed * *

 

RESPONSES AND REBIDS

 

3.CONVENTIONAL RESPONSES WHICH GUARANTEE GAME FORCING OR BETTER VALUES. May NOT be part of a relay system.

 

It says under

 

ACBL MID-CHART

 

**unless specifically listed below, and (for 6-20) on the ACBL Defense Database site, methods are disallowed**

 

1. All of the ACBL General Convention Chart.

2. Relay (tell me more) systems that promise game-forcing values.

 

What do I misinterpret?

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

You're right about that. Sorry.

[straube]

Nothing, you are correct

 

One scheme:

1M-2♣: any GF without 3+ in M

1M-2♦: any GF with 3+ in M

1♠-2♥: 6+♥s, invitational or constructive

 

That's interesting. What are the followups, especially for 1M-2C? Also, how do you handle GI with a minor?

[blackshoe]

The GCC is not clear what relay means in this context. Some call Stayman a relay bid.

From the ACBL Alert Regulation: "Relay: A bid which does not guarantee any specific suit; partner is requested to make the next-step bid (usually) or make another descriptive bid if appropriate (e.g., a diamond bid which usually shows hearts but may not have hearts in some cases)".

 

Perhaps not as helpful as it might be, but it's better than nothing. By this definition Stayman is a relay.

[akhare]

From the ACBL Alert Regulation: "Relay: A bid which does not guarantee any specific suit; partner is requested to make the next-step bid (usually) or make another descriptive bid if appropriate (e.g., a diamond bid which usually shows hearts but may not have hearts in some cases)".

 

Perhaps not as helpful as it might be, but it's better than nothing. By this definition Stayman is a relay.

 

At the risk of derailing the original post:

 

 

1. It's clear that a 2-level artificial GF response to 1M is 100% GCC legal
   
2. The question is whether responder's subsequent artificial bids can be classified as a "relay system".
   

 

For example, after 1♠ - 2♣ (artificial GF) - 2♥ (natural) would a artificial 2♠ (further ask) be considered as a relay? If not, what is responder allowed to bid that *would* make it GCC legal?

[awm]

The relays have to start before opener rebid for it to be a relay system. So if 2c is artificial GF and openers next bid is not a nearly-auto 2d you are fine.

 

In fact for my original post I kind of assumed you were playing 2c as gf with possible relays to follow. If this is the case you can handle 5422 type hands easily enough via that path, so the problem hands are unbal invites where you do not want to be passed in 1nt and unbal GF types where responder really would rather show than ask...

 

Of course you could also go to an "all 2/1s natural inv+" approach as Sam and I do, or to a mid-chart transfer based approach.

[steve2005]

Given the following constraints:

 

• 2♣ response canonical GF
   
  

 

 

What does canonical GF mean?

[blackshoe]

At the risk of derailing the original post:

 

1. It's clear that a 2-level artificial GF response to 1M is 100% GCC legal
   
2. The question is whether responder's subsequent artificial bids can be classified as a "relay system".
   

 

For example, after 1♠ - 2♣ (artificial GF) - 2♥ (natural) would a artificial 2♠ (further ask) be considered as a relay? If not, what is responder allowed to bid that *would* make it GCC legal?

 

The relays have to start before opener rebid for it to be a relay system. So if 2c is artificial GF and openers next bid is not a nearly-auto 2d you are fine.

 

In fact for my original post I kind of assumed you were playing 2c as gf with possible relays to follow. If this is the case you can handle 5422 type hands easily enough via that path, so the problem hands are unbal invites where you do not want to be passed in 1nt and unbal GF types where responder really would rather show than ask...

 

Of course you could also go to an "all 2/1s natural inv+" approach as Sam and I do, or to a mid-chart transfer based approach.

2♣ is a relay. If you disagree, go back and read the definition I posted. Given 2♣ is a relay, an artificial 2♠ as a further ask (also a relay) makes responder's two bids a sequence of relays. The sequence started with 2♣, responder's first bid, which was before opener's rebid, so this is a relay system, and is not legal under the GCC.

