QP/strength ask without scanning?

[awm]

I'd describe my 1♠-2♣ sequence as either:

 

1. 12-13 with 5+♥

2. 14+ any (GF)

 

But otherwise this seems right. The big difference between Straube and my methods is treatment of invitational and semi-invitational hands; mostly this discussion has been about the weak hands and comparing Zel's "NF 2/1" style vs. responding 1NT vs. other possible NF 2/1 styles.

[straube]

What's the difference you see in our treatment of invitational and semi-invitational hands?

 

My recollection is that a principal difference is your use of 2D for invitational hands without 5 hearts? Is that right? And the point of this was because we both have the 5332s in our 1S opening, have consequently chosen a semiforcing NT and consequently have the potential for missing game when opener passes 1N with a maximum 5332. About right?

 

So basically your method finds these games (using 2D) while mine gets hearts (using 2D) in the picture.

 

If Zelandakh were to switch to a forcing NT, I'd recommend my solution because the GI without 5 hearts will always get another chance to invite.

[awm]

What's the difference you see in our treatment of invitational and semi-invitational hands?

 

My recollection is that a principal difference is your use of 2D for invitational hands without 5 hearts? Is that right? And the point of this was because we both have the 5332s in our 1S opening, have consequently chosen a semiforcing NT and consequently have the potential for missing game when opener passes 1N with a maximum 5332. About right?

 

So basically your method finds these games (using 2D) while mine gets hearts (using 2D) in the picture.

 

If Zelandakh were to switch to a forcing NT, I'd recommend my solution because the GI without 5 hearts will always get another chance to invite.

 

There are a number of differences, mostly around my desire to have two invitational ranges. Basically I always have a way to distinguish weak invite (say 10-11) vs. strong invite (12-13). You have this ability if the auction starts 1♠-1NT-2m, but you lose the distinction if opener rebids 2M, or if responder starts with 2♦, and you also have the possibility to miss a game if opener passes 1NT (opposite the stronger invite). You'll be better off when responder is weak with 6+♥ (you can transfer into 2♥, I have to play 3♥). There are slightly different hands where we miss 2♠ on a declined invite -- for me it's responder with 12-13 and 2♠-5♥ opposite opener with ♠+♦; for you it's hands where opener has ♠+♥ and responder has 12-13 with 2344/23(35)/22(45) or the like (where 1♠-1NT-2♥- and you can't really bid 2♠ with the upper end of an invite). There are probably some sequences where you will play 3m in a 4-4 or 5-4 fit while I play 2♠ in a 5-2 (my "strong invite" auctions don't prioritize finding minor suit fits of less than ten cards, due to some simulations showing that 2♠ in a 5-2 is often superior). And I think we've chosen different 1♠-2♥ treatments (mine is a real limit raise, not constructive-plus).

 

So there are definitely a bunch of differences! Most of them are not around the weak hands though.

[straube]

If you have a 10-11 count and say 1354 and the bidding goes 1S-1N, 2S are you bidding 2N here since opener knows you can only be lightly invitational? Or do you worry about removing from a more likely part score?

[awm]

If you have a 10-11 count and say 1354 and the bidding goes 1S-1N, 2S are you bidding 2N here since opener knows you can only be lightly invitational? Or do you worry about removing from a more likely part score?

 

2♠ actually shows extras in our style (because we open 2♠ with up to a bad 11), so it's pretty safe to bid 2NT. We also don't really jump to 3♠ unless we have seven, so opener having 14-15 is definitely a possibility.

[nullve]

If you have a 10-11 count and say 1354 and the bidding goes 1S-1N, 2S are you bidding 2N here since opener knows you can only be lightly invitational? Or do you worry about removing from a more likely part score?

2♠ actually shows extras in our style (because we open 2♠ with up to a bad 11), so it's pretty safe to bid 2NT. We also don't really jump to 3♠ unless we have seven, so opener having 14-15 is definitely a possibility.

I bet that passing with 11, 1354 is winning bridge unless vul-at-IMPs. (The 11good-15 range is too wide IMO.)

[straube]

2♠ actually shows extras in our style (because we open 2♠ with up to a bad 11), so it's pretty safe to bid 2NT. We also don't really jump to 3♠ unless we have seven, so opener having 14-15 is definitely a possibility.

