yunling Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 Don't know if this topic fits for "Natural System Discussion", but I'm talking about a standard 5 card major system.When 1M-2M raise guarantees 3 card support, opponents can balance quite aggressively, especially in MPs, and not often caught since they are somewhat protected by the law.So I came up with a mixed strategy, having 2M raise as 7-10 with 3 card support or 9-10 with 2 card support.This makes it dangerous for opponents to balance and don't do much damage to your constructive bidding.Also, there is less need for opener to stretch to bid after 1M-1N-2x-2M since responder is not very likely to have a 9 count, which is also a small benefit. Is this idea crazy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 This might be covered by the rule of 2 & 3. We want our clever operations to make life difficult for two people at the table, not three. Maybe I am just unlucky; but when I do these things, Partner is the one who believes I have described my hand correctly and completes or competes to the wrong strain or level. Consider whether you can even have a simple 1S-2S-4S auction anymore. If you can't, perhaps 2S is alertable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 Obv this 2♠ bid is alertable. The downside of this strategy comes when opener has a strong hand. Arguably,1♠-2♠2NT and1♠-2♠3othersuit should be nonforcing since it could be the last playable spot. But if so, opener would have to jump to the 4-level (or 3NT) with any gf hand. Also, when opps interfere over 2♠, opener can't compete so easily. But it's an interesting idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
straube Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 Obv this 2♠ bid is alertable. The downside of this strategy comes when opener has a strong hand. Arguably,1♠-2♠2NT and1♠-2♠3othersuit should be nonforcing since it could be the last playable spot. But if so, opener would have to jump to the 4-level (or 3NT) with any gf hand. Also, when opps interfere over 2♠, opener can't compete so easily. But it's an interesting idea. I think you have it backwards. After 1S-2S, 2N or 1S-2S, 3othersuit responder would retreat to 3M with the weakest 3-cd raises and raise/bid 3N with the 2-cd raises. After 1S-2S (interference) opener may compete with 3S with a 6-cd suit and can double with extra values but only 5-cds (will often be converted by the 2-cd 9-10 raise. I think this idea has been discussed before. A downside is that the doubleton raise might have found a better fit after say 1S-1N, 2m or 1S-1N, 2H so you might restrict it to hands that would otherwise be very likely to rebid 2M whatever opener's rebid might have been. Then 1S-1N, 2m-2S would usually be 6-8 doubleton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve2005 Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 With no interference your natural bidding system should be doing better than raising on 2-cards. It will throw off your whole system, you can always give later preference which partner will take as 2-cards. However, if there is interference and you have no good bid but are too good to pass there is a place for an occasional 2-card raise especially with Hx. This applies to overcalls also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 Is this idea crazy? No. Don't be generous. I have seen many crazy ideas in bridge. This one is downright a bad idea imo. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilKing Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 Meckstroth/Rodwell did exactly this for quite a long time (alerted, of course). It was known as a "poker raise", as I recall. They don't do it any more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 Meckstroth/Rodwell did exactly this for quite a long time (alerted, of course). It was known as a "poker raise", as I recall. They don't do it any more.They didn't have some of the drawbacks, like opener being 5-3-3-2 and huge. But they still apparently discarded it as a bad idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 Don't know if this topic fits for "Natural System Discussion", but I'm talking about a standard 5 card major system. When 1M-2M raise guarantees 3 card support, opponents can balance quite aggressively, especially in MPs, and not often caught since they are somewhat protected by the law. So I came up with a mixed strategy, having 2M raise as 7-10 with 3 card support or 9-10 with 2 card support. This makes it dangerous for opponents to balance and don't do much damage to your constructive bidding. Also, there is less need for opener to stretch to bid after 1M-1N-2x-2M since responder is not very likely to have a 9 count, which is also a small benefit. Is this idea crazy? Meckstroth/Rodwell did exactly this for quite a long time (alerted, of course). It was known as a "poker raise", as I recall. They don't do it any more.IMO, with frequencies, dependent on the form of scoring, the vulnerability, and the state of the match, an agreed mixed strategy of 2 and 3-card raises makes sense. The 2-card raise should have low frequency. Opener's change of suit should be forcing; but 2N and 3N could be natural non-forcing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesleyC Posted April 13, 2015 Report Share Posted April 13, 2015 Not completely crazy, but (especially at MPs) the chance of bidding an uncontested hand to the wrong part score is serious downside. However, in a contested auction like 1S (X) ???, or (1C) 1H (X) ??? occasionally raising with Hx support is a much sounder tactic. The chances of damaging our uncontested auction are gone, and taking away a level of space may cause the opponents to misjudge both strain and level. The bid also has handy lead directional implications. A couple of other ways you can more pressure your opponents in balancing situations are, responding 1NT to 1M on weak hands with 3c support (to discourage balancing) and opening/overcalling 1M with a strong 4c suit(in the hope that they over-compete). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordontd Posted April 13, 2015 Report Share Posted April 13, 2015 I used to play this with one partner in a strong club context. I wasn't wild about the idea but I don't have any strong memories that it worked particularly well or badly for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasetb Posted April 13, 2015 Report Share Posted April 13, 2015 Playing against the robots, on certain hands in the 8-10 range I have raised partner with Ax, Kx, or even Qx during competition, and it tends to work out pretty well, especially if we are on defense. I don't like the idea of it when it goes 1M - Pass to us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Badger Posted April 13, 2015 Report Share Posted April 13, 2015 I'm not going to dismiss it out of hand, but if Rodwell and Meckstroth, and Mr Ace aren't keen on it then it does sound a bit dubious. It could work well at MPs, but to me it goes against the grain of trying to find a 8 card or better fit. I believe - though it would be nice if someone could clarify this - that the probability of opener only holding a 5 card suit as opposed to a 6 card one is about 3-1. So the odds do not appear to be in your favour. It also is problematic if opener is very strong or semi-strong and wishes to make a slam try or use a trial bid. Therefore if using a 2 card raise in a 1M - 2M auction, a 2NT rebid by opener would probably have to be conventional (in an "Ogust sort of way") asking responder to clarify his hand by way of a 2 card or 3 card raise and the point range he actually has. Also, it depends on the system being used too, SAYC, Acol (5 card M) and Precision being a tad more flexible around the edges than 2/1 that relies heavily on the 1NT response to many 1♥ or 1♠ openings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fourdad Posted April 13, 2015 Report Share Posted April 13, 2015 No. Don't be generous. I have seen many crazy ideas in bridge. This one is downright a bad idea imo. bingo!!! :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhm Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 Meckstroth/Rodwell did exactly this for quite a long time (alerted, of course). It was known as a "poker raise", as I recall. They don't do it any more.So what does it prove? Some will claim it is a bad idea, since they discarded it. Others will claim if they played it for a long time, it can't be that bad an idea. Rainer Herrmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted April 15, 2015 Report Share Posted April 15, 2015 So what does it prove? Some will claim it is a bad idea, since they discarded it. Others will claim if they played it for a long time, it can't be that bad an idea. Rainer HerrmannIt's all in the timing. While they are playing it, the idolists will agree that it is a great idea. When they finally decide against continuing to do it, because the results are negative or the disclosure becomes a problem, it becomes a bad idea. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yunling Posted April 15, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 15, 2015 I think this idea has been discussed before. Can you find a link for the past discussions? I only found discussions using it as 2-card invite but its not quite alike. They didn't have some of the drawbacks, like opener being 5-3-3-2 and huge. But they still apparently discarded it as a bad idea.I don't see why this is a drawback. With a huge 5332, I'm comfortable with rebidding 3NT. They don't benefit from the 1M-1N-2m-2M auction, on the other hand. I think the main drawback of this agreement is when opener has an unbalanced hand with some extras on which it would go 1M-2M-4M in the field but you are forced to bid 3m. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted April 15, 2015 Report Share Posted April 15, 2015 Even if you show all 4 card supports via bergenish bids, there are hands with 4 card fit that it are really bad to reach to 3 level immediately. I know they are not too many but they are not very rare either. Among all other problems of starting 2M with 2+ card support, opener not knowing and/or wasting time and space just to find out how many trumps responder has is a bad idea. It really matters a lot for opener to know exactly how many trumps responder has. Because 4M is something that we all love to blast frequently for obvious reasons. Mainly they usually work more than one way, they score game bonus, they leak minimum info. Something I would never want to disable myself from doing. Also, unfortunately, opponents do not interfere only in balancing position. Suppose it went 1♠-pass-2♠-3♥. Opener is in the dark regarding both pd's strength and the number of trumps he has. Things get even more like a nightmare when other opponent raises to 4♥. And these are just tip of the iceberg when it comes to complications imo. There are so many others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wank Posted April 15, 2015 Report Share Posted April 15, 2015 the problem is obviously when opener has an invite. getting to 3M on a 7 card fit would be disgusting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted April 15, 2015 Report Share Posted April 15, 2015 the problem is obviously when opener has an invite. getting to 3M on a 7 card fit would be disgusting. I know this is off topic but....each time I log in to BBF, and when notifications tells me "wank has quoted a post you made" and I click on it, I see no quotation was made by you. And this is happening only when you make it. Not with others. First couple times I thought you quoted and then changed your mind, but I doubt that's the case. It happened on this one and previous ATB topic by ART. Some sort of bug perhaps, idk. Anyway, if your comment was made regarding the auction I constructed (1sp-pass-2sp-3h), opener holding an invitation hand with only 5 spades and probably 14-17 hcp is not a problem at all. He doubles and responder with 2 spade and 9-10 hcp passes I guess. But I think your comment was not related to this auction. When I saw the quote I thought it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wank Posted April 16, 2015 Report Share Posted April 16, 2015 no i wasn't quoting you. weird. i was talking in general, not with specific regard to your sequence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cthulhu D Posted April 17, 2015 Report Share Posted April 17, 2015 It's been discussed before, but in a limited opening context where this a much better idea. Partner is much less likely to want to bid again and this minimoses the risks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.