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

[straube]

We've settled on 1M-2C as gf. We practiced 1S-2H and 1S-2D as GI nf and I liked the 1S-2H but the 1S-2D seemed slightly less frequent for some reason. More than that, I've been interested in awm's idea of having a light GI (1N) and a heavy GI (2/1). I'm thinking that 2D should be a heavy invitation. The 1N response might include a few heavy invitations (clubs primarily), but would usually be light invitations.

 

1S-2D, GI with 3+ diamonds, could be canape with longer clubs, nf but usually not passed

 

.....P-minimum, 4+ diamonds

.....2H-natural, forcing for one round

..........2S-nf, 2-fit

...............2N-preference

...............3C-artificial GF, checking on hearts and club stopper

...............3D-5440

...............3H-fifth heart, nf but open to 4H

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

...............like for 2S

..........3C-canape, six clubs

..........3D-six diamonds

..........3H-minimum, fit

.....2S-six spades, not maximum but responder should raise with any 2-fit

..........P-no 2-fit

..........2N-probably void

..........3C-canape

..........3D-six diamonds

..........3S-minimum 2-fit

.....2N-other, 0-3 diamonds, minimum

..........3C-canape

..........3D-six diamonds

.....3C-minimum, 5 clubs

.....3D-4+ diamonds, not minimum

.....3H-GF, five clubs

.....3S-GF, six spades

.....3N-GF other

 

so some judgment is involved. We're hurt a bit i not having a natural 2C response for GI+ hands, but this solves for the most part the difficulty of 13 opposite 13 not getting to game.

[straube]

This structure gives up on 4/4 heart fits when we don't have enough oomph for game, but it solves a lot of other problems...

 

1S-

.....2C-GF relay

.....2D-GI-3+ diamonds, nf

.....2H-GI 6 hearts

.....2S-raise

.....2N-limit

.....3C-WJS

.....3D-WJS

.....3H-mixed

 

Now for 1S-2D

 

.....P-4D, minimum

.....2H-3+ hearts, forcing

..........2S-2-fit

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

..........2N-other, may have four hearts

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

..........3C-4D/6C

..........3D-6D

..........3H-5H

..........3S-4H/6C

.....2S-6 spades, not 4 hearts, not max

..........2N-void

..........3C-4D/6C

..........3D-6D

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

..........3S-2-fit

.....2N-not 6S, not 3H, not 5C, not 4D

..........3C-5 clubs

..........3D-6D

.....3C-5C, minimum

.....3D-5D, minimum

.....3H-5C, maximum

.....3S-6S, maximum

.....3N-maximum, other

 

and 1S-1N, 2C

.....2D-diamonds, weak

.....2H-hearts, weak

.....2S-preference

.....2N-strong invite

.....3C-light invite

.....3D-strong invite, fitting clubs

.....3H-5H/4+C, strong invite

[straube]

So partner wants 1S-3C as GI natural. Maybe he's right.

 

Maybe 1S-2N can be a heavy invite with a 2-fit and four or five hearts and four or five clubs. 3D can check back for five

 

1S-2N

.....3C-to play

.....3D-checkback for majors

..........3H-five hearts

...............3S-6 spades

..........3S-2 spades, 4 hearts

.....3H-to play

.....3S-to play

 

I think now 1N cannot have a heavy invite

[glen]

That's interesting. What are the followups, especially for 1M-2C? ...

Various possible, a simple one:

After 1M-2♣:

2♦: denies 6+M, 4+OM, 5-5+, asks type of GF:

-- 2♥: ♣s

-- 2♠: ♦s

-- 2NT: balanced

-- 3♣: 5+♥s if 1♠-2♣;-2♦-3♣

2♥/♠: natural

2NT: 5+♦s

3♣: 5+♣s

 

... how do you handle GI with a minor?

The usual options in 2/1 GF, either 1M-3♣/♦ are invites or use 1NT forcing/semi-forcing at the price of a wide ranging minor suit rebid

[straube]

Thanks Glen.

[straube]

1H-2D four+ diamonds, nf, could have longer clubs, 0-2 hearts

 

.....P-minimum, fit

.....2H-any minimum

..........P-two hearts or 3154

..........2S-two hearts, possible clubs

...............2N-no fit for clubs

....................3C-club canape

...............3C-fit for clubs

....................3D-sorry, just diamonds

...............3H-six hearts

..........2N-short hearts, at least 4D/5C

...............P-no fit

...............3m-fit

...............3H-prefers hearts

..........3C-short hearts, club canape

..........3D-short hearts, diamonds

.....2S-6 hearts, non-minimum

..........natural

..........3H-2-fit, minimum

.....2N-clubs, forcing

.....3C-five clubs, minimum

.....3D-4-fit, forcing

.....3H-minimum 5S/6H

.....3S-forcing 5S/6H

 

1H-2N, LR

1H-3C, GI natural

1H-3D, mixed raise

[akhare]

This structure gives up on 4/4 heart fits when we don't have enough oomph for game, but it solves a lot of other problems...

