[straube]

We open 2C and 2D to show 6cd suits and 10-15 points. These bids deny a 4-cd major except for 2C which can have a 4-cd spade suit.

With other openings we're using thrump dbls at the 3-level (which ask for a stopper, else a major) and that seems to make sense for us when we're (probably) trying to see if 3N is possible.

At the 2-level, it's more murky.

Maybe for 2C interference...

.....2D-
..........dbl-4 spades
..........other-natural and forcing
.....2H-
..........dbl-4 spades
.....2S-
..........dbl-5 hearts

For 2D interference...

.....2H-dbl-5 spades
.....2S-dbl-5 hearts

Sound right or should we use penalty or whatever?

[helene_t]

Your 2m openings are very narrowly defined so I think you can do without the negative double and play penalty doubles instead. After an old-fashioned Precision 2♣ opening I would definitely play negative doubles.

[straube]

I'm starting to think that for 2C we should use a 2S response to show four spades with GI+ values. The idea is that this level is too rich to be looking for a 4-4 fit without some high card points in reserve.

2C (2D)
..........dbl-5+ hearts
..........2H-5+ spades
..........2S-4 spades and GI+

2C (2H)
..........dbl-5+ spades
..........2S-4 spades and GI+

Probably transfers are right over 2D as well

2D (2H)
..........dbl-5+ spades
..........2S-5+ clubs
..........3C-GI diamond raise
..........3D-raise

For 2m (dbl)
..........rdbl-shows hearts
..........other-system on

That last isn't best but is simple.

[wclass___]

Please no penalty doubles, it is better to focus on your own bidding, plus you can make penalty pass anyway.

2N needs to be artifical and forcing.

Split ranges. e.g. I would definetly chose 2♦-[2♥]-X=5♠ INV+(possibly with other meaning) and 2♠=competitive

2♦-[X]-XX please try to penalize

[WellSpyder]

wclass___, on Oct 4 2010, 04:59 PM, said:

Please no penalty doubles, it is better to focus on your own bidding, plus you can make penalty pass anyway.

I don't agree with this at all. If partner opens a normal 3♦ pre-empt and the next hand overcalls 3♠, do you play double for penalties or some fatuous take-out showing 4♥s? The choice between penalties and take-out should depend on how well-defined partner's hand is and the prospect of finding a fit in another suit.

As an example, I played for a while in one partnership that opening 3♣ and 3♦ showed a good 6-card suit, and 10-14 points (but without 4M or 3 in each M). We found a penalty double of intervention was a run-away points winner, and never regretted not being able to make a take-out double, since responder almost always had a reasonable idea of where to play the hand.

But I agree with Helene that after a traditional Precision 2♣ I would (and do) play double of an overcall for take-out.

[wclass___]

WellSpyder, on Oct 4 2010, 11:09 AM, said:

wclass___, on Oct 4 2010, 04:59 PM, said:

Please no penalty doubles, it is better to focus on your own bidding, plus you can make penalty pass anyway.

I don't agree with this at all. If partner opens a normal 3♦ pre-empt and the next hand overcalls 3♠, do you play double for penalties or some fatuous take-out showing 4♥s? The choice between penalties and take-out should depend on how well-defined partner's hand is and the prospect of finding a fit in another suit.

Why are random preempts getting involved in discussion about straube's 2m openings? However i agree, if only double you know is ''take out'' - better play penalty double in this spesific situation.

[straube]

wclass___, on Oct 4 2010, 10:59 AM, said:

Please no penalty doubles, it is better to focus on your own bidding, plus you can make penalty pass anyway.

2N needs to be artifical and forcing.

Split ranges. e.g. I would definetly chose 2♦-[2♥]-X=5♠ INV+(possibly with other meaning) and 2♠=competitive

2♦-[X]-XX please try to penalize

How would you use 2N artificial and forcing?

I think we need a way to show clubs instead of two ways to show spades (after 2C (2H)). After all, we'll have clubs frequently and opener is allowed to have four clubs.

[Zelandakh]

straube, on Oct 4 2010, 07:52 PM, said:

How would you use 2N artificial and forcing?

I think we need a way to show clubs instead of two ways to show spades (after 2C (2H)). After all, we'll have clubs frequently and opener is allowed to have four clubs.

There are several ways to use 2NT as art and forcing here. For example you could use it as a limit raise or better in clubs. Or it might be a bad raise in clubs or various GF hands and essentially a pseudo-puppet to 3C. To show clubs you can use a combination of 2NT (as above), simple raises, and an immediate 3 level cue. Just think of all the various major hand types you want to show and assign bidding sequences to them.