[awm]

2♣ is a relay. If you disagree, go back and read the definition I posted. Given 2♣ is a relay, an artificial 2♠ as a further ask (also a relay) makes responder's two bids a sequence of relays. The sequence started with 2♣, responder's first bid, which was before opener's rebid, so this is a relay system, and is not legal under the GCC.

 

The 2♣ bid is not a relay. While it doesn't show a specific suit, this is not sufficient to be a relay (else virtually all artificial bids are relays). The key in the definition you gave is: partner is requested to make the next-step bid (usually) or make another descriptive bid if appropriate; here opener is just making a natural rebid and is hardly "requested to make the next-step bid."

[straube]

1S

 

.....1N-semiforcing

 

.....2C-3+ clubs, GI+, could be short with big fit or no 5-cd red suit

..........2D-bal or 4+ diamonds or 5+ clubs

...............2H-gf relay

...............2S-nf side diamonds

...............2N-nf other (could be hearts)

...............3C-nf clubs

..........2H-hearts

...............2S-gf relay

...............2N-nf

...............3C-nf clubs

...............3H-nf hearts

..........2S-4 clubs

...............2N-gf relay

...............3C-clubs

..........etc-gf, 6 spades and 12+

 

.....2D-5+ diamonds, GI+

..........2H-other

...............2S-artificial gf

...............2N-nf, 4 of round suit

...............3C-nf, 5 clubs

...............3D-nf, 6 diamonds

..........2S-4 hearts

...............2N-nf

...............3C-artificial gf

..........2N-6 spades, gf

..........3C-5 clubs, gf

..........3D-fit, gf

..........3H-5/5, gf

..........3S-?

 

.....2H-5+ hearts, gf

 

.....2S-simple raise

 

.....2N-limit raise, 3+

 

.....3C-WJS

 

.....3D-mixed raise

 

.....3H-GI six hearts

 

.....3S-weak raise

[akhare]

The relays have to start before opener rebid for it to be a relay system. So if 2c is artificial GF and openers next bid is not a nearly-auto 2d you are fine.

 

In fact for my original post I kind of assumed you were playing 2c as gf with possible relays to follow. If this is the case you can handle 5422 type hands easily enough via that path, so the problem hands are unbal invites where you do not want to be passed in 1nt and unbal GF types where responder really would rather show than ask...

 

Of course you could also go to an "all 2/1s natural inv+" approach as Sam and I do, or to a mid-chart transfer based approach.

 

Yes indeed, the intent is to play 2♣ as stated above. Pard is leery about its GCC legality, but my interpretation is that it's perfectly legitimate.

 

On a related note, since opener's 2N rebid in your methods promises 6+ in the major with 12+, how does that affect the range for the 2♥ / 2♠ preempts? Do you play something like a 5-10 range, with single suited 11 counts opting to open 1M or 2M depending on the rest of the hand?

[awm]

Our official "weak two" range is 5-11. 11-counts sometimes upgrade into 1M. We will also occasionally open 1M with a 6-4 hand in the 8-10 range (especially holding both majors).

 

As far as I can tell, the biggest problem hands for an approach with GF 2/1s and semi-forcing NT are:

 

1. Invite with a long suit. These can make game where partner is passing the 1NT response on a balanced hand.

2. Less than invite with a long suit. These often struggle in 1NT when a much better partial is available.

3. Invite with a 5/5 hand. These often struggle to reach the best partial as well as possible missing game in hearts on 1♠-1NT-Pass.

4. Less than invite with a 5/5 hand (much as case 2).

 

Many people use an immediate jump shift to handle one of 1 or 2. Most methods with INV+ 2/1 bids have issues with 3 and 4 also so it's often no swing.

 

If adopting a style where 2/1 is not always GF, one of the first things I'd look at is my handling of these four types (where I'd want to see improvement to compensate for the issues I'm introducing on slam bidding).