 

1S-

.....2C-GF relay

.....2D-GI-3+ diamonds, nf

.....2H-GI 6 hearts

.....2S-raise

.....2N-limit

.....3C-WJS

.....3D-WJS

.....3H-mixed

 

Now for 1S-2D

 

.....P-4D, minimum

.....2H-3+ hearts, forcing

..........2S-2-fit

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

..........2N-other, may have four hearts

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

..........3C-4D/6C

..........3D-6D

..........3H-5H

..........3S-4H/6C

.....2S-6 spades, not 4 hearts, not max

..........2N-void

..........3C-4D/6C

..........3D-6D

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

..........3S-2-fit

.....2N-not 6S, not 3H, not 5C, not 4D

..........3C-5 clubs

..........3D-6D

.....3C-5C, minimum

.....3D-5D, minimum

.....3H-5C, maximum

.....3S-6S, maximum

.....3N-maximum, other

 

I think that this can be tweaked a little more to make it slightly less complex. How about using the proposed 1♥ - 2♦ structure for 1♠ as well? The idea is that 2♥ would be 5+ and would be much more frequent than the 6+ GI hand.

 

After 1♠ - 2♦, opener's 2♥ can be used for minimum hands that may have 4+♥.

[straube]

1S-2D (3+ diamonds, GI, nf)

.....P-4 diamonds, minimum

.....2H-3+ hearts, forcing

..........2S-2-fit

...............2N-4 hearts, minimum

..........2N-misfit, 4+D

...............3C-artficial GF

....................3D-waiting

....................3H-4 hearts

...............3D-e.g. 5341

...............3H-5S/5H, nf

...............3S-6S/4H, f

..........3C-4D/6C

..........3D-6D

..........3H-5H

.....2S-6 spades, not maximum

..........P-short

..........2N-5 hearts

..........3C-4D/6C

..........3D-6D

..........3S-2-fit

.....2N-other

..........3C-4D/6C

..........3D-6D

.....3C-5C, minimum

.....3D-diamod fit, forcing to 3N or 4D

.....3H-clubs, GF

.....3S-six spades, GF

.....3N-to play

 

1S-2H-GI 6 hearts

 

1S-2N-GI, 4-5 hearts, 4+ clubs, 2 or fewer spades and diamonds

.....3C-to play

.....3D-artificial GF

..........3H-5 hearts

...............3S-6 spades

..........3S-2 spades

.....3H-to play

.....3S-to play

 

1S-3C-GI clubs

 

1S-3D-LR

 

1S-3H-MR

 

1S-3S-WR

 

Now for 1S-1N....

 

.....2C-4+ not min 5224

.....2D-4+ not min 5242

.....2H-4+ not min 5422

.....2S-6S

.....2N-6S, max, poor suit

.....3m-5S/6m, max

.....3H-6S/5H, max

.....3S-6S, max, good suit

 

and 1H-1N...

.....2S-6H

..........2N-short hearts

..........3m-6-cd minor

..........3H-2-fit

.....2N-4S/6H, max

.....3m-5H/6m, max

.....3H-5S/6H, not minimum

.....3S-5S/6H, maximum

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[awm]

Just out of question:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s84h5dat9743cak65&n=sak965h986dk862c8&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1s(10-15%205+%21s)p2d(3+%21d%20GI%20NF)pp(4%21d%20min)p]266|200[/hv]

 

Assess the blame for playing an excellent slam at the two-level.

[straube]

Just out of question:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s84h5dat9743cak65&n=sak965h986dk862c8&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1s(10-15%205+%21s)p2d(3+%21d%20GI%20NF)pp(4%21d%20min)p]266|200[/hv]

 

Assess the blame for playing an excellent slam at the two-level.

 

 

1S-2D

2H-2N 3+H, misfit (could present this as just diamonds)

3D-etc 5341

 

I'm sure hands will fall through the cracks. This structure doesn't cater particularly to GI club hands or GI minor suited hands at all for that matter. We like having our GF relay auctions and we have to pay a price for that. We wouldn't have to pay such a high price if our 2C bid was not necessarily game-forcing so that's a legal cost. I'm liking how this works in the main and Atul and I tested it and it seemed to do pretty well.

