[akhare]

awm, on 2013-May-18, 14:13, said:

The relays have to start before opener rebid for it to be a relay system. So if 2c is artificial GF and openers next bid is not a nearly-auto 2d you are fine.

In fact for my original post I kind of assumed you were playing 2c as gf with possible relays to follow. If this is the case you can handle 5422 type hands easily enough via that path, so the problem hands are unbal invites where you do not want to be passed in 1nt and unbal GF types where responder really would rather show than ask...

Of course you could also go to an "all 2/1s natural inv+" approach as Sam and I do, or to a mid-chart transfer based approach.

Yes indeed, the intent is to play 2♣ as stated above. Pard is leery about its GCC legality, but my interpretation is that it's perfectly legitimate.

On a related note, since opener's 2N rebid in your methods promises 6+ in the major with 12+, how does that affect the range for the 2♥ / 2♠ preempts? Do you play something like a 5-10 range, with single suited 11 counts opting to open 1M or 2M depending on the rest of the hand?

[awm]

Our official "weak two" range is 5-11. 11-counts sometimes upgrade into 1M. We will also occasionally open 1M with a 6-4 hand in the 8-10 range (especially holding both majors).

As far as I can tell, the biggest problem hands for an approach with GF 2/1s and semi-forcing NT are:

1. Invite with a long suit. These can make game where partner is passing the 1NT response on a balanced hand.
2. Less than invite with a long suit. These often struggle in 1NT when a much better partial is available.
3. Invite with a 5/5 hand. These often struggle to reach the best partial as well as possible missing game in hearts on 1♠-1NT-Pass.
4. Less than invite with a 5/5 hand (much as case 2).

Many people use an immediate jump shift to handle one of 1 or 2. Most methods with INV+ 2/1 bids have issues with 3 and 4 also so it's often no swing.

If adopting a style where 2/1 is not always GF, one of the first things I'd look at is my handling of these four types (where I'd want to see improvement to compensate for the issues I'm introducing on slam bidding).

--------------------------->

It may be worth explaining Sam and my general approach here because it's very different from what other people do. Our reasoning is that we open quite a bit lighter than most 2/1 GF players (many 10s, some 8s and 9s). Our range is also pretty wide for a "limited opening" system (some 8s up to most 15s). For this reason, invitational hands become extremely common, with a range of basically 10-15. Because these hands are quite a bit more common than the non-fitting GF hands (good 15 or more) we wanted a structure that caters well to the invites. In addition we have the following issue:

Suppose the auction starts 1♠-1NT-2♦ and I hold ♠x ♥AJxx ♦KQxx ♣xxxx. I'd really like to be able to raise to 3♦, because there are quite a few opener hands with 5/5 shape (say ♠AKxxx ♥xx ♦Axxxx ♣x) or with max values (say ♠KQxxx ♥KQx ♦AJxx ♣x) where game is really good. However, if I would also raise to 3♦ holding ♠x ♥AKxx ♦KQxx ♣Qxxx (which is not really a GF since we open nearly all 5-4 tens and some 9s) this makes it quite hard for partner to make a correct decision.

What we decided to do is to have two different invites. One is the "weak invite" of good 10-12, which is basically the normal invite that 2/1 players use. The other is the "sound invite" of 13-bad 15, which should be accepted by any sound opening hand. Obviously both invites can be adjusted somewhat for shape, but having two ways to invite has helped us quite a bit. We distinguish these over 1♠ by letting the weak invite start with 1NT whereas the strong invite starts with a 2/1 call. Obviously this costs us on non-fitting slam sequences, but the frequency of slam tries on non-fitting hands opposite our opening range is pretty low.

[straube]

I'm used to thinking of a relay bid as the bid that relayer or captain makes. Sounds like the ACBL doesn't.

Quote

Relay: A bid which does not guarantee any specific suit; partner is requested to make the next-step bid (usually) or make another descriptive bid if appropriate (e.g., a diamond bid which usually shows hearts but may not have hearts in some cases)

So a relay bid is a bid that relayee or the slave hand makes. For example 1S-2C, 2D by us shows a balanced hand or a side minor. The 2D bid is the first relay bid. Not 2C whether 2C is natural or not. In a sense opener is requesting responder to rebid 2H so that he can separate whether balanced or which minor.