 

--------------------------->

 

It may be worth explaining Sam and my general approach here because it's very different from what other people do. Our reasoning is that we open quite a bit lighter than most 2/1 GF players (many 10s, some 8s and 9s). Our range is also pretty wide for a "limited opening" system (some 8s up to most 15s). For this reason, invitational hands become extremely common, with a range of basically 10-15. Because these hands are quite a bit more common than the non-fitting GF hands (good 15 or more) we wanted a structure that caters well to the invites. In addition we have the following issue:

 

Suppose the auction starts 1♠-1NT-2♦ and I hold ♠x ♥AJxx ♦KQxx ♣xxxx. I'd really like to be able to raise to 3♦, because there are quite a few opener hands with 5/5 shape (say ♠AKxxx ♥xx ♦Axxxx ♣x) or with max values (say ♠KQxxx ♥KQx ♦AJxx ♣x) where game is really good. However, if I would also raise to 3♦ holding ♠x ♥AKxx ♦KQxx ♣Qxxx (which is not really a GF since we open nearly all 5-4 tens and some 9s) this makes it quite hard for partner to make a correct decision.

 

What we decided to do is to have two different invites. One is the "weak invite" of good 10-12, which is basically the normal invite that 2/1 players use. The other is the "sound invite" of 13-bad 15, which should be accepted by any sound opening hand. Obviously both invites can be adjusted somewhat for shape, but having two ways to invite has helped us quite a bit. We distinguish these over 1♠ by letting the weak invite start with 1NT whereas the strong invite starts with a 2/1 call. Obviously this costs us on non-fitting slam sequences, but the frequency of slam tries on non-fitting hands opposite our opening range is pretty low.

[straube]

I'm used to thinking of a relay bid as the bid that relayer or captain makes. Sounds like the ACBL doesn't.

 

Relay: A bid which does not guarantee any specific suit; partner is requested to make the next-step bid (usually) or make another descriptive bid if appropriate (e.g.' date=' a diamond bid which usually shows hearts but may not have hearts in some cases)[/quote']

 

So a relay bid is a bid that relayee or the slave hand makes. For example 1S-2C, 2D by us shows a balanced hand or a side minor. The 2D bid is the first relay bid. Not 2C whether 2C is natural or not. In a sense opener is requesting responder to rebid 2H so that he can separate whether balanced or which minor.

 

 

A sequence of relay bids is defined as a system if' date=' after an opening of one of a suit, it is started prior to opener’s rebid.[/quote']

 

So in this example we open 1S and do not make our first relay bid until opener's rebid. Hence this is not a relay system.

 

But I still have trouble with...

 

CONVENTIONAL RESPONSES WHICH GUARANTEE GAME

FORCING OR BETTER VALUES. May NOT be part of a relay

system

 

ok. My interpretation is this. It might be legal for 1S-2C to be gf and promise 5 hearts or 4+ diamonds (for example). If opener was normally supposed to rebid 2D and become captain then responder's first bid would count as the first relay bid and a series of inquiries by opener would constitute a system.

 

If so...how dumb. How dumb to bar something as stupid as that.

 

Do I understand this right Adam?

[rbforster]

What we decided to do is to have two different invites. One is the "weak invite" of good 10-12, which is basically the normal invite that 2/1 players use. The other is the "sound invite" of 13-bad 15, which should be accepted by any sound opening hand. Obviously both invites can be adjusted somewhat for shape, but having two ways to invite has helped us quite a bit. We distinguish these over 1♠ by letting the weak invite start with 1NT whereas the strong invite starts with a 2/1 call. Obviously this costs us on non-fitting slam sequences, but the frequency of slam tries on non-fitting hands opposite our opening range is pretty low.

I agree that this is a really good idea when playing a wide-ranging light opening system. I played 8-15 as well, with some or lots of distribution required on the 8-9 end, and it helped a lot to squeeze in two different invites on as many sequences as possible. XYZ, custom 2m responses to openers, etc, all helped.

[Free]

From the ACBL Alert Regulation: "Relay: A bid which does not guarantee any specific suit; partner is requested to make the next-step bid (usually) or make another descriptive bid if appropriate (e.g., a diamond bid which usually shows hearts but may not have hearts in some cases)".

This is a very strange definition. It seems to have it backwards since it's the relayer that usually bids the next-step bid and responder has all kinds of responses available. It also means that any puppet that doesn't promise any suit is considered a relay (for example 1X-1Y-1Z-2♣ playing XYZ is a relay). And what is the definition of "usually"? Very very weird! How can anyone build a GCC legal system with definitions like this? :blink: