[jillybean]

ONEferBRID, on Apr 2 2010, 11:23 AM, said:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
and I really like your idea for:
1M - 2NT!
3D! = ANY hand w/NO shortage

That way I can use the 4-level bids to show a 2nd 5 card suit:
1M - 2NT!
4C/4D etc = extras and 2nd 5 cd suit ( ergo shortage elsewhere)

and for a minimum hand:
1M - 2NT!
3C! - 3D!
4C/4D etc = minimum and 2nd 5 cd suit ( ergo shortage elsewhere )

Not my idea, it's my partners system but I will pass on your extension, ty!

[jdonn]

gwnn, on Mar 31 2010, 03:19 AM, said:

jdonn, on Mar 30 2010, 06:29 PM, said:

gwnn, on Mar 30 2010, 01:11 PM, said:

There was a very cute and simple one posted I think by jdonn a while back where 3♣ showed 6+ spades but I can't find it. in Northern Europe people play something like MikeH's second version.

Really? I do not remember this at all. I'm sure that means it was brilliant.

Jlall and I played the first 3 steps were min/mid/max strength, with shortness ask. You can certainly do more than that but we are geniuses with perfect judgment so we didn't need any more.

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...ndpost&p=313304



don't want to lol anyone but I am very close now.

Also I'm pretty close to loling at everyone (with me as #1) who read the thread because nobody seems to care that MikeH uses 3NT as two different things in the same structure.

Wow I don't remember it at all! I'm sure I just made it up on the spot and I've never played it. Although I have often had a concern that people should focus more on showing 5 or 6+ spades on these auctions at some point.

[dburn]

aguahombre, on Mar 31 2010, 10:11 AM, said:

It seems there would be even more room to accommodate the hands where responder has only LR support for the Major, if we used the J1N instead. All hands with support would start with 1NT. A complete follow-up structure, very similar to relay responses could describe all the different 1M openings.

A semi-forcing 2NT could then be used for any hand without support and 6+ HCP.

I believe, in view of discussions elsewhere, that it might be better still to play 1♥-1♠ as a game-forcing raise in hearts. 1♥-1NT shows 6+ points and 4+ spades, while 1♥-2♠ is reserved for hands without spades, without heart support, and without high cards. An advantage of this method is that opener can pass with 5-6 in the majors, rather than having to venture to the three level.

[Cascade]

dburn, on Apr 3 2010, 02:29 PM, said:

aguahombre, on Mar 31 2010, 10:11 AM, said:

It seems there would be even more room to accommodate the hands where responder has only LR support for the Major, if we used the J1N instead. All hands with support would start with 1NT. A complete follow-up structure, very similar to relay responses could describe all the different 1M openings.

A semi-forcing 2NT could then be used for any hand without support and 6+ HCP.

I believe, in view of discussions elsewhere, that it might be better still to play 1♥-1♠ as a game-forcing raise in hearts. 1♥-1NT shows 6+ points and 4+ spades, while 1♥-2♠ is reserved for hands without spades, without heart support, and without high cards. An advantage of this method is that opener can pass with 5-6 in the majors, rather than having to venture to the three level.

And after this 2♠ where do you go on hands that were easy after 1NT and we needed to keep the bidding low?

1♥ 1NT
2♣

1♥ 1NT
2♦

1♥ 1NT
2♥

and even

1♥ 1NT
PASS - if 1NT was not forcing

[aguahombre]

I do hope cascade was being as silly as we were. Would hate to think he was trying to be real in a joke sequence.

[dburn]

aguahombre, on Apr 2 2010, 08:47 PM, said:

I do hope cascade was being as silly as we were

No, no - perfectly valid questions, all of them. In my original post I stupidly forgot to give details of the remaining responses to 1♥:

2♣ shows a hand that would pass after 1♥-1NT-2♣.
2♦ shows a hand that would pass after 1♥-1NT-2♦.

This is known as the Advance Preference concept - as with the better-known advance cue bid, responder saves space by giving preference directly, rather than waiting for opener to show his second suit.

2♥ is natural, about 6-9 points with heart support - the Raise Is Limited principle.

2NT asks opener how many points he has, in order that responder can determine whether the hand should be played in a part score, a game or a slam - the Find Out Our Level convention.

Lest people should be concerned that this method is too complex to remember in the heat of battle, a mnemonic may readily be constructed from the initial letters of the three innovations described above.

[CSGibson]

We have the following structure:

3♣ - 5 card suit with undisclosed shortness
---3♦ Asking (denies shortness in responder's hand)
-------3♥ 16+ HCP, shortness still undisclosed
-----------3♠ - asks for shortness
---------------3N, 4♣, 4♦ - shortness showing up the line
-------3♠, 3N, 4♣ - <16 HCP, shortness showing up the line
---3♥, 3♠, 3N - 16+ HCP, showing shortness up the line, asking openers shortness, 1st response being the lower-ranking suit, 2nd higher ranking, 3rd same shortness. Sequence that follows shows HCP, but excludes J of trump & KQJ of short suits

3♦ - 6+ card suit with undisclosed shortness (similar follow ups to 3♣ bid, except in the rare case of shortness opposite shortness, where the HCP ask excludes the Q of trump as well as the J)

3♥ - no shortness, < 16 HCP, 4-5 controls (A=2, K=1)

3♠ - no shortness, < 16 HCP, 6-7 controls
3N - balanced 16-19
4♣, 4♦, 4♥ - good 5 card suit
4 of agreed major - <16 HCP, 3 or fewer controls

We also play different sort of spliners that max out at 15 HCP, so if responder has shortness and more HCP than that, he will go through the game forcing 2N bid

edit: unfortunately, there is no handy pneumonic device like David Burn has for his own raise structure...

[lowerline]

Fluffy, on Mar 31 2010, 09:02 AM, said:

lowerline, on Mar 31 2010, 08:15 AM, said:

Or

1♥ - 2NT (inv+ balanced 4crd raise)

3♣ = GF no shortness
3♦ = any void or 14+ any single
3♥ = MIN no shortness (5♥)
3♠ = 11-13 any single --> 3NT asks
3NT = GF 4♠6♥
4m = GF 5♥5m
4♥ = MIN no shortness (6♥)

Steven

You are commiting to game with 3♠, is it worth it?, I play inv+ also but just drop all the minimums in 3♣.

I don't mind occasionally being in a marginal 4M in imps. I consider it only a drawback in matchpoints.

Steven