2m structure

[straube]

Some friends of mine are looking for help with their 2m structure (natural 10-15). Their 2m opening promises a 5+ cd minor and denies a 4-cd major. 2m can include 5m4m22 and 5m4m31 and 2C handles 10-12 with 5m5m. Their 2N opening is 13-15 with 5m5m.

 

So I know we've discussed similar structures before but I'd appreciate suggestions or links.

[PrecisionL]

I play something similar in our strong club system.

 

We use conditional transfers over 2 clubs & opener accepts with 2 or 3-cd support. 2NT is 0-1 cd support and maximum, 3 clubs = 0-1 cd support & minimum.

 

3M response = good 5+ cd suit & club support.

3 clubs is a constructive raise.

 

Similar scheme over an opening 2 Diamond, but no transfers.

[Mbodell]

That sounds familiar to symmetric relay bids. I think there the next step is artificial game force (starting a relay) while the other bids are natural.

[dake50]

Some friends of mine are looking for help with their 2m structure (natural 10-15). Their 2m opening promises a 5+ cd minor and denies a 4-cd major. 2m can include 5m4m22 and 5m4m31 and 2C handles 10-12 with 5m5m. Their 2N opening is 13-15 with 5m5m.

So I know we've discussed similar structures before but I'd appreciate suggestions or links. -- straube

 

*** Way ahead in the trying to win the minor vs Major battle.

Start 2m above their easy 1M over 1m.

Three main goals now. Stops for 3Nt. 4M when partner has 5+M. And slam tries.

I like 2-level to show stops, partner repeating a good 5+M in case there is a 5-3,6-2 M-fit;

and immediate jumps as fit bid raises, one jump reserved for slam asks

(how good are your trumps? Relay = how many aces? Relay-2 = show kings?

with non-relays = suit ask, any top honor in this suit?

and, or next = exclusion ask,

and/or = this is my single or void picture splinter.

[Kungsgeten]

Here's what I'm going to try out:

 

2C--

2D = inv+ "relay" without 5+ major

2M = inv+ with 5+ major (GF if rebidding major)

2NT = good raise to 3C

3C = Preemptive raise

3D = GF with diamonds

3M = natural inv, NF

 

2D--

2H = inv+ relay as above

2S = inv+ with 5+ spades

2NT = inv+ with 5+ hearts

3C = good raise

3D = Preemptive raise

3M = natural inv

 

After the relay opener bids the closest bid with 4 cards in the other minor, strength doesn't matter. With 6+ minor and min she rebids the minor. With 6+ minor and max she chooses between 2NT and the "free bid" (2S or 3C) depending on if the hand seems nice to declare NT or not. Opener could also jump in a new suit to show max and SPL (should probably show 7+ minor too).

[awm]

I'd suggest something like:

 

2♣:

... 2♦ = signoff in a major, or inv with hearts, or non-fitting inv without a major

... 2♥ = GF relay

... 2♠ = inv with 5+♠

... 2N = inv with 3+♣

... 3♣ = preemptive

... 3♦, 3♥, 3♠ = splinter for clubs

... 3NT = to play

 

2♦:

... 2♥ = GF relay

... 2♠ = inv with 5+♠

... 2N = inv with 5+♥ (forcing one round)

... 3♣ = inv with 3+♦

... 3♦ = preemptive

... 3♥, 3♠, 4♣ = splinter for diamonds

... 3NT = to play

 

Most of the follow-ups fairly straightforward; over 2♣-2♦:

... 2♥ = denies three hearts (now pass/2♠ to play, 2N+ inv and natural)

... 2♠ = 3 hearts (now pass/3♥ to play, others inv and natural)

... 3♣ = 3316 or 3307 max ("super-accept" of major suit signoff)

[straube]

I'd suggest something like:

 

2♣:

... 2♦ = signoff in a major, or inv with hearts, or non-fitting inv without a major

... 2♥ = GF relay

... 2♠ = inv with 5+♠

... 2N = inv with 3+♣

... 3♣ = preemptive

... 3♦, 3♥, 3♠ = splinter for clubs

... 3NT = to play

 

2♦:

... 2♥ = GF relay

... 2♠ = inv with 5+♠

... 2N = inv with 5+♥ (forcing one round)

... 3♣ = inv with 3+♦

... 3♦ = preemptive

... 3♥, 3♠, 4♣ = splinter for diamonds

... 3NT = to play

 

Most of the follow-ups fairly straightforward; over 2♣-2♦:

... 2♥ = denies three hearts (now pass/2♠ to play, 2N+ inv and natural)

... 2♠ = 3 hearts (now pass/3♥ to play, others inv and natural)

... 3♣ = 3316 or 3307 max ("super-accept" of major suit signoff)

 

Thanks. How would you handle misfitting GI hands (those with the other minor or some 4414 or 4324 for example)? I'm thinking they don't have enough room for full relays...particularly for the 2C opening if weak 5/5 minors are placed there.