 

Here's the breakdown for 100 hands that held 2 or fewer spades by GI responses...

 

2D-79

2H-10

2N-8

3C-3

 

 

Another sample of 100 hands I tallied just for 2H responses yielded 15.

[akhare]

1S-2D

2H-2N 3+H, misfit (could present this as just diamonds)

3D-etc 5341

 

I'm sure hands will fall through the cracks. This structure doesn't cater particularly to GI club hands or GI minor suited hands at all for that matter. We like having our GF relay auctions and we have to pay a price for that. We wouldn't have to pay such a high price if our 2C bid was not necessarily game-forcing so that's a legal cost. I'm liking how this works in the main and Atul and I tested it and it seemed to do pretty well.

 

Here's the breakdown for 100 hands that held 2 or fewer spades by GI responses...

 

2D-79

2H-10

2N-8

3C-3

 

 

Another sample of 100 hands I tallied just for 2H responses yielded 15.

 

What were the constraints on the GI hands? I still think that it's worthwhile to look at 2H with 5+ and a heavy invite.

 

Also, it's unclear whether it's necessary to stop on a dime with NF 2D / 2H responses. Even assuming opener has a balanced 10 count, there should be sufficient strength to make some part score most of the times.

 

The idea of using canapé is clever, but by forcing 2D to be 3+ to make room for a rarer GI hand with 6H seems misplaced to me.

[straube]

The only constraint was 0-2 spades. I did zero hand evaluation (had it set at 12-13 but might as well have been 0-37) and sorted the responses by pattern.

[akhare]

The only constraint was 0-2 spades. I did zero hand evaluation (had it set at 12-13 but might as well have been 0-37) and sorted the responses by pattern.

The range of interest is 11 - 13. Most 14+ hands will GF anyway and the real question is whether 2D should be forcing for one round. In fact, you can probably make the case for a 3+ response by making it forcing for one round and 2H NF.

 

Using 2C comes at the cost of missing occasional superior part scores in say 2M, but I think that both 2D and 2H as forcing for one round should be evaluated as part of a comparative analysis.

[straube]

ok. I looked at a few hands and you seemed to be right. So...

 

1S-2H

.....P-minimum, 2-hearts

.....2S-6 spades

.....2N-any minimum

 

now the question is how to proceed with GF hands. I think some artificiality is called for at the 3-level. We need a checkback for the majors, certainly and ways to show minors as well.

 

This does take the pressure off of 2N. I suppose it would be GI with 4H and 5+C

[awm]

This seems to cover most everything in response to 1♠:

 

1NT = one of (1) weak misfitting hand willing to pass opener's rebid (2) any "weak invite" without a fit (3) "sound invite" with 4-5♣

2♣ = GF relay

2♦ = sound invite or some minimum GF hands with 4+♦, F1

2♥ = sound invite or some minimum GF hands with 5+♥, F1

2NT = sound invite 6+♣

3x = weak natural

 

1♠ - 1NT - 2♣ (pass only if 5(332) and rejecting sound invite):

... Pass = weak misfitting hand

... 2NT = light invite with 4-5♣

... 3♣ = sound invite with clubs (if partner has only three clubs he's accepting anyway)

... Other bids = light invite

 

1♠ - 1NT - 2Red:

... Pass = weak misfitting hand

... 2NT = sound invite with clubs

... Other non-jump = light invite natural

... sound invite including 4♥ forces to game opposite opener's 2♥ rebid (upgrade for major fit)

 

1♠ - 2♦:

... 2♥ = relay

-----> 2♠ = doubleton, sound invite like 2452 or 2254 or 2353

-----> 2NT = short spades with 1444 or 1453 or 1354 etc invite

-----> 3♣ = 5/5 minors invite

-----> 3♦ = 6+♦ sound invite

-----> 3♥ = 4-6 or more shape min GF (don't want to relay with this much shape)

-----> 3♠ = GF "picture" hand

... 2♠ = 4+♥

-----> 2NT = balanced or 1354-ish

-----> 3♣ = 5/5 invite

-----> 3♦ = 6+♦ sound invite

-----> 3♥ = GF (4-4 major fit is an upgrade)

-----> 3♠ = GF "picture" hand

... 2NT+ = GF (max) hands of various description, perhaps 2NT = 6+♠ and others natural

 

1♠ - 2♥:

... 2♠ = relay, min hand or fairly balanced

-----> 2NT = flat or short spades, not 5/5

-----> 3m = 5/5 invite (NF)

-----> 3♥ = 6+♥ sound invite

-----> 3♠ = GF "picture" hand

-----> 4m = self splinter with great hearts

... Others = natural, GF

[straube]

First off...Atul, I really think you need to cave on the range for our weak two bids. It would be very helpful if they were stronger. If you think about it...1S-1N, 2S wastes an awful lot of bidding space to show only 1 extra card. It's a loser. If opener's rebid of spades showed a 12 ct, we could effectively enter a GF whenever responder bids 2D.

 

I was coming to the same conclusion as Adam about 1S-2D rebids...

 

2H-relay

2S-4 hearts

2N-6 spades

 

makes a lot of sense at first glance.

 

But we'd like to play 1N semiforcing, not forcing...and there's a very nice advantage if it can deny a heavy invite at the same time. It means that opener may pass 1N more frequently. I also like 1S-2H as nf if it can be invitational.

 

Well, I'll have to study this a bit more. Thanks for your time Adam. I like a lot of it.

[straube]

ok. It's growing on me. I missed that you're using a semiforcing NT. I know your preference is for 2H to be forcing but I'm not seeing it. Are you very sure that you're right on this point? I would really like to be able to stop in 2H and I'm quite happy relaying with the minimum GF hands. I just haven't seen a problem doing so.

 

Can't really move forward until I hear back about our weak 2 range. Prefer 6-11.

[straube]

I think awm pretty much solved this for us.

 

If weak 2s are 6-11, then...

 

1S-2H nf invite

.....P-2-fit

.....2S-weakness signal, denies 5th spade, denies 2 hearts

..........P-2-fit

.........2N-other

...............3m-5-cd suit

.........3m-5-cd suit

.........3H-suit can play opposite shortness

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

.....3m-4+, gf

.....3H-minimum, 3-fit

 

 

anything else better?

[akhare]

Yes...Adam's suggestions look very good. However, I am still not convinced that 2H needs be to NF.

 

The biggest problem with is that it forces 2♥ to be 6+ cards, which significantly reduces its frequency and forces 2♦ to go through all sorts of contortions (like having a 5 card ♥ suit on the side).

 

The ability to stop in 2♥ simply isn't worth the tradeoff IMO. For example, consider an auction like 1♠ - 2♦ - (5♣) at unfavorable vulnerability. What does X by responder mean here if it's possible to have 5♥ on the side?

 

 

There no problem with a stated 6-11 range for preempts as long it doesn't preclude opening say AJTXXX, KQTXXX, etc. with 2M at the right vulnerability.

 

By the same token, it's important to exercise judgment while opening hands on the upper end of the range with 2M at favorable, because responder will give opener a lot of leeway for the 2M opening.

[akhare]

Deleted double post.

[rhm]

Just out of question:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s84h5dat9743cak65&n=sak965h986dk862c8&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1s(10-15%205+%21s)p2d(3+%21d%20GI%20NF)pp(4%21d%20min)p]266|200[/hv]

 

Assess the blame for playing an excellent slam at the two-level.

System agreements.

It shows the flaw in the idea of differentiating strength precisely at the cost of fuzzy distributional information.

What is the point of making a non forcing, game invitational bid of 2♦ with 3 cards in diamonds?

I rather bid a non forcing 1NT with 3 diamonds, strength unclear.

 

Whether 2♦ is played as game forcing, forcing or game invitational but non-forcing, it should show in my opinion a real diamond suit, or some other hard and useful distributional information at the expense of a game forcing 2♣ response.

A 2♣ response can be fuzzy about distribution, precisely because it is game forcing.

It is better to leave strength imprecise than distribution.

That is the main reason, why often only balanced hands can define their strength in a narrow range.

If both hands are minimum for bidding on, you overbid but may get lucky. (suits break and/or finesses work)

If you miss your fit or like in this case remain unaware of it, you are almost always in trouble, because the trick taking power of the 2 hands can vary much more.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[Zelandakh]

Have posted it before but just in case you have forgotten it:-

 

1♥

==

1♠ = invite or better (~11+)

1NT = weak with 4+ spades, NF

2m = weak, natural, <4 spades, NF

2♥ = weak, nat, NF

2♠ and up = 4+ hearts

 

 

After 1♥ - 1♠

==

1NT = min without 4 spades (now 2♣ = art GF and 2♦ thru 3♣ = nat invites)

2♣ = 4 spades (now 2♦ = art GF and 2♥ thru 3♦ = nat invites)

2♦ and up = GF

 

 

Note that 1♥ - 1♠; 1NT/2♣ - 2♥ acts as a limited form of Drury here, which is a nice feature for a light opening system. It also allows you to stop very quickly when Responder has a weak hand putting great pressure on 4th seat to do something.

