[awm]

Suppose I'm interesting in playing a 1♥ opening that shows five or more hearts. I'd like to use the 1NT response as an artificial game force. What's the best way to allocate the other bids?

Ideally I'd like to find as many of my spade fits as possible, get to reasonable partials, and have ways to invite to game with various shapes. In principle all game forces can go through 1NT (although realistically it's probably better to have splinters too) so a lot of bids are available.

It seems like the thing to do would be to play 1♠ as an artificial one-round force, either spades or a balanced hand (kinda like a forcing notrump but including hands with spades also) and then use two over one bids and various jumps as natural and non-forcing (weak or invitational in some combination). The tricky part is finding the spade fits after 1♥-1♠ without getting too high when responder in fact doesn't have spades.

Anyone have some good ideas?

[han]

Doesn't viking club do this? I'd start by looking at their book, I think they play 1S natural.

[jdonn]

han, on Nov 5 2008, 07:38 PM, said:

Doesn't viking club do this? I'd start by looking at their book, I think they play 1S natural.

What about if you are 3244 or 2245 with a minimum response? 1♠ on the first and 2♣ natural nf on the second? I guess that's what it would have to be, but that doesn't sound like much of a system to me.

Maybe the difference is that their 1♥ is limited but awm's isn't.

[jdonn]

Maybe this would work.

1♠ - Forcing notrump including hands with four spades, or invitational wiith 6+ spades.
2♣ - Any invitational hand. Opener would tend to relay with 2♦ especially on minimums, then 2♥ shows a three card limit raise, 2♠ shows five spades, 2NT would be natural so usually balanced or 31(45).
2♦ - Minimum with five spades.
2♥ - Normal.
2♠ - Minimum with six spades.

Every bid but 2♦ already exists as a valid part of other systems. If the 2♦ bid or anything like it already exists I'm not aware of it, but probably it does. I didn't list most ideas, but there are lots of neat things you can do over some of these bids.

I see there is some duplication with 1♠ and 2♣, but heck even better. Maybe then you want to use 2♣ 2♦ and 2♠ as transfers instead.

[awm]

I've looked at Viking Club, and also Symmetric Relay.

Both of these methods seem to essentially give up on effective partscore or invite bidding. They force you to pass the opening with something like 0-8 hcp and doubleton support (even though most modern precision players will not do this). They tend to multiplex invites into one call: "do you have minimum or maximum" which is a total disaster at finding side suit fits and possible light games.

I was looking for something a bit more constructive, hopefully not losing a lot (or even winning) when compared to natural/standard bidding on the non-GF hands.

[keylime]

I'd consider playing KI with this Adam - 1♠ being a hand lacking 4 spades.

[awm]

keylime, on Nov 5 2008, 09:47 PM, said:

I'd consider playing KI with this Adam - 1♠ being a hand lacking 4 spades.

The problem is... what do I bid with a hand where I do have spades?

The usual KI approach is 1♠ = "forcing notrump" and 1NT = "5+♠" but I have assigned 1NT to a different meaning than this.

Now, I have also potentially freed up some 2/1 bids since my GF hands go through 1NT. So maybe in principle I could use these somehow to show spades. But you can see what the problem is.

Josh's approach might work, but I see some problems. I am concerned about finding minor suit fits; these often reach better partials than 2NT and could find games too (especially 5-5 minor suit fits can make 5m pretty often). If you use 2♣ (or 2♦ for that matter) to handle all invites you will often have auctions like 1♥-2♣-2♦(rel)-2NT and could easily miss a nine-card minor fit to play 2NT (say 3514 opposite 3235).

[wclass___]

Imo 1♥ - 1N GF is ok only if the opening is limited.
I played 1♠ nat, 2♣ invitational hands; 2♦ = good heart raise
But, now i belive in catchall 1♠ and 2♣ showing spades...
1M-1N should be forcing in all natural systems, but 1♥-1♠-1N allows to get to 1N safelf
1♠ 3+ is another possibilitie, but i dount know....


