[32519]

I stumbled across GAstem on the BridgeGuys website, a variant of Ghestem. This is something new to me, never having heard of it or seen it before.

Does anybody have any experience playing GAstem? If so, does it work? Do you think it is a good convention?

[manudude03]

I've never seen or played it, and with little wonder, it looks terrible! Why give up the good old natural 2m and 1NT overcalls? Ghestem gets enough stick as it is giving up a 3C overcall. The author says you will find a fit 70% of the time, but assuming that's true, the other 30% could get bloody (especially the 1N bid).

It might be ok as a defense to a strong club (what was crash doing in there anyway, does anyone really play that over natural openers?)

I checked the ACBL GCC (mainly for the other thread) and you would have to play it as it least 5-4 and 10+ HCP anyway.

[Vampyr]

manudude03, on 2012-September-02, 02:17, said:

I checked the ACBL GCC (mainly for the other thread) and you would have to play it as it least 5-4 and 10+ HCP anyway.

The whole world doesn't play under the ACBL GCC (yet).

[campboy]

Well, it's not permitted at EBU level 4 either as far as I can see, unless the opening bid was 1♣ (or wasn't natural). And having had to give yet another Ghestem ruling this afternoon, I'm quite glad of that

[Zelandakh]

It seems to be a method based on the assumed fit preempt style. The problem is that you have less to gain after the opponents make a descriptive opening bid and have more to lose, in that you appear to be losing 3 useful constructive calls. It would be interesting to hear the author's solution to the hands which would normally have made one of these calls. This should really be part of any convention description.

[hrothgar]

I am extremely skeptical about the merits of the structure, and this comes from someone who likes assumed fit methods.

In my experience, the big pluses from assumed fit methods occur in in auctions like the following

2♥ - (P) - P - ???

The player in the balancing seat is very poorly positioned.
He doesn't know whether the balance of the missing strength rests with his partner or RHO.
As a result, the opposing partnership often ends up in some doubled contract at the three level.

These big pluses are necessary to compensate for those occasions where the assumed fit opening misfires.

Here, in contrast, the opening bidder has already conveyed fairly precise information about strength and, potentially, shape.

I suspect that the costs now outweigh the benefits.