 

Theirs is a difficult problem because they don't promise an anchor (6+cd) suit...which means that ideally they want to be able to invite and stop in 2N with a misfit or they will sometimes be catapulted into a 4-3 or 5-1 minor suit fit at the 3-level. However, using 2N as a resting spot is very expensive.

[Zelandakh]

How about my usual transfer suggestion?

 

2♣

==

2♦ = 5+ hearts

... - 2♥ = 0-2 hearts

... - ... - 2♠ = INV+ without 5 spades

... - ... - 2NT = INV with 5+ spades

... - ... - 3♣ = to play

... - ... - 3♦ = GF with 5+ spades

... - ... - 3♥ = nat, INV

... - 2♠ = 3 hearts, min

... - others = 3 hearts, max

2♥ = 5+ spades

... - 2♠ = 0-2 spades

... - ... - 2NT = nat, INV

... - ... - 3♣ = nat, INV

... - ... - 3♦ = nat, GF

... - ... - 3♥ = slam try with good spades

... - ... - 3♠ = nat, INV

... - 2NT = 3 spades, min

... - others = 3 spades, max

2♠ = INV+ without a 5 card major

2NT = INV with 4+ diamonds

3♣♦ = to play

3♥ = slam try with good diamonds

3♠ = slam try in clubs

 

As I have pointed out before, accepting with shortage works better than accepting with length since it makes it safer to transfer with weak hands and a long suit.

 

The 2♦ opening is much more awkward. Perhaps

 

2♦

==

2♥ = 5+ spades

... - 2♠ = 0-2 spades

... - ... - 2NT = nat, INV

... - ... - 3♣ = nat, GF

... - ... - 3♦♥♠ = nat, INV

... - 2NT = 3 spades, min

... - others = 3 spades, max

2♠ = INV+ without a 5 card major

2NT = INV with 5 hearts and 0-2 diamonds

3♣ = GF with 5+ hearts (5+ spades also possible)

3♦ = INV with 5+ hearts and 3+ diamonds

3♥ = nat, INV

3♠ = slam try with 5+ hearts and 4+ clubs

 

It is hard to know if this "implied transfer" will work without trying it out on some test hands. The basic idea here is to use 2♠ whenever possible as the way of getting out in 2NT so as to minimise the cost of this. Unfortunately there is not enough space to do this in every case (2♣ - 2♥; 2♠ - 2NT, 2♦ - 2♥; 2♠ - 2NT and 2♦ - 2NT being the exceptions).

 

As you know, the 2♣ response structure also copes with 4 card majors (with some minor modifications) if they can gain an advantage by putting those back in. Playing it this way I would be inclined to make the 2NT opening 10-12 and move the 13-15 hands into 2♣ so that the shape can be shown safely after a 2♠ response.

[straube]

Thanks Zelandakh. I sent him two structures. Would you mind saying which one you like better? One uses a transfer idea similar to yours. He's inclined toward method 1 and I don't like that it only has one raise of opener's minor (no preemptive raise). I'd be interested in anyone's take on these.

 

Method 1)

 

2C-

.....2D-hearts or artificial GF

..........2H-0-1 hearts

...............P-long hearts

...............2S-asks shape

...............other-GI with hearts

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

...............2N-asks shape

..........etc-3 hearts, full shape relays

.....2H-GI 5+ spades

..........2S-0-1 spades

..........2N-2 spades, min, 4 diamonds

..........3C-2 spades, min, 6 clubs

..........3S-3 spades, min

..........4S-3 spades, max

.........other-2 spades, max

.....2S-GI diamonds

.....2N-GI misfitting

.....3C-GI

 

Method 2

 

2C

.....2D-GI+

..........2H-6 clubs

...............2S-asks shape

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

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

..........2S-4 diamonds, higher or even short

...............2N-asks shape

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

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

..........2N-4 diamonds, lower short

...............3C-asks shape

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

..........etc-resolving 5/5 minors

.....2H-GI hearts

..........P-minimum 2-fit (or very minimum 3-fit)

..........2S-5 diamonds

..........2N-misfit, minimum, 4 diamonds

..........3C-misfit, minimum, 6 clubs

.....2S-GI spades

..........P-minimum 2-fit (or very minimum 3-fit)

..........2N-misfit, minimum, 4 diamonds

..........3C-misfit, minimum, 6 clubs

.....2N-GI clubs

.....3C-weak raise

[straube]

Thinking to base the 2D structure on what awm proposed. Anyone care to comment?