Hate Me

[jdonn]

Think of it this way. We play 1♠ forcing notrump, 1NT 5+ spades, 2♠ weak 6 spades. So since all you lose from that is 1NT but you gain 2♣ and 2♦ and 2NT, just find a way to make those cover all hands that are 5 spades weak or 5+ spades invitational. Here is one way since you love those minor suit fits so much.

1♠ = forcing notrump, 0-4 spades
2♣ = minimum 5 spades, opener bids 2♦ with 4+ diamonds, 2♥ with 6+ hearts, or 2NT with something like 1534. Over 2♦
- Pass = 4 diamonds
- 2♥ = 5233 or 5224 (2♠ can ask which)
- 2♠ = 5134
- 2NT = 5125
- 3♣ = 6 clubs
- 3♦ = 5 diamonds
If opener bids 2♥
2♦ = invitational 5 spades 4+ minor, 2♥ relay, 2♠/2NT are 5-4, 3♣/3♦ are 5-5.
2NT = invitational 5233, 4 card minor also allowable based on judgement (if it looks 'balanced')
3m = natural invitational

I came up with that quickly so I'm sure it can be improved (for example 5134 would probably want to pass 2♦ now that I think of it) but I think using every 2 level bid but 2♥ to show spades should cover you, since all other hands can start with 1♠.

[rbforster]

Adam - a few questions about your goals, and possible suggestions depending on the answers...

1. Are you thinking of playing a limited opening system, or more like a "standard" 1♥?
If you're playing a limited system, it might work to open your 5♥332 hands 1NT (13-15) or pass with less. This constrains your opening choices a little, but preempting the spade overcall when you've got hearts isn't that bad either. Now you could reserve the 1♥-1♠*-1N rebid by opener for showing 4♠. Responder with a minimum balanced and both minors could pass, or bid naturally.

2. Are you thinking of playing some specific relays over your 1♥-1N GF ask?
If you don't mind making the relays a little less efficient (and more natural), you could play 1N as a normal "forcing NT" with natural rebids and any new suit by responder would confirm the game force. This will get you to many good partials in the same way a regular 2/1 forcing NT does, and keeps the natural 1♠ response too. The downside here is that your GF hands might be a little vulnerable to preemption since opener won't know if he can safely bid (no special meaning to his pass), that your rebids by opener after 1♥-1N will be constrained to be mostly natural (to be passable), and higher bids will have to be restricted to fairly rare hand types with extra values and/or extra shape to avoid getting too high opposite a minimum forcing NT.

More generally though, here's a set of methods that might be useful on the part score side of things. I'll leave the higher responses to your taste in raises or specialized game forces. I'll assume that 3 card limit raises are handled per 2/1 style in the "forcing NT" response, while 4+ limit raises have a higher bid available (3♥ or Bergen).

1♥-?

1♠ forcing NT style, including almost all spade hands not suitable for a weak jump shift
1N art GF
2♣ 5+ weakish (NF)
2♦ 5+ invitational (NF)
2♥ normal raise
2♠ 6+ weak jump (NF), could be 5/5+ ♠♣ too (and rarely 5/5+ ♠♦ with no hearts)

1♥-1♠*-?

1N min with 4♠, or 3♠ and balanced - 35(32) 45xx
2♣ 4+ natural
2♦ 3+ natural (includes 2533)
2♥ 6+ natural
2♠+ natural and extras

Besides the special 1N rebid by opener (discussed later), responder's bids are natural and the same as over the standard forcing NT sequence. Note that 2♣ promises 4 while 2♦ promises only 3 to cater to the possible weak one-suiter in diamonds that's possible (but the corresponding weak club hand already bid 2♣ NF).

1♥-1♠*-2m or 2♥-?

