Needed: study material on 1M-2C & 1D-2C Full relay

[Chamaco]

Hi all :)

I am starting to agree a Precision-like system with a new pard.

 

One of the feature my pard has proposed is to use:

 

1M (5+, max 15hp) :2C = GF relay

1D (4+, unbalanced, MAX 15 HCP):2C = GF relay

 

1D excludes balanced 12-15, which are opened 1NT.

 

2C would the start of a full relay sequence for shape, etc etc.

The same 2C relay structure will be used also in strong club sequences when responder is positive with 5M or 5D.

 

Now the question.

It is the first time I will play a full relay sequence.

We did not agree yet on which relay to use, and my pard seems quite openminded.

 

The real criteria should be:

- being able to discriminate early if opener 1M is min or max, at least whern he has a 2 suiter (5332/5422 or single suiters do not need this discrimination): since we will open 1S with both ATxxx-x-KQxxx-xx AND AQxxx-x-KQxxx-Kx , it is important for opener to be able to deliver extra playing strength, even if he is only responding to a relay;

- EASE of memorizing: yes yes, I know many of you relayers will say "just play it a few times and it will be automatic" :-).

Yet, my point is the following: "AMONG ALL RELAY VERSIONS, WHICH IS THE MOST STRAIGHTFORWARD?"

 

IMPORTANT!

PLEASE NOTE THAT IN ALL CASES THE RELAY HAS TO START EXACTLY WITH 2C, NOT STEP LOWER (yes yes I know many of you start with a lower step, 1NT or lower, but this is simply impossible for what we play, so let's skip this issue)

 

 

SO: DO YOU KNOW OF ANY AVAILABLE MATERIAL DESCRIBING AN "EASY" 2C FULL-RELAY SEQUENCE ?

(BOOKS ARE OK, I'LL ORDER THEM, BUT ONLINE MATERIAL IS BETTER BECAUSE I'LL READ IT EARLIER!!!)

 

 

Thanks everybody!!!! :D

 

Mauro

[hrothgar]

Dear Mauro

 

I think that your plan is badly flawed.

 

If you are going to play relay methods, then bite the bullet and play a FULL relay structure, using first step as strong artificial and forcing. The benefits of the extra biddig space are enormous. Most notably: you can adopt Symmetric Relay or Numeric Relay. Both of these structures are extremely intuitive and can be applied in a comprehensive manner across your entire system.

 

In contrast, if you use 2♣ as your relay

 

1. You are adding enormous amounts of complexity which only applies to a small part of your constructive bidding. The implications for memory load are ugly.

2. The structure is going to be inefficient because you are resolving shape at too high a level.

 

I'd be very curious why your partner is so insistent that the 2♣ must be used as the initial relay ask.

 

With this said and done, I think that your best bet is to check out "Power System" by Ron Klinger. Power System uses

 

1M - 2♦ as a game forcing relay

1M - 2♣ is a game invitational relay. If Opener holds a max, he uses the same responses as after the game force relay.

 

Please note: I don't like Power System. The relay structure is non-intuitive and extremely inefficient. But, such is the price one pays...

[Chamaco]

I'd be very curious why your partner is so insistent that the 2♣ must be used as the initial relay ask.

 

Because he would like to use the same structure over 1C when responder bids a major:

 

1C:

...........1H = any 15+ hcp or H 8-14; 1S asks

....................1NT = 15+ hand, unbalanced,

....................2C = 15+ balanced

....................HIGHER RESPONSES IMPLY 5+ H AND ARE THE SAME AS 1H:2C

...........1S = 12-14 bal or S 8-14; 1NT asks

....................2C = 12-14 balanced

....................HIGHER RESPONSES IMPLY 5+ S AND ARE THE SAME AS 1S:2C

...........1NT = 8-14, same shapes as 1D opener; 2C asks

....................RESPONSES ARE THE SAME AS 1D:2C

...........2C= 8-11 bal, 2D asks

...........2D->2NT= various shapes of clubs

 

BASICALLY

2C is the relay for all Major or diamonds, SAME FOLLOWUPS in EVERY SEQUENCE.

