1M - 2M is this still a constructive raise by passed hand?

[MrAce]

And merely saying you think something is awful is not particularly constructive, either. I would agree, however, that it is awful for you and for most pairs.

 

I was actually being polite when i said awful. (especially for the "forcing" part)

[aguahombre]

I was actually being polite when i said awful. (especially for the "forcing" part)

And did you politely read why it is different for us? Anyway, we both agree it is awful for most players, because of their opening 1M style in 3rd.

[Cthulhu D]

First chair openings seem to be getting lighter and lighter, presumably making it less necessary/desirable to open light third hand. Still, I like to do it.

 

I'm pretty sure it's because there is a huge informational advantage in being the first mover.

[aguahombre]

I'm pretty sure it's because there is a huge informational advantage in being the first mover.

There certainly is. When it is most likely the opponents' hand, however, I am not sure whether the informational advantage is ours or theirs.

[Zelandakh]

Here's an alternative structure for 3rd/4th seat based on turning traditional methods on their head:

 

1♥ opening

==

1♠ = any invite without 4 hearts

1NT = weak with 4+ spades

2m = weak and nat

2♥ = weak raise

others = 4+ card raises to taste

--

 

1♥ - 1♠

==

1NT = min without 4 spades (now natural with 2♥ effectively acting as Drury)

2♣ = 4+ spades, any strength (now natural with 2♥ effectively acting as Drury)

2♦ and up = extras and GF

--

 

Similarly for a 1♠ opening:

 

1NT = any invite without 4 spades

2♣♦♥ = weak and nat

2♠ = weak raise

others = 4+ card raises to taste

--

 

1♠ - 1NT

==

2♣ = min without 4 hearts (now natural with 2♠ effectively acting as Drury)

2♦ = 4+ hearts, any strength (now natural with 2♠ effectively acting as Drury)

others = extras and GF

--

 

For the "others = GF" rebids you can use a relay structure if desired but it is not necessary providing you allow for the fact that Opener will not hold the other major.

 

Notice also that the 1M - 2m and 1♠ - 2♥ responses follow the same pattern as jallerton's, albeit that they are perhaps weaker in terms of pure strength. This system also goes one stage further in that, for example, 1♠ - 2♣; 2♦ - 2♥ is not required for 4th suit forcing and should be played as showing hearts.

 

As was pointed out in another recent thread a workable Drury-based alternative is to play a 2♣ response as natural and make the 2♦ response the decent raise. As others have said it seems somewhat unnecessary to play both constructive raises and Drury together so if we agree both I would assume CRs are off as a passed hand. If we agreed only CRs (and no Drury) then I would assume they are still on.

[jallerton]

Here's an alternative structure for 3rd/4th seat based on turning traditional methods on their head:

 

1♥ opening

==

1♠ = any invite without 4 hearts

1NT = weak with 4+ spades

2m = weak and nat

2♥ = weak raise

others = 4+ card raises to taste

--

 

So what does Responder do with a 3=2=4=4 7-count?

[aguahombre]

So what does Responder do with a 3=2=4=4 7-count?

presumably Zel meant 1♠/1♥ MIGHT be made on an invite w/o 4 spades. Opener's most common 1NT rebid would then be passed by responder with your 3=2=4=4 7-count --- as would a 2m rebid or a 2H rebid.

[Zelandakh]

So what does Responder do with a 3=2=4=4 7-count?

Weak hand - bid your cheapest 4 card suit naturally, so 2♣. Opener can pass that with a minimum and 3+ card support or continue naturally. You could try improvising as agua suggests but that would be risky - playing 2♣ opposite a 4630 is probably not optimal. My auction for that, assuming Opener is minimum, would be 1♥ - 2♣; 2♥ - p.