Quote

A sequence of relay bids is defined as a system if, after an opening of one of a suit, it is started prior to opener’s rebid.

So in this example we open 1S and do not make our first relay bid until opener's rebid. Hence this is not a relay system.

But I still have trouble with...

Quote

CONVENTIONAL RESPONSES WHICH GUARANTEE GAME
FORCING OR BETTER VALUES. May NOT be part of a relay
system

ok. My interpretation is this. It might be legal for 1S-2C to be gf and promise 5 hearts or 4+ diamonds (for example). If opener was normally supposed to rebid 2D and become captain then responder's first bid would count as the first relay bid and a series of inquiries by opener would constitute a system.

If so...how dumb. How dumb to bar something as stupid as that.

Do I understand this right Adam?

[rbforster]

awm, on 2013-May-18, 18:32, said:

What we decided to do is to have two different invites. One is the "weak invite" of good 10-12, which is basically the normal invite that 2/1 players use. The other is the "sound invite" of 13-bad 15, which should be accepted by any sound opening hand. Obviously both invites can be adjusted somewhat for shape, but having two ways to invite has helped us quite a bit. We distinguish these over 1♠ by letting the weak invite start with 1NT whereas the strong invite starts with a 2/1 call. Obviously this costs us on non-fitting slam sequences, but the frequency of slam tries on non-fitting hands opposite our opening range is pretty low.

I agree that this is a really good idea when playing a wide-ranging light opening system. I played 8-15 as well, with some or lots of distribution required on the 8-9 end, and it helped a lot to squeeze in two different invites on as many sequences as possible. XYZ, custom 2m responses to openers, etc, all helped.

[Free]

blackshoe, on 2013-May-18, 12:18, said:

From the ACBL Alert Regulation: "Relay: A bid which does not guarantee any specific suit; partner is requested to make the next-step bid (usually) or make another descriptive bid if appropriate (e.g., a diamond bid which usually shows hearts but may not have hearts in some cases)".

This is a very strange definition. It seems to have it backwards since it's the relayer that usually bids the next-step bid and responder has all kinds of responses available. It also means that any puppet that doesn't promise any suit is considered a relay (for example 1X-1Y-1Z-2♣ playing XYZ is a relay). And what is the definition of "usually"? Very very weird! How can anyone build a GCC legal system with definitions like this?

[straube]

We've settled on 1M-2C as gf. We practiced 1S-2H and 1S-2D as GI nf and I liked the 1S-2H but the 1S-2D seemed slightly less frequent for some reason. More than that, I've been interested in awm's idea of having a light GI (1N) and a heavy GI (2/1). I'm thinking that 2D should be a heavy invitation. The 1N response might include a few heavy invitations (clubs primarily), but would usually be light invitations.

1S-2D, GI with 3+ diamonds, could be canape with longer clubs, nf but usually not passed

.....P-minimum, 4+ diamonds
.....2H-natural, forcing for one round
..........2S-nf, 2-fit
...............2N-preference
...............3C-artificial GF, checking on hearts and club stopper
...............3D-5440
...............3H-fifth heart, nf but open to 4H
..........2N-nf
...............like for 2S
..........3C-canape, six clubs
..........3D-six diamonds
..........3H-minimum, fit
.....2S-six spades, not maximum but responder should raise with any 2-fit
..........P-no 2-fit
..........2N-probably void
..........3C-canape
..........3D-six diamonds
..........3S-minimum 2-fit
.....2N-other, 0-3 diamonds, minimum
..........3C-canape
..........3D-six diamonds
.....3C-minimum, 5 clubs
.....3D-4+ diamonds, not minimum
.....3H-GF, five clubs
.....3S-GF, six spades
.....3N-GF other

so some judgment is involved. We're hurt a bit i not having a natural 2C response for GI+ hands, but this solves for the most part the difficulty of 13 opposite 13 not getting to game.

[straube]

This structure gives up on 4/4 heart fits when we don't have enough oomph for game, but it solves a lot of other problems...