2D is the positive relay for ALL balanced hand (even 1NT opener = sort of 2-way stayman with 2D starting relay)

 

 

Te 2C relay is the same for 1H and 1S and also the 1D opener should follow similar principles= memorize only one set of info.

 

I understand this might not be optimal (I really am not in a position to be able to judge), but my own definition of "optimal" is a compromise between efficiency and harmny with pard (e.g. play something that makes pard happy while guaranteeing a minimum level of effectiveness).

[csdenmark]

Mauro I know you have studied Viking Precision - normal relay structure.

If you look into Icelandic Precision you will see with symmetric relay structure.

 

As I am not interested in private systems myself I have not given much attention to your conditions. But that much - they are both using 2♣ for GF relay and both has parallel structures for 1♣ open.

 

You find both systems in full versions on www.bridgefiles.net

[awm]

Ron Klinger published a fairly complete relay structure for 1M-2♣ in his book "The Power of Shape." Of course, this is just the last chapter in the book; the rest of it is interesting but maybe more geared towards intermediate players.

 

DeFalco and Ollina seem to use something of a relay structure after 1M-2♣ which has some of the desirable properties you describe; however I believe for them 2♣ is not "any GF" and instead shows clubs, or balanced, or a constructive major suit raise. Also this may not be a "complete" relay system as I don't think exact shape is usually known. Methods similar to (but not identical to) theirs are described in the Ambra notes which can be found on Dan Neill's page.

 

Personally I have never seen much value in relays over 1M openings, but obviously some people in these forums feel differently.

[the hog]

Richard has mentioned relays from Klinger's Power system. They are not very intuitive, but do work ok provided you and your partner are prepared to put in the effort to learn them.

 

Where you will gain heaps is when you use the 2C invitational relay. When I played Power some years ago, we had numerous auctions such as 1H 2C 2D (min opening) 2H on a combined 22/23 count when the field was in 3. You can imagine this gains heaps when 3 can't make due to a bad break or whatever. I still have the notes floating about somewhere on this structure if you want them.

 

If you don't like this, then have a look a Ice relay, which uses 1M 2C as a gfr.

 

Ron

[david_c]

2C would the start of a full relay sequence for shape, etc etc.

I wonder what you mean by "full relay" here. Presumably it means that it should be possible to find out the complete shape, and then have further relays available afterwards. This is what I currently do in 1M:2C auctions, and to be honest it suffers from a lack of space. If the relay was 1NT then this problem would be solved, but I'm very reluctant to give up the normal meaning for 1NT (particularly over a 1S opening).

 

Personally I prefer not-quite-full relays, as in Ambra etc. That involves not always being able to find out the complete shape, though you get very close. It gives up some of the accuracy in slam bidding. But it's still an improvement compared to natural bidding because it gives the relayer a sensible way to bid his hand - in natural methods you are often in a situation where there is no particular suit you want to show, so you have to make the most meaningless bid available hoping to get more information. These relays do the same thing but in a more systematic and space-saving way.

[Flame]

I wouldnt call it a full relay but I play like the italian boochi dubin play 2c over 1M as a relay or invite with 3 cards or invite with 6 good clubs.

You can find it on boochi dubin cc, or more detailed on the italian's woman pair on 2004 europe on the ecat site. I like this relay very much , as its pretty easy to remember and very effective.

[Chamaco]

Ron Klinger published a fairly complete relay structure for 1M-2♣ in his book "The Power of Shape."

Ty all ! :-)

 

I have Klinger's book,

I was trying to collect as much info as possible to sort out the various schemes and evaluate the respective tradeoff between ease and efficiency.

 

I think for the GF hands we will use Klinger's structure from the "Power of shape" (which is different from the Power System): a 2C GF relay scheme over 1D and 1M (just for the record, over a natural ACOL-like 1C opener -which of course does not fit a Precision scheme - Klinger's suggested GF relay wd be 1NT).

