Suggestions on 2C/D responses to precision 1D

[Chamaco]

Hi all, I'd appreciate any suggestions on the following ideas.

 

Criticisms is also welcome, but before saying "try using my scheme" (every bridge player tends to say that :) ), please try to criticize the details of this one I am proposing and describe specifically what would be the pitfalls. :D

 

WHAT ARE WE USING NOW ?

 

We play Precision with 1NT = 10-12/14-16, so 1D is

 

a. 13-15/11-13 balanced, 2+ diamonds

b. max 15 with 4+D.

 

The scheme we use now.

1D:?

- 1M = natural

- 1NT = natural

- 2C = 5+ clubs, can have a 4cM only if GF; can be invitational without 4cM

- 2D = inv+ with diamonds

- 2M = strong JS, slammish hand with semisolid suit; if suit is repeated, sets trumps

- 2NT natural

- 3C = invitational with C single suiter

- ............................

 

We also use XYZ and XYNT when bidding goes:

1D:1H:1S

1D:1M:1NT

Opener bypasses spades to bid 1NT if balanced

 

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

 

WHAT CHANGES WOULD I LIKE TO MAKE ?

 

a. 1D:2M sequences

I would like to use something like Reverse Flannery, e.g.

 

1D:2H = constructive (less than invitational) with 5H+4S

1D:2S = constructive (less than invitational) with 5H+5S

 

These hands are awkward to bid with our curent system.

 

5S+4H is not a problem in XYZ.

Invitational hands with 54/45/55 also can be bid reasonably with xyz or oher squences.

 

b. 1D:2C/2D as artificial bids "a la XYZ"

 

1D:2M sequences as Reverse Flannery do not allow the strong Jump Shifts.

This is a problem for me, since it is important to set a selfsufficient trump suit early in the bidding.

 

I know there are some "turnarounds" to do that (using Bourke relay or 3rd suit forcing, or whatever), but they all mess up what already works in our sequences.

 

Therefore I have thought of using something similar to XYZ:

 

1. 1D:2C

This is a Puppet to 2D, and includes either a weak D raise OR any invitational hand.

It denies a 4cM (in that case we start with 1M).

After the puppet to 2D, responder bids naturally.

This bid could also free up the 2NT and 3C bids from their natural invitational meaning.

 

2. 1D:2D = this is a generic game force which:

----a. denies 4cM OR

----b. shows a self sufficient major interested in slam

 

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

 

What do you think ?

[Adebisi]

Hi, i have played reverse Flannery responses for some time and i could tell u that, those 5h/4s hands and 4-10 hcp are much more frequent than strong semisolid suits.Also i havent had problems with them if i just start with 1H or 1S.

When opener is balanced u have no problem, when he rebids 2c u go on with 4th suit.To loose nat 2C/D bids after 1D opening to make clear room for semisolid slammish hands that occur very rear is loss in my opinion. :)

[Chamaco]

Hi, i have played reverse Flannery responses for some time and i could tell u that, those 5h/4s hands and 4-10 hcp are much more frequent than strong semisolid suits.

 

I know.

But frequency is crucial at Pairs, whereas at IMPS, infrequent slam hands matter much more than occasionally playing the wrong partscore (which often will make anyways).

 

So, if you play teams, I believe it is better to sharpen the slam tools rather than the partscore tools. At Matchpoints, I agree with a system "partscore oriented".

 

When opener is balanced u have no problem, when he rebids 2c u go on with 4th suit.

 

Fourth suit forcing to show strong one suiter interested innslam, often leads to VERY awkward bidding.

 

Responder, when he holds something like KQJTxxx in spades, will have a hard time convincing pard that spades are the trump suit, and in the meantime you find yourself at the 4 level with less room for cuebidding.

 

Strong Jumpshift do solve a real problem: if there are World Class players who choose to play SJS, there must be a reason, namely setting the trump suit early.

I now on the other hand, Meckwell do play 1D:2M as major 2-suiters, so there are merits on both sides.

 

My attempt is to keep the advantage of SJS scheme, trading it with a first round natural invitational+ bid in a minor.

In a precision 1D scheme this price does not look too high.

The real risk of not showing you long invitational minor is, in natural bidding, the risk of losing slam in the minor.

Usually this is not a case opposite a limited opener.

 

I would like to have opinion specifically about my scheme, e.g. details on what might work poorly.

 

Thanks ! :)

[inquiry]

This seems playable. I already use 2♦ as virtual game force (using criss cross for less strong diamond raises), and I already use 2♣ for non-descript invites. I assume the run of the mill hand make a 2♦ raise and then try to get into 3NT if all the side suits are adequately stopped will now start 1♦-2♣-2♦-2M where 2M shows stopper.

 

I would be happy to give this a try in bdding room with you sometime, or to try to pull up a few hundred example hands from BridgeBrowser for you to look at.

 

Ben

[david_c]

This stuff about reverse Flannery is interesting - I think the usual meaning of "reverse Flannery" is 5S+4H, not the other way round. The convention is designed to make life easier when opener has an unbalanced hand: if the bidding goes 1D:1S,2D you may be missing a heart fit.

 

When you have 5H+4S, you have no problems at all with opener's unbalanced hands, so there's no need for a Flannery-type convention to deal with it. It's true that you can't show 5H+4S after 1D:1H,1NT playing XYZ. But that's an advert for playing transfer checkback instead of XYZ, not an advert for Flannery responses ...

