[Free]

I've been thinking about this for a while, and I gave it some shape now. I just wonder if it's a good idea, if I forgot something, if there are some possible improvements,...

I would play 1m-1M-2NT as Forcing for one round, holding one of following hand types:
- 18-19, balanced, 2-3M (F1)
- 16+-19, 6m, 3M (F1)
- 18-19, 4M, GF
Since responder will (should?) bid 1M with light hands only when he holds a 5+ card suit, he would usually want to signoff in 3M anyway. In case he has a normal response, the follow-up structure should handle most of the problems.

Continuations:
3m = invitational in the minor, no 5M
3Om = relay, GF
3M = signoff, 5+M, weak hand
3OM = natural, GF
3NT = signoff
4C+ = cuebid, 6+M

After the 3Om relay, opener can easily describe his hand:
1♣ - 1M
2NT - 3♦
?

3M = 3 card M (balanced or 6m)
3OM = 2 card M, 18-19, balanced, (24)-3-4
3NT = 2 card M, 18-19, balanced, (23)-3-5 (with 4-4m open 1♦)
4♣+ = 4 card M, GF, cue

1♦ - 1M
2NT - 3♣
?

3♦ = 2 card M, 18-19, balanced, (23)-5-3
3M = 3 card M (balanced or 6m)
3OM = 2 card M, 18-19, balanced, (24)-4-3
3NT = 2 card M, 18-19, balanced, (23)-4-4
4♣+ = 4 card M, GF, cue

The advantages are clear: the "Hand of Death" is no problem anymore, you have more ways of supporting partner (example 1m-1M-4M should be a minimum distributional hand, like AJxx-x-AKJxxx-xx), and you don't lose anything huge. When opener doesn't have support for responder's Major, it will be immediately clear (frequently support on a 3 card at 2-level). Also opener can bid out his balanced hands, so minor suit slams may be discovered.

Problems may be: if you have a 5 card Major and invitational opposite 16+-19HCP you have to bid game. Also, when opener is patterning out his hand, you may give away too much information to your opponents.

So, what do you all think? (be honest please, I can take it)

[jtfanclub]

Just curious, why does it need to be forcing?

Upper limit of the 2NT is 19. Lower limit of a 1M response is 0.

If responder has a 4 card suit, shortness in opener's minor, and <6 hcp, is 2NT a horrible place to play it? On occassion, you'll end up playing a 4-4 major suit fit at 2NT instead of 4 of a major...but only when you don't have the points to be in game anyways.

1m-1M-2NT is 18-19 in SAYC, and isn't forcing. I'm not sure the hands as listed really have the 'oomph' to force to the 3 level. I mean, 18hcp and 2 card support? 2NT is often already too high for these hands.

[jtfanclub]

Just to reply to my own post...

I'm going to assume junk with support for the minor would pass the first time, even with a major. Junk is defined as fewer than 5 hcp, and balanced 5-6 hcp.

I don't think you'll ever want to stop in 3 of a minor on this auction. If partner has junk, you want to play in NT or a major. If he doesn't have junk, you want to be in game.

One response option would be.

1m-1M-2NT
Pass- junk with a 4 card major
3C- GF with a 5 card major (regardless of opener) Maximum response, maximum space.
3D- GF with a 4 card major (regardless of opener), NOT balanced.
3M- Junk with a 5 card major
3OM- Transfer to 3NT, 4 card major, balanced.
3NT- some sort of slam Q.
4M- Junk with a 6+ card major, assuming you don't have WJS available.

[hrothgar]

Hey there:

Here's an idea that I have been toying with for a while: Lets assume that you decide that you want to use 2NT as an artificial raise, much as you are doing here. Furthermore, lets assume that you opened 1♣ (we'll consider the case of a 1♦ opening in a bit)

Why not invert the meaning of 2NT and 2♦?

Use

1♣ - 1M
2♦

as your artificial raise. (You'll need to decide whether or not this bid promises 2+ card suppport for opener's major, 3+ card support or what have you)

In turn, use

1♣ - 1M
2N

as a Diamond reverse (denying X card support for responder's major)

This treatment is (obviously) inspired by Polish Club. I suspect that this treatment is probably playable, though it would require that responder keeps his 1M response reasonably strong so you don't get screwed over by reversing opposite a 2 count or some such.