 

Also note I found online another structure over 1S opener from a system called "The way forward":

http://www.cam.ac.uk/societies/bridge/articles/twf10.htm

 

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

 

The overall scheme we shall play over 1M opener.

It is largely based on Robson-Segal's scheme, applied also in uncontested auction:

- Fitshowing jumps

- 2NT raise inv+, scanian development

- concealed splinters

- 1NT(or 1S over1H) forcing denies 3 card support.

 

Comments are welcome:

 

1H:?

......1S = Kaplan inversion, less than GF, denies 3 card support (might be 4333) AND denies 5S (opener rebis 1NT with 4S)

......1NT = Kaplan inversion, 5+S, less than GF

......2C = GF relay, usually no 4+ card support

......2D = 3 card support, 10+ losers (about 0-7hcp) OR 8 losers (10-12, invitational)

......2H = constructive raise, about 9 losers

......2S = Fitshowing jump

......2NT = Inv+ 4 card support, SCANIAN raise followup

......3C/D = FSJ

......3H = preemptive

......3S = Concealed splinter

......3NT = FSJ in spades

......4C/D = FSJ

......4H = preemptive

 

 

1S:?

......1NT = forcing 1R, denies 3 card support; cannot have an inv. hand with 5 H (that hand would bid directly 2H), so if later show H, it's weak hand;

......2C = GF relay, usually no 4+ card support

......2D = 3 card support, 10+ losers (about 0-7hcp) OR 8 losers (10-12, invitational)

......2H = Invitational, 5+ hearts

......2S = Constructive raise, 9 losers

......2NT = Inv+ 4 card support, SCANIAN raise followup

......3C/D/H = FSJ

......3S = preemptive

......3NT = Concealed splinter

......4C/D/H = FSJ

......4S = preemptive

[david_c]

I don't see why 1H:1NT has to be strictly less than GF. It's often useful to be able to describe your hand instead of relaying. Particularly if you have a distributional hand short in partner's suit, you would rather not have to relay (in my opinion).

 

My methods over 1M include a 2C relay; but I don't use the relay with a 5-card major unless the hand is balanced (we play 1S:2D as inv+ with 5+ hearts). With a 5-card minor we will certainly start with 2C, but if we have shortage in partner's major we will often break relays on the next round.

[Chamaco]

I don't see why 1H:1NT has to be strictly less than GF. It's often useful to be able to describe your hand instead of relaying. Particularly if you have a distributional hand short in partner's suit, you would rather not have to relay (in my opinion).

On this specific point I agree wholeheartedly with you.

 

I do not particularly fancy to have to go via the relay with any GF hand.

 

However, my pard has come to a compromise with me over other bidding sequences, so it seems just about fair that I accept giving this a try.

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

 

On the other hand, I like the fact that the 1S:2H sequence as specifically invitational removes the problematic hearts-based hands from 1NT forcing sequences, AND the fact that 1NT forcing (or 1S) specifically excludes support for pard's major.

[Free]

I'm used to play 1NT as relay, invitational or stronger. Whenever you have a freak hand, you can break relays after you've bid 1NT and heard your response. This helps for non-forcing 2-level bids :)

 

However, last week or so, I heard an interesting approach: transfers! This way you can describe your own hand, and when you have a GF hand, opener won't pass. This is imo a very good approach, since you can bid weak or strong using simple transfers, you can show FSJ's without jumping in several situations,... At this moment I don't have experience playing it, and it will stay like this for a while since my partner has exams, and soon I'll have them to ;)

[MickyB]

However, last week or so, I heard an interesting approach: transfers!

You are going to have to do some serious grovelling to get Richard to forgive you for this ;) In the MOSCITO document the point is made that transfers leave the opponents an easy way into the auction.

[hrothgar]

However, last week or so, I heard an interesting approach: transfers!

You are going to have to do some serious grovelling to get Richard to forgive you for this ;) In the MOSCITO document the point is made that transfers leave the opponents an easy way into the auction.