 

I think we're in a similar place after 1S-1N, 2S because I play that shows a bit extra as well. So responder's rebid of 3m or 3H is lightly invitational? You play 1S-3m/3H as WJS? I think for me that 1S-1N, 2S-3m would be lightly invitational since I'm removing from a playable spot; I give up then on the weaker hands. After 1S-1N, 2S I could rebid the same 2N with the 10-11. I have both 3H and 3S available if I want to split the difference with spade raises. So I lose with 1S-1N, 2S when responder has a weak hand with a long minor but gain when responder gets to show hearts before opener rebids 2S.

 

1S-1N, P- opposite an invitational hand is bad for me whenever opener has the 5332 13 ct. So I miss an occasional game or decide to include the 5332 13 ct with my 14-16 NT; means I get to 23 pt 2Ns and 24 pt 3Ns. On the plus side, I get to play two hearts after 1S-1N, 2D-2H which seems at least as frequent.

 

1S-1N, 2m I think I'm ahead on these hands when responder has invitational values. I suppose 1S-1N, 2m-2N is again 10-11? I can show that after Lebensohl. More important, I can raise opener's minor strongly or lightly. 1S-2D* as GI misses many minor suit fits.

 

1S-1N, 2H involves more guesswork for me. Probably for you a 3m rebid is lightly invitational? I think I need it as a landing spot. If I remember right, you pass with doubleton spade and like 6-7/8 such that 1S-1N, 2X-2S promises 8/9 or more? So far I've done 1S-1N, 2H-2S as wider ranging but I could consider having that promise constructive values...in which case I could only respond 1N with 6-7 with either a 3-suited takeout of spades (planning to pass whatever) or a 6-7 with exactly two spades and 4 or 5 hearts.

 

So 1S-1N, 2H I pass with 6-7 2S/4-5H. Maybe I have xx KJxx Kxxx xxx (I think you pass this hand). If instead partner rebid 2C I could just Lebensohl to 2S. Anyway, that seems an attractive option to me...possibly improving the contract to hearts, taking away (at least) the 1N bid from the opponents.

 

But anyway, 1S-1N, 2H-2N is more ambiguous for me...11-13? 1S-1N, 2H-3H is lightly invitational (same). I'm endplayed into 1S-1N, 2H-4H with GI hearts whenever I have a hand unsuitable for the 2C relay start....basically 4 hearts and fewer than 4 diamonds. I think that 1S-1N, 2H ought to show a little more than a very minimum hand with exactly 5S/4H anyway.

[awm]

I bet that passing with 11, 1354 is winning bridge unless vul-at-IMPs. (The 11good-15 range is too wide IMO.)

 

This seems like a pretty easy simulation.

 

Opener: 12-15 6(322) or 6(331)

Responder: 11 with 1(345)

 

Which is better, 2S (always) or 2N (12-13) and 3N (14-15)?

[straube]

I noticed a system update from...

 

1♠ - 2♣ = either GF (any) or a good 12-14 with 4+♥

 

1♠ - 2♦ = forcing; shows a good invite (12+ to 14-) without three spades and without four hearts

... 2♥ = normal asking bid; responder makes a natural call next with 2♠ being balanced with doubleton, 2NT showing both minors, 3m a six card suit

... 2♠ = GF 6+♠

... 2N = GF 5+/5+ majors

... 3m = GF 5+/5+

 

to

 

I'd describe my 1♠-2♣ sequence as either:

 

1. 12-13 with 5+♥

2. 14+ any (GF)

 

which picks up your 5-3 heart fits and lets you discriminate 4H/6m from 5H/5m. Then 12-13 and 4H goes through 2D. For practice I tried working it out, but I found it rather hard to solve. Does the 2H rebid have to handle more hands?

 

2H-asking (any minimum <4H OR GF balanced to semi-unbalanced OR GF 5S/4-5H)

.....2S-2 spades, nf

..........2N-GF

..........3m-nf

..........3H-GF, 4H

..........3S-GF 5H

.....2N-short spade, nf

..........3m-nf

..........3H-GF, 4H

..........3S-GF, 5H

..........3N-other

.....3m-6m, nf

..........3D-6D, nf

..........3H-GF 4H

..........3S-GF 5H

..........3N-other

2S-6S, could have 4H, GF

2N-4H, min

3m-5m, GF

3H-6S/5H, min

3S-6S/5H, GF

 

or maybe something simpler like

 

2H-4+H, f

2S-minimum, usually only 5S

2N-6S, GF

3m-5m-GF

3H-6S/5H, min

3S-?