All things considered a transfer Walsh based system is probably a better way to go. Even so, this might be worth throwing out there.

[inquiry]

I use the 1m-1M-2NT as a "forcing raise" (similar to one of your proposed usages).

The 6+m, 3+M support is handled by 1m-1M-3m (one of your proposed usages for 2NT)

The strong balanced hand, I go through a funnyish treatment taught to me by Misho, using new minor by opener as forcing 1 round. Such that, 1m-1M-2om can be a variety of hands, including strongish three card support, or balanced without three card support, or strongish minor two suiter (but not too strong for me, as I play misiry, so strong 5-5 or better are not possible).

I like the strong raise, as that limits 1m-1M-3M, and also, by force, limits 1m-1M-2M. This turns out to be useful to me because i raise with 3 card support here a lot, and partner will not get too excited.

The big winner on nmfo is 1m-1M-2om-2M-Pass where you would play 2NT or 3M if 2NT was natural.

[Robert]

Hi everyone

You are playing fairly close to KS(Kaplan Sheinwold) type bidding ranges here.

KS plays that the other minor(Om) is a one round force.

1m-1M-1NT=15-17 so you jump to 2NT with 18-19.

1m-1M-3M=18-19 'dummy points' since 1m-1M-2M=15-17

I remember one pair(not playing KS methods) that played 1C-1D-1NT=18-20 and 1D-1M-1NT=12-14

Regards,
Robert

[Free]

jtfanclub, on Aug 16 2007, 05:19 PM, said:

Just curious, why does it need to be forcing?

Upper limit of the 2NT is 19. Lower limit of a 1M response is 0.

If responder has a 4 card suit, shortness in opener's minor, and <6 hcp, is 2NT a horrible place to play it? On occassion, you'll end up playing a 4-4 major suit fit at 2NT instead of 4 of a major...but only when you don't have the points to be in game anyways.

1m-1M-2NT is 18-19 in SAYC, and isn't forcing. I'm not sure the hands as listed really have the 'oomph' to force to the 3 level. I mean, 18hcp and 2 card support? 2NT is often already too high for these hands.

I seldom respond 1M with 0HCP. However, when I would do it, I'd have distribution, at least a 6 card M.

The 2NT rebid doesn't have to be forcing per se, but the hands responder can have make it rather forcing in nature... Either he has a weak hand with 5+M which wants to play 3M opposite any hand opener has, or he has 6+HCP and the situation is pretty much GF. That's why I call it "forcing", not because responder 'has to bid' but because responder 'will bid'.

I agree that a 5-2 fit will often go down at the 3 level, as well as 2NT. But there's no way to tell if opener has 2, 3 or 4 card support, so you might as well bid 3M and hope for the best.

[jtfanclub]

Free, on Aug 19 2007, 03:22 AM, said:

I agree that a 5-2 fit will often go down at the 3 level, as well as 2NT.  But there's no way to tell if opener has 2, 3 or 4 card support, so you might as well bid 3M and hope for the best.

Well, yes. But, maybe that's the whole flaw.

On most auctions, if you have 2 card support, you have another call you can make instead of 2NT. You can reverse, or jump shift, or something; I don't know what you're using 3NT for, but as long as you're going to make 2NT forcing, why not put the few remaining doubleton hands in 3NT?

[Free]

1m-1M-3NT is used with a solid minor as trick source, pretty standard

[lowerline]

An idea from Garozzo's Ambra:

Put the strong (forcing) onesuiters and the balanced hands with 4crd support in the rebid of the other minor (2♦ after a 1♣ opening; 2♣ after a 1♦ opening). This leaves more space to bid these hands.
As a result the 2NT rebid remains pretty standard (denying a 4crd support). After that you can play transfers (3♣, 3♦ and 3♥). The exact meaning is dependent of the context, but responder can always pass the transfer completion. 3♠ will always show a hand with slam interest with exactly a 4crd suit in the previously bid major and a 4crd support for partner's minor.

Steven