[straube]

I'm looking at low level interference of IMprecision.

It's very cool that 1C (1H) dbl shows a semipositive with 4+ spades. Maybe not so good that 1C (1H) 1N shows a semipositive with 5+ hearts, but we need a bid for this hand so it looks right.

1C dbl thinking that...

.....P-DN
.....rdbl-bal GF
.....1D-unbal GF
.....etc

1C (1D)

.....P-DN
.....dbl-GF, bal or unbal
.....etc-

So that's pretty straight forward. More confusing to me is RHO interference...

We're playing 1C P 1D P 1H handles mostly balanced hands whereas IMprecision's 1H rebid handles mostly heart hands.

So 1C P 1D (1H)

?

Thinking...

P-(stole my bid, systems on)
dbl-takeout, systems off
1S-natural, systems on
1N-5+hearts, systems on

The advantage of this is that we stay in system. The disadvantage is that we're ignoring this heart information and might very well wind up in hearts ourselves...on a misfit and bad split.

IMprecision has a much easier time here because double shows hearts (4+) and responder has a second negative (1S) when he has a bad hand and doesn't want to sit for the double.

Suggestions?

I kind of want pass (or double perhaps) to keep us in system and show (usually) a balanced hand. As for the rest....

[straube]

So I'm a little further along with the problem 1C P 1D (1H) ?

Sampled hands and not surprisingly takeout double shapes are common and useful while hands with hearts are not...so I'd rather use double as takeout.

P-would have rebid 1H...for us usually balanced hands
.....dbl-GF bal
.....1S-DN any
.....etc-showing GF with 6+ QPs and various patterns
dbl-takeout
.....1S-DN, forcing
.....other-GF natural
1S-natural, still in system
1N-majors, nf
.....2C-GF relay
..........2D-3-suited
..........etc
2C-systems on
2D-systems on

One question is whether it makes sense for responder to dbl back in with either a GF bal or DN hand...letting opener sit with hearts opposite either one.

Welcoming help from Adam or others here.

[straube]

Any guidelines on distinguishing DNs from superpositives after such auctions as...

1C P 1D (2C) dbl P ?

1C P 1D (2D) P P ?

We're supposing that responder's bid at the 2-level here is nf. When can a DN responder double back in? Never? We came up with allowing this for 2D or lower.

[straube]

After 1C P semipositive RHO overcall

1) if the overcall is our relay (asking) bid, dbl takes the place of the asking bid and pass is for hands that don't want to bid (typically has opponent's suit)
2) if the overcall is not our relay (asking) bid, opener's double creates a GF.
3) if opener has a fit for partner's suit (8-cd fit for a major or 9-cd fit for a minor) he should show a fit by transferring (Rubensohl) at the 3-level
4) if opener has a 6-cd suit of his own, he should either bid it cheaply at the 2-level or transfer to it (Rubensohl) at the 3-level.

I think using the double as the relay ask (and/or GF bid) slows the auction down and handles more hand types than double as penalty or support or takeout.

Still looking for feedback on 1C P 1D (overcall) P P auctions. I looked at a few hands and so far still feel that we need to let the DN hand balance with a suit or takeout double. If we use 2D as the last overcall that the DN hand can double, it's easier to remember in that...two four-cd majors are available and if opener guesses to pass and they make 2D, at least they aren't in game. Seems like a DN responder ought to be able to balance with a suit at the 2-level but maybe not the 3-level?

[awm]

straube, on 2013-February-17, 01:23, said:

Any guidelines on distinguishing DNs from superpositives after such auctions as...

1C P 1D (2C) dbl P ?

1C P 1D (2D) P P ?

We're supposing that responder's bid at the 2-level here is nf. When can a DN responder double back in? Never? We came up with allowing this for 2D or lower.

Sam and I discussed this but I don't think our agreement ever made it into the notes. I believe it's as follows:

(1) Opener's direct bid over the interference is normally NF to the 0-4.
(2) If opener doubles, the 0-4 hand will either bid at the two-level (NF) or use 2NT lebensohl. GF hands will bid to the three-level directly.
(3) If opener bids a suit, the 0-4 hand must either pass or make a simple raise. Introducing a new suit in response to a suit bid is GF.
(4) If opener passes, the 0-4 hand is permitted to bid two-of-a-suit. This is natural and NF. The 0-4 hand will not double or bid at the three-level voluntarily.

We do not like doubling with the 0-4 hand! The reasoning is that opener will fairly often want to convert a double when partner has the GF after passing the interference (normally the pass shows length in the opponents suit) and converting is often risky opposite the 0-4. This occasionally costs us the ability to compete on a partscore deal when we have two nearly-balanced hands where one has 0-4 and one has something like 17-20, but these hands are typically difficult for other methods as well and the inability to convert double when responder has 9+ is a huge cost to pay for fixing that problem.

[straube]

awm, on 2013-February-17, 14:34, said:

Sam and I discussed this but I don't think our agreement ever made it into the notes. I believe it's as follows:

(1) Opener's direct bid over the interference is normally NF to the 0-4.
(2) If opener doubles, the 0-4 hand will either bid at the two-level (NF) or use 2NT lebensohl. GF hands will bid to the three-level directly.
(3) If opener bids a suit, the 0-4 hand must either pass or make a simple raise. Introducing a new suit in response to a suit bid is GF.
(4) If opener passes, the 0-4 hand is permitted to bid two-of-a-suit. This is natural and NF. The 0-4 hand will not double or bid at the three-level voluntarily.

We do not like doubling with the 0-4 hand! The reasoning is that opener will fairly often want to convert a double when partner has the GF after passing the interference (normally the pass shows length in the opponents suit) and converting is often risky opposite the 0-4. This occasionally costs us the ability to compete on a partscore deal when we have two nearly-balanced hands where one has 0-4 and one has something like 17-20, but these hands are typically difficult for other methods as well and the inability to convert double when responder has 9+ is a huge cost to pay for fixing that problem.

i really like these rules. Thanks.