[awm]

1S-2D

... 2H = not four hearts; if max denies some shapes

... 2S = min 4+H NF

... 2N = max 4+H

... 3m = max 5+/5+ natural

... 3H = short hearts max 5143/5134/5044

... 3S = short hearts 6S max

 

1S-2D-2H

... 2S = doubleton NF

... 2N = 1444, 1(345) not 5H, 04(45), 1255, 0355 etc

... 3m = 6+ suit NF

... 3H = extreme both minors invite

... 3S = min GF 3-card support, not suited for 1S-4S

 

1S-2D-2H-2S/2N

... 3m = 5/5 min over 2s, 4+ minor min over 2N

... 3H = max short diamond

... 3S = max short club

... 3N = to play likely max no shortage

... 4m = 5/5 good min over 2N, shortness with 6S over 2S

... 4S to play

[straube]

Really nice. Thank you. It never occurred to me to describe opener's 5431s. I guess if you have a min 6S/5H hand partner passes in a 6-2 fit and you're golden and if he corrects you rebid the hearts. After 1S-2D, 2N-3H would be useful as 3 hearts in case opener has 6/4 or 5/5. 1S-2D, 2N-3S would be 2S denying 3 hearts? 1S-2D, 2N-4m splinters and 1S-2D, 2N-4H to play.

[straube]

It looks like you put your 5S440s through three starts. One would be 3C (grouped with 5422 and 7411), the other through 2H (showing diamonds) and the last through 2C (including clubs).

 

The grouping of the 7411 with 5422 in this instance makes me wonder if you've adopted this for (for example) your semipositives. It used to be that you grouped them with the high short.

 

I know the knock on grouping 7411 with 5422 (as was done in the first standard symmetrics) is that the 7411 is so much more infrequent, but a counter-argument is that 3C as full resolution of a 5422 is very low. I think standard symmetric resolved...

 

3C-even short

.....3D-asks

..........3H-7411

..........etc-5422s

 

since this affords more space for the 5422s, but then you have the problem of the relay captain wanting to find full shape but not wanting to give permission for the 5422s to pass 3N. I've been thinking...

 

3C-even short

.....3D-asks

..........3H-5422, 4-6 QPs

..........3S-5422, 2-3 QPs

..........3N-7411

 

or something like that. For positives (reverse relay for example) when pattern is shown at +1 and the "even short" resolves at 3D. Now I guess....

 

3D-even short

.....3H-asks

..........3S-11+ QPs

..........3N-9-10 QPs

..........etc-7411s

 

What do you think?

[shevek]

In our current relay methods we play key card asking bids (and 4D as an end signal) after shape is resolved. We've previously played "control ask" (asking for aces and kings), followed by DCB, but gave that up because we weren't comfortable with it (the auctions took a lot of time, we would have to count on our fingers to see which steps should be skipped, etc).

 

- Simply "man up" and practice DCB style bidding until we're comfortable with it.

 

What's your experience playing QP asks? Is it often that slam is out of the picture after a response? If not playing DCB, the idea of QP ask would be to limit the hand further. We currently play relays after our 1M openings (5+M, 11-16) and our 1D opening (4+D unbalanced, 11-19), what QP ranges would you recommend for these?

 

In our opinion, QP ask and DCB are nearly essential after a strong club and unlimited positive. Otherwise, relayer is often guessing about combined strength. No point in going to the trouble of getting pattern & strength, then giving up on locating honours.

We play 16+ 1♣. QPs start at 5, kontrols at 2. Occasionally responder will give a positive with 4 QPs. We don't cater for that.

We zoom a bit but it's complicated and maybe not worth it.

 

Playing symmetric, 95%+ hands come out by 3♥. QP ask, then DCB has worked well for us.

Our rules (not standard)

- Stopping shows 0, or 2 with the ace (so 0 or 4+ QPs)

- Switch to +ve cueing with singletons (Ignore stiff queens, count stiff K as 1 QP)

- 2nd pass locates lower honours, so KJ, KQ, QJ. (But not AJ, so relayer won't confuse that with KQ)

- If 0/2 shown, 2nd pass confirms 0 (unless can't be the case) then stop shows 2 only, next step = 3 (AKJ, AKQ, AQJ)

- etc

The 4D mild slam try has been good too (see earlier post)

 

Our 11-15 openings start QPs at 6. Range is 6-10, since AAAK opens 1♣.

