[hrothgar]

awm, on Dec 17 2008, 04:09 AM, said:

While I think relays are good in some auctions, most of the published "relay systems" seem to go overboard with it. Relay is not the best way to find a reasonable partial, or to invite game, or to determine whether we have the necessary stoppers for 3NT. So while relays can be a big win on the occasional slam decision... I think I'd go with some form of precision or even "standard" bidding with relays in a small number of auctions. Garrozzo has proposed some nice methods in the "standard with relays" style.

I view relays in much the same way that I view strong club opening

I don't playing Strong Club because I like opening 1♣ with hands with 15+ HCPs. I play strong club because I beleive that the benefits from light / limited opening outweigh the costs.

In much the same way, I don't play relay becase I believe that relay structures are the best way to decide between 3N and 4M. With a few exceptions, I beleive that relay auctions are inferior to natural bidding.

The reason that you play relay is that relays make very efficient use of bidding space, allowing you to free up bids for other (useful) purposes

[han]

If I had an infinite amount of time I wouldn't waste it thinking about bridge systems. I'd probably play some form of precision.

[the hog]

han, on Dec 17 2008, 09:10 AM, said:

If I had an infinite amount of time I wouldn't waste it thinking about bridge systems. I'd probably play some form of precision.

But Han if your time is infinite, how would you be wasting it?

[kenrexford]

The_Hog, on Dec 16 2008, 10:28 PM, said:

han, on Dec 17 2008, 09:10 AM, said:

If I had an infinite amount of time I wouldn't waste it thinking about bridge systems. I'd probably play some form of precision.

But Han if your time is infinite, how would you be wasting it?

Well, technically he said that he would not waste it. This is true. You cannot "waste" infinite time.

[TylerE]

I voted Precision because that's the closest thing - In trust some sort of Canape' big club - Something along the lines of Hamway perhaps.

[PrecisionL]

I would play almost any Strong Club with canape (FCF: four cards first). It is fun and you can add as much science as you like (and your partner can stand).

Larry

[shevek]

Strong pass.
Either you bid or you have a good hand. Irresistible.
I have a short attention span and get bored easily.

[han]

The_Hog, on Dec 16 2008, 10:28 PM, said:

han, on Dec 17 2008, 09:10 AM, said:

If I had an infinite amount of time I wouldn't waste it thinking about bridge systems. I'd probably play some form of precision.

But Han if your time is infinite, how would you be wasting it?

You mean, I could sit here readings the forums all day and it would be a day well spent?

[MickyB]

I'd be playing something that varied greatly by conditions, especially seat.

First seat, I'd be playing something akin to MOSCITO. Something designed to reach your final contract in two bids to really pressurise fourth seat. This is more important to me than any of the factors that I'm about to mention for the other seats, partly because, when we are in first, there's no chance that someone will have opened in front of us, so we'll always have the opportunity to use our openings when our hand is suitable.

Second seat, I'd be playing a 17+ strong club. There's less advantage to having sharply-defined limited openings than in first, but having the strong club means we don't have the problem of showing 17-19 bal at our next turn, without resorting to a 2C/2D opening showing this hand. Another option here would be Polish Club.

In third, I'd stick with the strong club, despite it gaining less on slam-bidding when opposite a passed hand. The structure I have in mind has 9-13 2m openings and can open 1M on 4M5m 9-13, both of which are especially suited to third seat.

In fourth, I'd play strong NT and five-card majors or Polish Club. No need for preemptive four-card majors or 2D openings here, and only low-level competition anticipated.

SAYC and Acol having one vote between them is one vote too many. SAYC has literally no advantages when compared with 2/1 GF except rebid.

[Gerben42]

Having played almost all existing systems and some that don't, I don't know what is the BEST system, but I'd probably play what I play now: An agressive Fantunes-type system with 2-level 9-12, 1-level 13+ and forcing.

I think it is the kind of system that naturalists like Fred would like also, because it focuses on natural bidding (oh, and we use "improving 2/1 GF" )

Alternatively the other extreme:

Pass 14+ (or 13 with shape)
1♣: 8 - 13, 4+♥
1♦: 8 - 13, 4+♠
1♥: 0 - 7 (8)
1♠: 8 - 13, 5+4+ minors or 6+♦
1NT: 9 - 13 bal., usually no 4M
2♣: 8 - 13, 6+♣
2♦: 4 - 8, any 5 - 5 except both minors
2M: 4 - 8, 6+card
2NT: 4 - 8, 5 - 5 minors

Semipositive responses to Pass, and symmetric relays.

[Cascade]

The_Hog, on Dec 17 2008, 04:28 PM, said:

han, on Dec 17 2008, 09:10 AM, said:

If I had an infinite amount of time I wouldn't waste it thinking about bridge systems. I'd probably play some form of precision.