Different ways of showing spades are important because there are lots of important hand types with spades - ideally you want to be able to distinguish between 4, 5 and 6+ for all INV and GF hands (or alternatively between 0-2, 3 and 4 from Opener). When you have a club fit it is more important to discover a stop in the opps' suit than to determine lengths.

[wclass___]

straube, on Oct 4 2010, 02:52 PM, said:

How would you use 2N artificial and forcing?

I would first find a way how to bid INV hands with support as 2NT is not really an option.

e.g. 2♣-[2♠]-? .. not many options here and 3♣ as INV is probably best, so 2NT must be a puppet to 3♣.

After 2♦ it is probably wise to use 3♣ as puppet.

It is somewhat complicated to assign meaning for 2NT as contract rightsiding is very important here.

Ax(xx) stopper is interesting, and one might use 2NT-sth-3NT to show this.

[straube]

Devoting space toward recovering 4/4 spade fits at the 2-level is not worthwhile.

2C (2D)
...............dbl-5 hearts
...............2H-5 spades
...............2S-cue bid, club tolerance
...............2N-natural
...............3C-raise
...............3D-stopper, demands opener bid 3N

2C (2H)
...............dbl-5 spades
...............2S-cue bid, club tolerance
...............2N-natural
...............3C-raise
...............3D-natural, f
...............3H-stopper, demands opener bid 3N

2C (2S)
...............dbl-cue bid, club tolerance
...............2N-natural
...............3C-raise
...............3D-hearts
...............3H-diamonds
...............3S-stopper, demands opener bid 3N

2D (2H)
...............dbl-5 spades
...............2S-clubs
...............2N-natural
...............3C-cue bid, diamond tolerance
...............3D-raise
...............3H-stopper, demands opener bid 3N

2D (2S)
...............dbl-5 hearts
...............2N-natural
...............3C-cue bid, diamond tolerance
...............3D-raise
...............3H-clubs
...............3S-stopper, demands opener bid 3N

[Zelandakh]

straube, on Oct 6 2010, 07:18 AM, said:

Devoting space toward recovering 4/4 spade fits at the 2-level is not worthwhile.

Actually you could achieve this within the structure you propose...
eg
2C - (2D) - 2H - (P) or 2C - (2H) - X - (P) (now becomes 4+ spades)
2S = 0-2 spades
2N = 3 spades with stop
3C = 3 spades without stop
3D = 4 spades, min
3S = 4 spades max

There are other possibilities but you get the idea. I use something similar without interference over a precision 2C opening. Even if you choose to keep the call as 5+ spades it might be beneficial to know about the extra support should there be further competition.

[straube]

Zelandakh, on Oct 6 2010, 08:54 AM, said:

straube, on Oct 6 2010, 07:18 AM, said:

Devoting space toward recovering 4/4 spade fits at the 2-level is not worthwhile.

Actually you could achieve this within the structure you propose...
eg
2C - (2D) - 2H - (P) or 2C - (2H) - X - (P) (now becomes 4+ spades)
2S = 0-2 spades
2N = 3 spades with stop
3C = 3 spades without stop
3D = 4 spades, min
3S = 4 spades max

There are other possibilities but you get the idea. I use something similar without interference over a precision 2C opening. Even if you choose to keep the call as 5+ spades it might be beneficial to know about the extra support should there be further competition.

I think your structure is clever but wrong. Clever because it arranges opener's rebids in terms of fit for spades (worst to best). It also picks up the 4-4 spade fits which mine does not.

The thing is it may not be absolutely necessary for responder to show the 4-4 fit immediately. Lets say it goes 2C (2H) and responder has Axxx Kxx xxxxx x. He can safely pass this sort of hand and know that if opener has Kxxx xx x AKxxxx that he will reopen with 2S.

Your scheme is ok in an uncontested auction, but lets say the overcall is raised and opener has a decent hand with 3 spades. He can't know if it's safe to come in at the 3-level.

Better I think for responder to be able to show GI+ values right away so as to let opener show 4 spades himself.

2C (2H) 2S(GI+ cue) (3H) 3S(shows 4 spades).

Opener is relying on the fact that responder has GI values. These values support fit finding. If there's no spade fit, likely responder can rebid 3N or 4C.

The other thing is that if 2C (2H) dbl can show 5 spades, then opener can rebid 2S with 2 or 3 (min) but can reject with 0 or 1. This means that we can play 2S with 5-2 fits. If opener's rebid could be 0 or 1 spades and responder has Axxxxx Kxx xx Qx he won't know whether to sit for 2S or pull to 3C.