With your 11-19 1♦, suggest you start at 7.

[Zelandakh]

In our opinion, QP ask and DCB are nearly essential after a strong club and unlimited positive.

Clearly this is not the case as straube's PCB examples prove. There are also plenty of successful systems using CPs rather than QPs - in this case an extra step is usually used after shape resolution to show strength (1st step = min; zoom with extras).

[Kungsgeten]

We've chosen to change our relays after 1M-2C a bit (allows for showing more shapes, but still no separation of min/max), and use 1D-1NT (which may be balanced invitational without a major) as the relay instead of 1D-2C, but after the diamond opening we can show min/extras early since it is more wide ranging. We'll keep the RKC bidding for now, but have discussed changing it to ORKC instead, to cater for slam invites. I think its pretty standard stuff, except perhaps how we show single-suiters:

 

1M-2C;

2D = Clubs or 5332 or 5440

2H = Diamonds

2S = 6+M

2NT = At least 5-5 majors.

3C+ = 4 card major.

 

1M-2C; 2S-2NT;

3C = 7+ major, no void. Relay for shortness (no/low/mid/high).

3D = 6322.

3H = 6331, low short.

3S = 6331, mid short.

3NT = 6331, high short.

4C/D/H = 7+ major, void up the line.

 

1D-1NT;

2C = Two-suited minimum (about 11-15). Not canapé. Responder can invite with 2NT.

2D = 6+D (11-19) or 5C and 4D (11-16). Responder can invite with 2NT (F1).

2H = 4+ clubs, extras. Not canapé (well, may be 6C-5D).

2S = 4 hearts, extras. We open 1M with 6D-5M.

2NT = Three-suited, extras. Not canapé.

3C+ = 4 spades, extras.

 

1D-1NT; 2D-2H;

2S = 6+D minimum.

2NT = 5C and 4D. We're one step higher here, but can't be 6-4...

..3C = R.

....3D = High short.

....3H = 5422.

....3S = 5431 low short.

....3NT = 5440 low short.

3C+ = 6+D extras.

[Zelandakh]

A couple of observations. Firstly I am a firm believer in showing shortages from high to low rather than the other way round, as it means the most expensive step will contain one or both major fragments. I notice that you already do this in your 1♦ auction so I think you should carry that over to your 1M structure for consistency. Secondly, you presumably open 1♠ with 5-5 majors so your 2NT rebid in the 1♥ opening is presumably 6-5 in reality. This part could therefore probably be improved upon.

[Kungsgeten]

A couple of observations. Firstly I am a firm believer in showing shortages from high to low rather than the other way round, as it means the most expensive step will contain one or both major fragments. I notice that you already do this in your 1♦ auction so I think you should carry that over to your 1M structure for consistency. Secondly, you presumably open 1♠ with 5-5 majors so your 2NT rebid in the 1♥ opening is presumably 6-5 in reality. This part could therefore probably be improved upon.

 

We use the symmetric relay principle "length from low to hi, shortness hi to low" in all relay auctions, except when showing single-suiters. In the rest of the system, where we can ask for shortness, we use none/low/mid/high (the reason being that's what we're used to). The reason for using none/low/mid/high when showing single-suiters, is that it mimics our Jacoby/Stenbergs structure, which make the memory load somewhat easier. Any time 2NT is used as a major suit raise, we play the following:

 

1M-2NT;

3C = Minimum, no void.

3D = Extras, no shortness.

3H = Extras, short club.

3S = Extras, short diamonds.

3NT = Extras, short other major.

4C+ = Void up the line.

 

This structure is very popular in Sweden (I would say standard), and while there's probably better structures we haven't bothered changing it.

 

The part about 5-5 majors is absolutely true. It's probably a waste making 2NT show 6-5 majors, but I think we'll use that anyway to make things simple, then 3D = 5-6-0-2, 3H = 5-6-1-1, 3S = 5-6-2-0. Otherwise I actually think nullve's idea of opening 1H with 5-5 majors and max is interesting, but we don't do that.