 

2D-

 

.....2H-artificial GF OR GI clubs OR GI raise

..........2S-single-suited

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

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

..........2N-4 clubs, higher short

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

..........3C-2254

...............3D-GI raise (exception...we know 2254 is likely 11-12)

..........etc-4 clubs, lower short

.....2S-GI 5 spades

.....2N-GI hearts

..........P-3154

..........3C-xy64

..........3D-xy6z

..........3H-3-fit or possibly 2254

..........3S-GF 2-fit?

..........3N-max, heart short

.....3C-GI with 4423, 4414, 4324 etc (no 5-cd major, not 3D, not 5C)

..........P-min, 4 clubs

..........3D-min, 6 diamonds

.....3D-weak raise

.....3H-GI 6 hearts

[Zelandakh]

It might surprise you but I prefer Method 2. I think that this structure loses almost all of the advantages of transfers. There is no Law protection for transferring to hearts with a weak hand and it is not available for spades at all. There is also masses of space used up where Responder is unlimited and might want to use some of it for slam purposes. Finally, you are missing a trick with the 2♠ and 2NT responses, which should be reversed. Make 2NT the invite with diamonds and now 2♠ not only handles the natural 2NT response but can also include the GI club raise and GF diamond hands. That at least gets round the glaring loss of a weak 3♣ raise that you mentioned.

 

Your 2♦ structure looks to have something of a problem if Opener has a minimum 3154 and Responder wanted to invite. Again, perhaps the 2♠ "trick" can be used to good effect here by re-arranging things:

 

2♦

==

2♥ = GI 5+ spades or art GF

... - 2♠ = min for spades

... - ... - 2NT = GF relay

... - others = GF with relay patterning

2♠ = GI without 5 card major or GF with shortage

... - 2NT = min

... - ... - 3m = nat GI

... - ... - 3M = shortage GF

... - 3♣ = max, 4+ clubs, GF

... - ... - 3M = shortage

... - 3♦ = max, 1-suited, GF

... - ... - 3M = shortage

2NT = GI 5 hearts

3♣ = GI+ 3+ diamonds

3♦ = weak raise

3♥ = GI 6+ hearts

 

That seems to do everything in your scheme but more harmoniously. It still does not cope well with GI hands of 5 hearts and 3 diamonds but that is a smaller problem. Adam's scheme does cope with that hand type but at the, probably bigger, cost of not being able to stop in 2NT on GI hands with 5 hearts and no diamond fit.

[straube]

I like method #2 better then #1 as well. If they're willing to learn the relays I like that solution. The 2D opening is harder because there's a lot less room. I really like having a preemptive raise and think that's fairly universal.

 

If they're not relaying 2D, then I like the basic approach of...

 

2D-

.....2H-asking

..........2S-min, 6 diamonds

...............2N/3C/3D to play

..........2N-min, 4 clubs

...............3C/3D to play

..........3C-GF, 4 clubs

..........etc-GF 6 diamonds, not 4 clubs

.....2S-GI natural

.....2N-GI hearts

.....3C-inv raise

.....3D-weak raise

.....3H-GI hearts

 

except that the 2D-2H continuations are awkward because responder has difficulty setting trump in a minor suit after opener shows a minimum. Any ideas?

 

In your scheme, what would 2D-2H, 2S-2N continuations be? 2S here shows 0-2 spades I think.

 

Thanks for helping.

[Zelandakh]

The problem with the scheme you prefer is that there is effectively no natural 2NT response, which is something that I think you need when the range of the opening is large. The scheme in #11 addresses this too without disrupting the essential logic behind it.

 

Setting a minor at the 3 level for slam purposes is often problematic, both for relayers and for natural bidders. I am not sure the loss is such a big one. The best solution I have come up with for handling slam tries below 3NT are the direct 3M responses to my 2♣ opening. It would be logical to use the spare 2♦ - 3♠ sequence in this way, as a slam try agreeing diamonds, if not using it as a splinter.

 

If 2♥ is used as an ask with most of the GF hands then I am sure the hands need to be arranged so that 2♦ - 2♥; 2♠ - 2NT is also a relay. Again, this is part of the scheme in #11. The same sequence in the scheme of #8 is the method of inviting with 5 spades. That is ok in a transfer method, since the GF hands are distributed throughout the structure. Both meanings are given explicitly if you follow the ...'s closely.

 

You are also right that giving up the weak single raise to cover the 5♥3♦ GI hand is something of a loss in the #8 scheme. Of course that hand type could be ignored as in most of the other options but I am not sure that is a great solution either. Perhaps you could run a simulation only containing GI hands of 5 hearts and 3+ diamonds and hands qualifying for a single raise. Practically every method posted so far only handles one of these so it may as well be the same one in every structure.