[Chamaco]

It's true that you can't show 5H+4S after 1D:1H,1NT playing XYZ. But that's an advert for playing transfer checkback instead of XYZ, not an advert for Flannery responses ...

 

In xyz, weak responder won't look for the spade fit.

But invitational and GF responder will have a chance for it.

 

Are you saying that xfer checkback allows for it ?

How does xfer checkback work ?

[Gerben47]

Simple question: WHY? What was wrong with the previous scheme (except SJS which I don't like but you probably already know this).

 

What problems did you previously have with 5♠ + 4♥ hands?

 

After 1NT rebid 2♥ shows that shape, NF.

After 2♣ rebid forget about a fit (unbalanced hands should raise with 3 cards)

After 2♦ rebid: forget about fit unless at least invitational, in that case bid 2♥.

 

Strong Jumpshift do solve a real problem: if there are World Class players who choose to play SJS, there must be a reason, namely setting the trump suit early.

 

Can't they play it because of tradition? If you only use them to set the trump suit they are a real rare bird. IIRC they are also used on some other hands (GF fit + side 5+card for example).

[Chamaco]

After 2♣ rebid forget about a fit (unbalanced hands should raise with 3 cards)

After 2♦ rebid: forget about fit unless at least invitational, in that case bid 2♥.

 

This is the wrong part.

You lose the second suit.

 

1D:1S

2C/D:?

 

(2C is passable)

Now you have 55 in the major, not strong enough to rebid, and opener has 3 card support in H.

With, say, 7 hcp or so, you'll give a preference to opener's minor.

 

Strong Jumpshift do solve a real problem: if there are World Class players who choose to play SJS, there must be a reason, namely setting the trump suit early.

Can't they play it because of tradition? If you only use them to set the trump suit they are a real rare bird. IIRC they are also used on some other hands (GF fit + side 5+card for example).

 

 

It can be tradition, but usually, many traditions have their good reasons to exist.

I have learned to try to understand "oldfashioned things" rather than dismiss them early :-)

Obviously, there are more than one hand type that can fit into the SJS.

 

Sure, the frequency of the hands may be low, and at MP they may make litle sense.

But at IMPS, where slams make the big difference, I much rather prefer using SJS(not playing relays) rather than cumbersome 4sf sequences or similar.

[david_c]

Are you saying that xfer checkback allows for it ?

How does xfer checkback work ?

In the version I play, after 1D-1H,1NT:

 

2C = forces 2D (weak with diamonds, or an invitational hand)

2D = transfer

2H = 5H+4S, less than invitational

2S+ = various other things

 

The nice thing about this is that if you play Keri over 1NT you already know what most of the continuations will mean. (Apart from that, it also makes good theoretical sense, in that transfers allow the unbalanced hand to describe itself to the balanced hand.)

[awm]

I've been trying some different response structures to 1♦ lately, and one thing I've found is that discovering minor suit fits can be very important. It allows you to play 3-minor instead of 2NT, which frequently is the difference between a making and a non-making partial. It also allows some hands to upgrade and bid some light 3NTs on a running minor. It seems like the main loss for the methods you describe, is that after 1♦-2♣, minor suit fits will be harder to uncover since neither partner has really indicated anything about relative minor suit lengths. You may conceivably also lose in a competitive auction, if it becomes hard for responder to clarify his hand (1♦-Pass-2♦-4♠) but this is pretty infrequent.

 

You may be able to have the best of both by defining:

 

2♣ / ♦ natural forcing, just like before

2♥ 5+ hearts and 4+ spades (if unequal lengths then hearts longer) constructive non-invite

2♠ any single-suited slam try, opener bids 2NT and responder then sets the suit (presumably opener can then bid 3nt with an awful hand for the suit, but otherwise suit is set)

 

-- Adam

[Chamaco]

I've been trying some different response structures to 1♦ lately, and one thing I've found is that discovering minor suit fits can be very important.

I think this is espcially true with standard bidding.

But opposite a nebulous 1D, opener is limited.

 

As I said, I believe that the main loss of not showing the minor is losing a potential slam, in std bidding, when opener can still have a reverse.

 

There will admittedly be a few hands where, say, 3D/3C makes and 2NT goes down, but I wonder about the frequency of these hands.

BTW, opener or responder has some chances to "describe himself" over a 2C/2D generic relay.

 

Example:

 

1D-2C (relay, weak +D or invit w/o majors)

-- 2D = normal relay (other bids are D "superaccepts")

----2H/2S = to be defined; these bids can be useful

----2NT = natural invit bal

----3C/D = natural invitational with the minor bid

-- 2H/S= 6+D, 5M

-- 3C = 5+D, 5C

-- 3D = D single suiter

 

1D-2D (GF, without major OR with SJS-type in a major)

-- 2M = 5+D, 4M;

----if responder bids other major, he has the SJS hand

---- otherwise, he has either

-------a. bal hand = bids NT

-------b. minor oriented hand: bids 3m

-- 2NT = balanced hand

-- 3C = 55 or better in minors

-- 3D = diamond single suiter

-- 3M = 6D, 5M

 

In the latter cases (2NT->3M), responder's bid of the other major is always SJS hand.

 

Anyway I like the idea of using 1D-2S as generic single suiter.