I also note that the Scandinavians seem very happy with their transfer response structures...

 

There are advantages and disadvantages to everything. Right now, 2/1's playing MOSCITO aren't quite as frequent as one would want (The primary reason that Marston is experimenting with 2/1's as 1 round forcing is to increase the frequency of the response)

 

I prefer to play 2/1s as natural and non-forcing. However, if I were to bite the bullet and have forcing 2/1s I'd probably want to implement a transfer based response strucutre.

[Adebisi]

Hi , here is Fallenius-Nilslands developments they used to play, hope it helps:)

MAJOR SUIT RELAYS

 

The 2 C GF relay

 

1 M - 2 C shows either a GF hand (any) or clubs with at least two-over-one strength. Opener shows distribution over relays. When responder breaks the relay chain he can often rebid clubs as nonforcing. If other bids show clubs or not depends on the situation.

The same relay scheme is used after the strong club.

Wild 2N

After identifying a sidesuit, openers 2 N shows

10+ cards in two suits and a void somewhere

 

Rebids and continuation after 2 C when responder has a GF hand:

 

2 • a) one suiter (no side suit - including 5332)

:) Wild with 4+ diamonds

2 H ® relay

2 S onesuiter without shortness(not real good 5332/6322)

2NT ®

3 C 5332

3 • asks for doubleton (Techs)

3 x seminat., may invite 3 N (or start cue)

3 N suggest 3 N

4 m cue (openers M trumps)

3 • 6322

3 M 5422 boring with SS minor

techs

2 N Wild with diamonds (cont. next page)

 

3 C 6331 or 8-cardsuit

over relay 4C shows 8-cardsuit,3N/4• is apair

3 • 7321 or bad 7330

3 H R

step 1-3 spl, 4-6 void

3 H 5332 good trumps and controls

from an unlimited hand 3-4 extra HCP

3 S ditto with 6322

3N void OM , 7+ suit

4m void, 7+suit

2 S-card clubs, NF after a 1 S -opening

2 N 6-card clubs, GF

3 C 6-card clubs, NF

 

1M - 2 C, continued

2 H 4+ OM

2 S R

2 N Wild

3 C+ TLS (Three level scheme - see below)

2 S 4+ diamonds, not Wild hands

2 N R

3 C+ TLS

2 N Wild with 4+ C

3 C + TLS with 4+ C

 

Apair

When 3 N is the response to a relay, apair means that 4 C or 4 •has the same meaning with a better hand. Apair is in general always used in relay biddings when 3 N can be passed. When the strength already is narrowly defined or when 3 N is forcing we may have agreed not to use apair.

 

Wild scheme (used after a Wild 2 N)

2 N - 3 C R

3 • higher void, over relay as below

3 H lower void 55

3 S lower void 64

3 N 65

4 C+ 74/66/75

 

TLS (Three Level Scheme)

 

When bidding at the three level both suits are known. Then we show our distribution with TLS.

 

3 C exactly 5-4

3 • R

3 H 22

3 S 13

3 N 31 with apair

 

3 • exactly 6-4, over R 12/21 with apair

3 H 5-5 as above

3 S 5-6, 3 N not to play

3 N 5440, void in next higher suit (with club void , key on OM)

4 C 6-5 (1-1)

4 • 7-4 (1-1

[Syl20]

My methods over 1M include a 2C relay; but I don't use the relay with a 5-card major unless the hand is balanced (we play 1S:2D as inv+ with 5+ hearts). With a 5-card minor we will certainly start with 2C, but if we have shortage in partner's major we will often break relays on the next round.

Could you please explain the continuations after 1♠-2♦ (when shall the opener relay in 2♥ and when shall he further describe...) ?

 

How do you then cope with unbalanced hands with ♣ or ♦ 9-11hcp ?