[straube]

The trouble with 2D-2H, 2S (opener doesn't like spades) is that responder can be embarrassed when he holds 5413 or 5314 etc and can't pass 2S (no fit) or retreat to 2N (artificial GF). At least if we use 2D-2S as natural GI, we can get out in 2N...and play some 5-2 spade fits at the 2 level. The other thing is that at the point 2D-2H, 2S-2N where 2N is an artificial GF, we don't have enough room to find fits before 3N is reached.

 

I still like #10. It's true that 2D-3C as GI no fit/no 5-cd major/not 5 clubs is a little uncomfortable, but they'd only really lose when opener has 6D/4C and responder has 4423 (because they would play 3C then).

The relays for #10 are set up so that if they get too high, they'll have discovered a 9-cd club fit and can offer to play 4C if 3N doesn't feel right. I'm just not sure that they want to relay.

 

It's unfortunate that they (in many of these solutions) have to decide 2D-3D as a weak raise or fit showing with hearts. I had wondered whether 2D-3S could be assigned as fit showing with 5 hearts and 4 diamonds. Aside from getting a bit high, I would worry about lead directing/spade showing doubles. Some upsides are that you would never lose a 9-cd diamond fit and could still play 3N.

 

I sent them some structures that required relays. I think if they used relays that after finding pattern they could make a simple size asking bid (min, med, max) and then place the contract. I realize sometimes they'll be surprised when pard has values in his short suits, but I think it would work pretty well most of the time.

 

Thanks for your help, Zelandakh. I especially appreciate how you will answer specific questions. I'll be looking in on this thread in case you have anything to add. Thanks also to everyone for their solutions and input. I sent the link to this thread as well and I think they'll have some good options.

[Zelandakh]

I was assuming that Opener would pass such a natural GI 2♠ bid with, say, 1354. Even if this is a 5-1 fit it may not be worse than 3 of a minor opposite 5413. I can see a case for having 2 bids to show a minimum in #11 though; perhaps 2NT for spade shortage and 6+ diamonds, with all bids 3♣+ for GF relay responses instead of 2NT+. Clearly we are getting quite tight for space here though. It looks like there is actually a fundamental difference in bidding philosphy going on here though. I see misfitting hands without game values and want to stop as low as possible, even if that means a 6 card fit sometimes. You see a potential Burns Law violation and want to improve the part-score, even if it means raising the level of the contract. It may be that the answer to this question of when to stop in 2♠ and when to commit to the 3 level (and use the associated sequence as non-forcing, which is also important) has a bearing on which method your friends prefer. Do they prefer to be in silly contracts (too high) or silly contracts (wrong strain)?!

[Kungsgeten]

Nyström-Berthau did something like this:

 

2C---

2D = INV+ relay

..2H = 4 diamonds

..2S = 6+ clubs, not 4 diamonds, min

..2NT+ = Like 2S but max

2HS = Natural NF

2NT = F1 with 5+ diamonds

3C = Simple raise

3DHS = SPL

4C = Preemptive

 

2D--

2H = INV+ relay

..2S = 4 clubs

..2NT = 6+ diamonds, not 4 clubs, min

..3C+ = Like 2NT but max

2S = Natural NF

2N = F1 with 5+ hearts

3C = Natural NF

3D = Simple raise

3HS = SPL

4C = SPL

4D = Preemptive

 

I guess they continued to relay after the INV+ bid with a GF hand bid something else otherwise.

 

http://www.bridgefederation.se/welcome/compete/obs0304/deklisar/nystrom-berthau%20+%20notes%20+%20BS%20forms.pdf

 

Ahlesved-Petersson seems to do something similar (but 2D--3C is a raise and 2C--2N is natural INV): http://www.ecatsbridge.com/documents/files/cc/OpenTeams/Sweden/petersson-ahlesved.pdf

[MickyB]

Zel's structure looks good to me. Transfers in that style allow you to handle both 6M INV and 5M3C INV comfortably, unlike 2C:2M NAT INV. 5M1C INV isn't very pretty but that's not really the fault of the methods, you're just poorly placed once partner has opened 2C.

[benlessard]

2C..

 

2D many INV or GF with MM

2H INV with 4-5 H opener need 3 to pass

2S INV with 4-5 S opener need 3 to pass

2NT relay to 3C (preemptive or GF raise)

3C GF with at least 4D may have 5M

3D GF with at least 6H

3H GF at least 6S

3S GF with 6D and weak M or slammish.

3NT to play

4C preemptive.