[Zelandakh]

straube, on Oct 6 2010, 03:23 PM, said:

I think your structure is clever but wrong. Clever because it arranges opener's rebids in terms of fit for spades (worst to best). It also picks up the 4-4 spade fits which mine does not.

The thing is it may not be absolutely necessary for responder to show the 4-4 fit immediately. Lets say it goes 2C (2H) and responder has Axxx Kxx xxxxx x. He can safely pass this sort of hand and know that if opener has Kxxx xx x AKxxxx that he will reopen with 2S.

Your scheme is ok in an uncontested auction, but lets say the overcall is raised and opener has a decent hand with 3 spades. He can't know if it's safe to come in at the 3-level.

Better I think for responder to be able to show GI+ values right away so as to let opener show 4 spades himself.

2C (2H) 2S(GI+ cue) (3H) 3S(shows 4 spades).

Opener is relying on the fact that responder has GI values. These values support fit finding. If there's no spade fit, likely responder can rebid 3N or 4C.

The other thing is that if 2C (2H) dbl can show 5 spades, then opener can rebid 2S with 2 or 3 (min) but can reject with 0 or 1. This means that we can play 2S with 5-2 fits. If opener's rebid could be 0 or 1 spades and responder has Axxxxx Kxx xx Qx he won't know whether to sit for 2S or pull to 3C.

You have to play it so if you think it is wrong fair enough .

I personally play these bids as GI+ or a weak hand with long suit. Thus with a decent hand and 3 card support it is safe to come in knowing you either have a game somewhere or a 9 card fit. Similarly pulling 2S to 3C shows an invitational hand - you have to make the decision to sit for 2S before bidding at all with a competitive hand. The only action Responder should take after transferring with a weak hand is generally to re-transfer should Opener show support. I use 2S differently in my structure so the sequence you give is not available to me. It seems you only lose the 4-4 spade fit if Responder is invitational and Opener minimum - not a big loss.

[straube]

That helped me see how you are using it. Yes, I'm losing out on 4S GI opposite 4S minimum. I've only looked at a few hands but it seems a rather narrow target (and some of those clubs may play better).

I want to use 2C (2H) dbl as constructive+ (like 9+ hcp with 5 spades or shaded with 6). With a weaker spade hand I'll pass and then takeout pd's reopening dbl to 2S. Since pd's reopening dbl ought to be more values and not necessarily shape, he'll get the message that responder has likely 6 spades.

Nice to have an agreeable difference of opinion. So are you playing 2C as clubs now and is this structure that you proposed how you're handling interference?

[kayin801]

We play negative doubles here after our 2♣, and penalty double of a natural 2NT overcall. I've hardly ever run into trouble with this, or at least any more trouble than I would using natural methods. I mostly treat it like 1♣-(2♠)-?. We are also allowed to compete in clubs, and can do so more easily knowing that partner has a 6 bagger, so you should be more willing to do that with a lot of 7-9 point hands with 2-3 clubs and something nice in them. I know that's unsatisfactory at MP sometimes, but I am sooooooooooooooooo much happier knowing partner has real clubs for me.

I haven't played a 2♦ opener this way too much, but I would assume that it would operate the same way?

Edit: just saw that you mostly deny 4cM with your openings. Whoops. I think what I said holds less weight then :/ I would guess that for negative doubles, you want to ostensibly show 5 hearts or 4 spades, depending on their overcall, and I'd be content with that, and then make 2♣-(2♥)-2♠ constructive 5+ suit NF

[Zelandakh]

straube, on Oct 6 2010, 04:58 PM, said:

That helped me see how you are using it. Yes, I'm losing out on 4S GI opposite 4S minimum. I've only looked at a few hands but it seems a rather narrow target (and some of those clubs may play better).

I want to use 2C (2H) dbl as constructive+ (like 9+ hcp with 5 spades or shaded with 6). With a weaker spade hand I'll pass and then takeout pd's reopening dbl to 2S. Since pd's reopening dbl ought to be more values and not necessarily shape, he'll get the message that responder has likely 6 spades.

Nice to have an agreeable difference of opinion. So are you playing 2C as clubs now and is this structure that you proposed how you're handling interference?

My 2C opening is traditional precision shapes in the 10-14 range so somewhat less well defined than yours. The structure I use over this is somewhat similar to the competitive auctions you were suggesting only I use it in an unopposed auction too. I do not think you are losing much in missing the 4-4 spade fit on the very small range of hands we are talking about. A bigger concern would be the inability to compete on hands where partner cannot re-open with a double.