 

On the legality, well I would say that this fails but Adam has pointed out that it is ok for the way the ACBL defines things providing you are careful with the follow-ups not to run afoul of the relay system clause.

[straube]

Have posted it before but just in case you have forgotten it:-

 

1♥

==

1♠ = invite or better (~11+)

1NT = weak with 4+ spades, NF

2m = weak, natural, <4 spades, NF

2♥ = weak, nat, NF

2♠ and up = 4+ hearts

 

 

After 1♥ - 1♠

==

1NT = min without 4 spades (now 2♣ = art GF and 2♦ thru 3♣ = nat invites)

2♣ = 4 spades (now 2♦ = art GF and 2♥ thru 3♦ = nat invites)

2♦ and up = GF

 

 

Note that 1♥ - 1♠; 1NT/2♣ - 2♥ acts as a limited form of Drury here, which is a nice feature for a light opening system. It also allows you to stop very quickly when Responder has a weak hand putting great pressure on 4th seat to do something.

 

On the legality, well I would say that this fails but Adam has pointed out that it is ok for the way the ACBL defines things providing you are careful with the follow-ups not to run afoul of the relay system clause.

 

Not legal in ACBL-land for GCC. My current understanding of relay systems is that this is legal for Midchart because it allows all constructive responses and an artificial 1S response as GI+ is not defined as a relay bid (see prior post). Aiming to have something legal for both charts.

[Zelandakh]

Having established the GF, you do not have to play relays for the resulting auction. Then it is (arguably) legal, depending on who you get as TD.

[straube]

Yes...Adam's suggestions look very good. However, I am still not convinced that 2H needs be to NF.

 

The biggest problem with is that it forces 2♥ to be 6+ cards, which significantly reduces its frequency and forces 2♦ to go through all sorts of contortions (like having a 5 card ♥ suit on the side).

 

The ability to stop in 2♥ simply isn't worth the tradeoff IMO. For example, consider an auction like 1♠ - 2♦ - (5♣) at unfavorable vulnerability. What does X by responder mean here if it's possible to have 5♥ on the side?

 

 

There no problem with a stated 6-11 range for preempts as long it doesn't preclude opening say AJTXXX, KQTXXX, etc. with 2M at the right vulnerability.

 

By the same token, it's important to exercise judgment while opening hands on the upper end of the range with 2M at favorable, because responder will give opener a lot of leeway for the 2M opening.

 

I'm suggesting that we respond 2H with as few as 5 hearts now but make the response non-forcing. If we also up our 2M range it makes opener's rebids much easier.

 

1S-2H

.....P-2 hearts minimum

.....2S-0-1 heart, minimum, only 5 spades

.........P-2 spades

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

...............3m-5+

.....2N-6 spades, GF

 

Now opener always has a sensible action after 2H. Otherwise what does he do with Axxxx x xx AQxxx ? I mean if opener could have a bland 10 ct with six spades, then I imagine a 2S rebid would be right for that and 2N would be right for this. With this suggestion, he first rebids 2S to deny a sixth spade and if patner rebids 2N indicating spade shortness, he shows the clubs.

 

Actually 7-11 would be better but I don't want to get too hung up on hcps. Certainly you'd preempt with AQxxxx and out; if your points at the low end are concentrated in your suit then it's worth getting that message across but so of. Certainly you'd open 1S with AJTxxx x KQTxxx.

 

Finding a 6-2 heart fit is rather difficult. Let's say 1S-2H were forcing. Then we could...

 

.....2S-0-1 heart, minimum, only 5 spades

.....2N-2 hearts, minimum, only 5 spades

.....3C-GF 6 spades?

.....3D-GF diamonds?

.....3H-minimum fit?

.....3S-GF clubs?

 

Thoughts? I don't like it.

 

If 2H is nf then we get an extra bid to "show" the doubleton which is pass. We lose out on games where responder just wants a 6-2 fit but we stay at the 2-level more often and avoid the dangerous three level.

 

So Adam's been a big help so far and I know he favors 2H as forcing. Does he think passing with a doubleton is very wrong or just not to his taste? Using...

 

1S-2H

.....P-minimum, 2-fit

.....2S-minimum, 5 spades, 0-1 heart

.....2N-6 spades, GF

.....3C-natural, GF

.....3D-natural, GF

.....3H-minimum, fit

 

I don't want to be in game every time we find an 8-cd major suit fit, but I want as many of our 8-cd major suit fits to be announced as much as reasonably possible (knowing that I'm missing some 6-2 heart fits with this scheme).