P preference
2♦ long weak diamonds
2♥ preference
2♠ 5+ invitational
2N invitational, fewer than 5♠
3♣ invitational with long clubs
3m invitational raise
3♥ invitational raise
3♠ highly invitational with 6+ spades

Note 2m/2♥ rebids by opener deny 4♠. Thus further spade bids by responder here are 5+ invites. With 5 spades and a weak hand responder will need to pass or preference between opener's suits (weak hands with 5♠ and no tolerance for one of opener's rebids should consider a 2♠ WJS initially. Typically these will have a heart void).

1♥-1♠*-1NT*-? (opener is min - 35xx bal or 45xx)

P always an option
2♣ XYZ style relay to 2♦, and then
   P long weak diamonds
   2♥ preference with 4♠2♥
   2♠ 4♠ invitational
   2N invitational semibalanced with clubs
   3♣,3♦ game tries with spades agreed (5+♠)
2♦ asks for opener's preference between diamonds and spades (typically 4144 or 4153); opener should bid 2♠ with 4.
2♥ preference, no interest in spades
2♠ preference with 5+♠ (rarely 4135)
2N invitational bal or semibal, at most 3=2 in the majors, typically with both minors
3♣ invitational, distributional with long clubs

This should do pretty well in terms of finding all the major fits/preferences, although weakish 2-suiters with clubs may have some difficulty since they have to guess early whether to bid 2♣ NF or to try 1♠ forcing to try to find a better fit.

In terms of major fits, the only ones that get lost are a few 5-3 spade fits where opener has 3 spades but rebids either a minor or hearts. But these get lost in standard too when responder is too weak to take another call (and wasn't long enough in spades to make a WJS earlier).

The spade WJS hands are treated a little worse than in standard since these have to decide earlier whether to bid 2♠ directly or not, while in standard they can bid 1♠ and consider partner's response before bidding 2♠ NF or preferencing instead.

Edit: minor improvements to the 1♥-1♠-1N follow-ups

[ASkolnick]

If you are playing 1N forcing, you could set it up as follows:

a) Normal 1N forcing hands (1H-1N-2C-P)
New suits become GF. (1H-1N-2C-2D)
c) NT, then raise invitational. (1H-1N-2C-2H)

One thing I know is that this is GCC legal. I asked Sol Weinstein a couple of months ago. You do lose on the really weak 2 type hands with a bad suit, but I think those are much more infrequent then people think. It means that partner didn't open a weak 2 and his hand is not as constructive.

Therefore, with invitational hands with a suit, just bid a "constructive-invitational" 2-1. Depending on style or what forcing opening is, you can play this as 1 round force or non-forcing in a limited scope.

[Mbodell]

I'm used to limited 1♥ openers where most 5332 will be in NT unless below our NT range and 55 in the majors get opened something else as well.

Then we play 1NT is artificial game force (in a TOSR setting). 1♠ is NFConst. 2♣ is drury and use a form of game tries that can resolve long or short tries in any suit as well as power ask or trump strength ask. 2♦ is NFConst. 2♥ is normal weak 6-9 raise. 2♠ is weak jump. 2NT is natural 10-12 and either exactly 2 hearts or some 4333 with 3 hearts. 3♣ and 3♦ are sort of non-fit jumps showing NFConst values but at most a stiff heart. 3♥ is preemptive weak raise. 4♥ is to play (wide ranging). 3NT is exactly 2 hearts and balanced to play.

We do pass with the 8 HCP doubletons, and even sometimes with 9 HCP. This probably doesn't meet your needs though for good minor part score auctions (plus drury in all seats isn't always allowed - we can usually play it at the club but not in most tournaments).

[awm]

I'd like to design something that works in both a system with wide-ranging openings or with limited openings. While obviously there are some differences between these, most good precision players will bid over 1M on more or less the same hands that the 2/1 players bid over 1M (i.e. you don't see a lot of this "pass with 6-9 hcp" business in the modern game).

Looking at what people have suggested:

(1) Josh Donn's version will be very good at finding spade fits. However there are likely to be some awkward sequences after 1♥-2m when the best fit is in a minor suit.