But Han if your time is infinite, how would you be wasting it?

That was a favourite saying of one my school mates when a teacher told him he was wasting time (which seemed to happen frequently) he would respond "you can't waste time it is infinite"

[csdenmark]

The_Hog, on Dec 17 2008, 02:36 AM, said:

Btw do you know that if you refer to this as a FP system that this is in fact a misnomer. The pass is strong and technically forcing. However I have seen it passed. Bobby Richman, Aust international picked up a 23 count. His rho passed, 13+, Richman tanked and lho with a 0 count passed! Puts pressure on 4th seat, doesn't it?

Sure - please tell more. Looks very interesting.

[the hog]

han, on Dec 17 2008, 12:40 PM, said:

The_Hog, on Dec 16 2008, 10:28 PM, said:

han, on Dec 17 2008, 09:10 AM, said:

If I had an infinite amount of time I wouldn't waste it thinking about bridge systems. I'd probably play some form of precision.

But Han if your time is infinite, how would you be wasting it?

You mean, I could sit here readings the forums all day and it would be a day well spent?

Absolutely. Its what I do for the first half hour at work.

[the hog]

csdenmark, on Dec 17 2008, 05:08 PM, said:

The_Hog, on Dec 17 2008, 02:36 AM, said:

Btw do you know that if you refer to this as a FP system that this is in fact a misnomer. The pass is strong and technically forcing. However I have seen it passed. Bobby Richman, Aust international picked up a 23 count. His rho passed, 13+, Richman tanked and lho with a 0 count passed! Puts pressure on 4th seat, doesn't it?

Sure - please tell more. Looks very interesting.

Not much to tell. Passed out and 23+ hand and partner were cold for 4Major. Nothing the other way.

[ulven]

mikeh, on Dec 16 2008, 07:05 PM, said:

I don't, however, recommend relay for anyone with a real job Too much work.

The notion that relays, per se, is really memory heavy and complicated is widespread. I don't agree at all. It's all in the design - as with any system.

My own relay strong C system is light weight, symmetric and fits in 13 pages. That's the complete system (except defensive methods) and my new partner, without any experience of relays previously, has easily adapted. And this is a system aimed for international competition.

Of course many relay systems are complicated, but that's because the implementation of the relay approach and the other addons. Any system can be a real pain when gadgets start to stack up.

Strong C with relays are technically superior IMO. That much said, not everyone will get their best results using that. It's important to be comfortable with the methods and that outweighs many other factors. If you're uncomfortable, other areas of your game will invariably suffer.

[PeterGill]

Marston's Weak Opening Relay (with Forcing Pass),
as long as we were allowed to practice it in every bridge event that exists.
That, more so than time, is the limiting condition for me.

Peter Gill

[helene_t]

I was afraid of admitting that I voted for Precision but given that thirteen other suckers did the same I probably shouldn't be ashamed of it.

[wclass___]

From this list only strong club+relays!
Interferences problems are trivial(bullshit) comparing to advantages you get through other bids in system.

Some mentioned forcing pass, but i would better not comment those who suggest, Pass as 13+ 14+ Do Sounds nice only in practice. Works mainly vs. poor opponents .....Living in dream world? Even without absolutely no opponent bidding, still, there are better systems, since, for perfect (with no opponent bidding)system pressure on 1/2 seat and 3/4th seat should be equal.

Natural, also is no good, wide ranges and so on....
FN is also far from perfect 1♣+1♦+1♥+1♠=overall is sth like 20%
1N is, i dount know, 15%?? 2x are also far from perfect, i see too many disadvantages in on bidding and competitve bidding.

Polish club is really dreadgul method.
Comparing to strong club where majority of opps try to use destructive interference(and loses), here such interference if used would lead to much more bad scores for 1C bidders.
I dount really know, why so few use their defenses to polish club and play simplified natural approach.

[rbforster]

ulven, on Dec 17 2008, 06:47 AM, said:

The notion that relays, per se, is really memory heavy and complicated is widespread. I don't agree at all. It's all in the design - as with any system.

My own relay strong C system is light weight, symmetric and fits in 13 pages. That's the complete system (except defensive methods) and my new partner, without any experience of relays previously, has easily adapted.

I agree - relays are often memory intensive, but that's usually because they weren't designed well (or at least with simplicity as a goal). Specifically over strong openings (1♣, pass, whatever), it's pretty easy to design symmetric transfer relays that are both easy to remember and get the strong hand to declare. I design these for fun, and it doesn't usually take more than 5-10 minutes to get a basic response structure figured out to fit whatever goals you might have. PM me if you like this kind of stuff

[brianshark]

I like strong club which has a weak option (Polish or similar). At the moment I play carrot club, 10-15 openings and 1C is 11-13 balanced or 16+ and I find it really easy to play and effective.