If you are interested the overall scheme came largely as an adjunct to playing puppet over 1NT and then modified through alot of play-testing and tweaking...
2D = 4+ hearts
2H = 4+ spades
2S = range ask, no major
2N = 5 spades, 4 hearts, INV
3m/3N/4C/5C = to play
3H = slam try in diamonds
3S = slam try in clubs
4D = hearts
4H = spades

With both majors it is normal to start with 2D even if spades are longer. The exception is for 5-5 invitational hands which start with 2H. I spent alot of time with this structure comparing it with traditional precision and meckwell style responses. I personally find it alot simpler to use even though there are difficult hands (6D is particularly difficult to find on many hands). Had I not found this response set I would probably have re-designed the system to fire the 5C-4M hands through the 1D opening.

Really I just noticed the similarity to your proposed structure and thought I would show you the response structure over the transfer I had worked out if you wanted to look for the 4-4 fit. Of course my 2S bid specifically denies a major (3S the following round is a stopper ask) so this route to recapture the 4-4 fit is unavailable. Basically your suggestion looks to be sound - I would say try it and see how it works out. If you find the 4-4 fit issue or the delayed competition is a problem then make some small changes to address the issue.

[keylime]

If your 2♣ opening could be based on five clubs with a 4 card major, then playing double as negative has some merit. However, I'd play penalty doubles over any pure 2m opening being six cards or more, regardless of the possibility of holding a side major.

[Free]

keylime, on Oct 7 2010, 11:43 PM, said:

If your 2♣ opening could be based on five clubs with a 4 card major, then playing double as negative has some merit. However, I'd play penalty doubles over any pure 2m opening being six cards or more, regardless of the possibility of holding a side major.

I agree. And play some kind of Lebensohl/Rubensohl/someothersohl for constructive purposes, works great imo.

[Zelandakh]

Free, on Oct 8 2010, 07:39 AM, said:

I agree. And play some kind of Lebensohl/Rubensohl/someothersohl for constructive purposes, works great imo.

If you look at straube's structure he is using something Rubinsohl-like except that the transfers start from double and 2S is used as the cue bid with a direct cue bid a stopper ask. I think this is at least as good as a pure Lebensohl structure with penalty doubles. For comparison:-

2C (2D) (straube)
...............dbl-5 hearts, INV+
...............2H-5 spades, INV+
...............2S-cue bid, club tolerance
...............2N-natural
...............3C-raise
...............3D-stopper, demands opener bid 3N

2C (2D) (rub with pen dbl)
...............dbl-pen
...............2H-to play
...............2S-to play
...............2N-club raise
...............3C-4 spades
...............3D-5 hearts, INV+
...............3H-5 spades, INV+
...............3S-stop ask

It is clear that the second structure deals better with competitive hands (straube prefers delayed action with these) and gets a penalty double. It is equally clear to me that the first structure is better on constructive hands. The loss of penalty doubles is not great (trap pass or bid 3NT) although I personally think the delayed action with competitive hands might prove to be a problem in practise. Even when I am a big fan of Rubinsohl, here I prefer the former structure modified to allow competitive hands to bid dbl/2H. That said I am not convinced that 2NT natural is a good use of a key bid - seems to be stopping on a pin-head to me.

[straube]

What I've never liked about responses to 2C is that most seem to play 2M as constructive nf. Not saying that this isn't right necessarily, but what does 2M advertise? A 5 cd suit? A 6 cd suit? Does the response deny club support?
Will we languish in a 5-2 fit when we have a 6-4 club fit available?

If I can play transfers over interference, then responder can show a constructive hand (I'm thinking 9+ hcps with a 5-cd suit) and then decide after opener accepts the transfer (generally showing 2-cd support) whether to pull to 3C or not. Certainly responder would pass 2M with a minimum hand and a 6-cd suit.

I've sampled hands a bit and it seems like the penalty double occurs infrequently and there is usually an attractive alternative like bidding 3N. I can play 2C (2H) P P dbl as just extra values. It can't really promise support for all of the other suits (maybe 2-cd tolerance?) but it seems like responder will usually be well-placed. If opener doesn't have extra values he passes or bids 3C with a better suit.

I do agree about 2N invitational being a rather narrow target but it seems like an important message to send. I'd have the cue bid (2S for clubs) which then pretty much denies exactly an invitational hand with a stopper but does show some points.

I was actually using the direct cue bid as showing a stopper instead of asking for one. If I hold Axx Kxx KQxxx Qx and hear the auction go 2C (2H) I want to force the heart overcaller to be on opening lead in case opener has Qx or even Jx of hearts.