(2) Rob Forster's version will miss some 5-3 spade fits, especially when responder is less than game invitational. This includes opener's 35(14) hands where standard auction would be 1♥-1♠-2♠. There are also some issues after 1♥-2♠ (WJS) when opener has singleton spade (should he pass hoping responder has six, or look for responder's minor suit where a huge fit could exist).

Both of these look like they are not really "better" than standard bidding over 1♥ (perhaps we make up the losses in the 1NT relay, perhaps not) although they should not be much worse.

Here's an idea I came up with:

1♠ = any non-fitting weak or invitational hand except weak with 6+♣ and 0-1♥, invite with a 6m, or invite with 5+/5+ in the minors

1NT = GF relay

2♣ = invitational with a 6+ minor or with 5+/5+ minors

2♦ = a good raise to 2♥ (like 9-11 or a bad 12 hcp)

2♥ = a bad raise to 2♥ (like 5-8 hcp)

2♠ = invitational with 6+♠, not forcing

2NT = a strong four-card heart raise (LR+)

3♣ = weak with 6+♣, 0-1♥

3♦ = a mixed raise of hearts

3♥ = a weak raise of hearts

Hopefully it is immediately evident that there are some wins here outside of the GF relay. The "good 2♥ bid" will substantially help us in staying at the two-level instead of getting overboard trying for game opposite a wide-ranging single raise (or jumping to three-level with a 3-card limit raise) as well as making our game bidding opposite limit raises more accurate (room for game tries now). Invitational 5-5 minor hands are pretty tough to bid in most standard methods and now we have a way to bid those too. The 2♠ bid is a potential win over standard methods.

So how about the 1♥-1♠ auction. Here are continuations:

1NT = 4+♦ or 2533, 3532 patterns, forcing one round
2♣ = 4+♣ or 3523, limited strength (like a standard 2♣ rebid)
2♦ = like flannery, 4♠ and 5+♥, not enough to reverse into spades
2♥ = normal 2♥ rebid, denies 4♠
2♠ = natural reverse
2NT = 3♠ and 6+♥, extras
3♣ = game force, guaranteeing 4+♣ and 5+♥
3♦ = game force with 6+♥ (note 1NT is F1 so can bid that with diam GF)
3♥ = normal 3♥ rebid, without 3♠
3♠, 4♣, 4♦ = splinter with self-sufficient hearts

You can see that we haven't found our 5-3 spade fits (yet). But we can! Some follow-ups:

1♥-1♠-1NT:

2♣ = relay, either 5♠ (maybe 4 very strong ♠) or invite with 4♦
...... 2♦ = 4+♦ and not GF, no 3♠ (now like 1♥-1♠-2♦)
...... 2♥ = 2533 and not a lot extra (here pass/2♠ to play, 2NT natural INV, 3m INV 5m)
...... 2♠ = 3♠ and fairly minimum (like 11-15) (2N INV with 4♦, else agree spades)
...... 2N = balanced and serious extras, something like 16-17 (natural continuations)
...... 3♣ = 0544/1543, GF values
...... 3♦ = 5+♦ and GF values
...... 3♥ = GF 6/4 hand
...... 3♠ = 3♠ and serious extras (16+); forcing to game
...... 3NT = only 2♠, 2533 or 2542 and GF values
2♦ = 4+♦, want to play 2♦, generally denies 5♠, if only 4♦ then 0-1♥
2♥ = 2♥, generally denies 5♠ or 5♦
2♠ = weak with 6+♠
2NT = natural invite, generally denies holding 5♠ or 4♦
3♣ = very shapely diamond raise
3♦ = invitational with 5+♦, generally denies 5♠

1♥-1♠-2♣:

Pass = no 5♠, would pass a natural 2♣ rebid after 1♥-1NT(F)
2♦ = relay, 5♠ (maybe 4 very strong ♠) or 4♣ invite
...... 2♥ = no 3♠, thus 4+♣, not 17-18 hcp
.......... 2♠ = invite with 5♠ and not 4♣; in principle can be passed
.......... 2N = invite with 4♣ (normally correct to 3♣ if not accept)
.......... 3♣ = weak with club fit, likely 5♠ also
...... 2♠ = 3♠, fairly minimum (like 11-15); 2NT shows 4♣ invite, else agree spades
...... Else = essentially natural with extra values
2♥ = 2♥, no 5♠
2♠ = 6+♠ weak, maybe also 5143 in that order (misfit)

[david_c]

This is (or maybe was) part of the Welland-Fallenius system:

1♠ = like a forcing NT but may have 4-5 spades. Opener's rebids are transfers.
1NT = GF relay
2♣ = 5+ spades 9-12
2♦ = good heart raise
2♥ = nat
2♠ = weak

[Flame]

I know its not popular but i think since the ♠ issue is so dramatic here, it make sense to play some kind of flanery.

[benlessard]

What we play is that.

1H show 5 and is unbalanced 12-14 or 18-22.

1H-----1S (relay 6+)

1NT 4+♣
2C 4+♦
2D 6+♥
2H 5H+4S 12-14

the rest is GF with 5H & 4S


1H-----???

1Nt (minor one suiter) or S inv
2C C+ higher suit 6-10 and stiff H
2D D + S 6-10 stiff H
2H (we like to use it as invitationnal with S and 2H but single raise is probably better)
2S Spades INV & (stiff H)

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

My first impression was, why 1NT?

You may have a look at Ron Klinger Power System,
he uses a 2D response as GF, and a 2C response as
inv., works.
You are just two steps higher, than would be the case,
if you would use 1NT, but I would doubt that this matters
a lot.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[awm]

P_Marlowe, on Nov 7 2008, 04:47 PM, said:

Hi,

My first impression was, why 1NT?

You may have a look at Ron Klinger Power System,
he uses a 2D response as GF, and a 2C response as
inv., works.
You are just two steps higher, than would be the case,
if you would use 1NT, but I would doubt that this matters
a lot.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Actually it does matter. A lot. This is the way of things with relays, one or two steps makes a huge difference.

I will note that I have kibitzed Ron Klinger playing in top-flight Australian events on BBO several times recently. He doesn't play "Ron Klinger Power System" -- this system is already very out of date. What he plays now appears to be a modified Symmetric Relay with some polish club-like elements.

[akhare]

I don't know whether this helps, but we play the following (Moscito-like) structure over 1♠ showing 5+♦s:

1N: Forcing 1 round, doesn't necessarily promise GF strength
2C: 5+ ♥, constructive, forcing 1 round
2D: 5+ ♦, constructive, forcing 1 round

After opener's response to 1N (typically 2♣ / 2♦), 2♥ is the GF relay.

BTW, in ACBL-land, the 1N response can't be GF, but it's OK as long as it doesn't *promise* inv+ values.

You can probably get by if you play 2♣ / 2♦ as constructive NF bids.

After 1♥ - 1N:

2♣: 4+ ♣s or any balanced hand
2♦+ -> naturalish

The cheapest bid by responder continues the relay and relay breaks are invitational...

[jdonn]

awm, on Nov 7 2008, 04:52 PM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Nov 7 2008, 04:47 PM, said:

Hi,

My first impression was, why 1NT?

You may have a look at Ron Klinger Power System,
he uses a 2D response as GF, and a 2C response as
inv., works.
You are just two steps higher, than would be the case,
if you would use 1NT, but I would doubt that this matters
a lot.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Actually it does matter. A lot. This is the way of things with relays, one or two steps makes a huge difference.

I will note that I have kibitzed Ron Klinger playing in top-flight Australian events on BBO several times recently. He doesn't play "Ron Klinger Power System" -- this system is already very out of date. What he plays now appears to be a modified Symmetric Relay with some polish club-like elements.

I read the others and I still like mine. Maybe discussion will open my eyes and maybe small changes could be beneficial, but what don't you like exactly?