 

Thanks

[david_c]

My methods over 1M include a 2C relay; but I don't use the relay with a 5-card major unless the hand is balanced (we play 1S:2D as inv+ with 5+ hearts). With a 5-card minor we will certainly start with 2C, but if we have shortage in partner's major we will often break relays on the next round.

Could you please explain the continuations after 1♠-2♦ (when shall the opener relay in 2♥ and when shall he further describe...) ?

We're playing that 2♥ shows any minimum, and anything else is forcing to game. That's the simplest way of doing it. Other systems that I've seen allow opener to rebid 2♠ with a misfitting minimum hand. This has the advantage of giving better description to opener's 2♥ rebid; the disadvantage is that responder may have to invent a minor suit in order to force after 1♠:2♦,2♠.

 

How do you then cope with unbalanced hands with ♣ or ♦ 9-11hcp ?

You can find some discussion on this in the recent topic "invitational jump shifts". My preference (though it's not what I'm currently playing) is to put them into the 1NT response, intending to rebid the minor at the 3-level (assuming that the suit is good enough). If you previously used sequences like 1♠:1NT,2♦:3♣ to show weaker hands, then you have to do something else with those hands. What I like is:

 

over 1♥: Play that 1♥:1NT,2x:2♠ shows a weak 3♣ or 3♦ rebid.

 

over 1♠: Pretend the weak hands don't exist, or play 1♠:3m as a natural weak jump.

[Chamaco]

If you previously used sequences like 1♠:1NT,2♦:3♣ to show weaker hands, then you have to do something else with those hands. What I like is:

 

over 1♥: Play that 1♥:1NT,2x:2♠ shows a weak 3♣ or 3♦ rebid.

 

over 1♠: Pretend the weak hands don't exist, or play 1♠:3m as a natural weak jump.

 

There is a possible improvement to solve the difference of weak minor one suiters and invitational minors one suiter.

 

If bidding goes 1M:1NT:2x:?

 

Now the direct 3m is invitational, whereas 2NT is Lebensohl (puppet to 3C then pass/correct).

 

Of course, in order to apply this, you have to put somewhere else the invitational balanced hand (since 2NT cannot be passed): the idea is to include in 1NT forcing the GAME FORCE balanced hand instead of the invitational (so that when pard puppets to 3C, you just bid 3NT).

 

The invitational balanced goes via a 2/1 (switching the balanced GF and the invitational GF).

[Syl20]

That's the simplest way of doing it. Other systems that I've seen allow opener to rebid 2♠ with a misfitting minimum hand. This has the advantage of giving better description to opener's 2♥ rebid; the disadvantage is that responder may have to invent a minor suit in order to force after 1♠:2♦,2♠.

I don't see the point: responder is invitational and opener is msfit minimum thus why should responder want to force ?

 

Ok about invitational jump at 3♣/♦ with 9-11 and 6 cards but what about 9-11H and 5♣/♦ and 4♥ over 1♠ opening ?

 

Finally, if 2♦ shows ♥, what is your use for 2♥ (still over 1♠ opening) ?

[david_c]

That's the simplest way of doing it. Other systems that I've seen allow opener to rebid 2♠ with a misfitting minimum hand. This has the advantage of giving better description to opener's 2♥ rebid; the disadvantage is that responder may have to invent a minor suit in order to force after 1♠:2♦,2♠.

I don't see the point: responder is invitational and opener is msfit minimum thus why should responder want to force ?

Our 2♦ response includes game-forcing hands with hearts, as well as the invitational ones. You could agree to use the relay on the game-forcing hands, but I'd rather not.

 

Ok about invitational jump at 3♣/♦ with 9-11 and 6 cards but what about 9-11H and 5♣/♦ and 4♥ over 1♠ opening ?

These problems are all the same as if you're playing natural 2/1GF ... respond 1NT, and if partner doesn't rebid one of your suits you will usually continue with 2NT on the next round.

 

Finally, if 2♦ shows ♥, what is your use for 2♥ (still over 1♠ opening) ?

We're using this to show 3-card spade support, with a better hand than a direct raise to 2♠. Similar to "drury".