1S-
.....2C-GF relay
.....2D-GI-3+ diamonds, nf
.....2H-GI 6 hearts
.....2S-raise
.....2N-limit
.....3C-WJS
.....3D-WJS
.....3H-mixed

Now for 1S-2D

.....P-4D, minimum
.....2H-3+ hearts, forcing
..........2S-2-fit
...............3C-artificial GF
..........2N-other, may have four hearts
...............3C-artificial GF
..........3C-4D/6C
..........3D-6D
..........3H-5H
..........3S-4H/6C
.....2S-6 spades, not 4 hearts, not max
..........2N-void
..........3C-4D/6C
..........3D-6D
..........3H-
..........3S-2-fit
.....2N-not 6S, not 3H, not 5C, not 4D
..........3C-5 clubs
..........3D-6D
.....3C-5C, minimum
.....3D-5D, minimum
.....3H-5C, maximum
.....3S-6S, maximum
.....3N-maximum, other

and 1S-1N, 2C
.....2D-diamonds, weak
.....2H-hearts, weak
.....2S-preference
.....2N-strong invite
.....3C-light invite
.....3D-strong invite, fitting clubs
.....3H-5H/4+C, strong invite

[straube]

So partner wants 1S-3C as GI natural. Maybe he's right.

Maybe 1S-2N can be a heavy invite with a 2-fit and four or five hearts and four or five clubs. 3D can check back for five

1S-2N
.....3C-to play
.....3D-checkback for majors
..........3H-five hearts
...............3S-6 spades
..........3S-2 spades, 4 hearts
.....3H-to play
.....3S-to play

I think now 1N cannot have a heavy invite

[glen]

straube, on 2013-May-18, 11:43, said:

That's interesting. What are the followups, especially for 1M-2C? ...

Various possible, a simple one:
After 1M-2♣:
2♦: denies 6+M, 4+OM, 5-5+, asks type of GF:
-- 2♥: ♣s
-- 2♠: ♦s
-- 2NT: balanced
-- 3♣: 5+♥s if 1♠-2♣;-2♦-3♣
2♥/♠: natural
2NT: 5+♦s
3♣: 5+♣s

straube, on 2013-May-18, 11:43, said:

... how do you handle GI with a minor?

The usual options in 2/1 GF, either 1M-3♣/♦ are invites or use 1NT forcing/semi-forcing at the price of a wide ranging minor suit rebid

[straube]

Thanks Glen.

[straube]

1H-2D four+ diamonds, nf, could have longer clubs, 0-2 hearts

.....P-minimum, fit
.....2H-any minimum
..........P-two hearts or 3154
..........2S-two hearts, possible clubs
...............2N-no fit for clubs
....................3C-club canape
...............3C-fit for clubs
....................3D-sorry, just diamonds
...............3H-six hearts
..........2N-short hearts, at least 4D/5C
...............P-no fit
...............3m-fit
...............3H-prefers hearts
..........3C-short hearts, club canape
..........3D-short hearts, diamonds
.....2S-6 hearts, non-minimum
..........natural
..........3H-2-fit, minimum
.....2N-clubs, forcing
.....3C-five clubs, minimum
.....3D-4-fit, forcing
.....3H-minimum 5S/6H
.....3S-forcing 5S/6H

1H-2N, LR
1H-3C, GI natural
1H-3D, mixed raise

[akhare]

straube, on 2013-May-19, 11:04, said:

This structure gives up on 4/4 heart fits when we don't have enough oomph for game, but it solves a lot of other problems...

1S-
.....2C-GF relay
.....2D-GI-3+ diamonds, nf
.....2H-GI 6 hearts
.....2S-raise
.....2N-limit
.....3C-WJS
.....3D-WJS
.....3H-mixed

Now for 1S-2D

.....P-4D, minimum
.....2H-3+ hearts, forcing
..........2S-2-fit
...............3C-artificial GF
..........2N-other, may have four hearts
...............3C-artificial GF
..........3C-4D/6C
..........3D-6D
..........3H-5H
..........3S-4H/6C
.....2S-6 spades, not 4 hearts, not max
..........2N-void
..........3C-4D/6C
..........3D-6D
..........3H-
..........3S-2-fit
.....2N-not 6S, not 3H, not 5C, not 4D
..........3C-5 clubs
..........3D-6D
.....3C-5C, minimum
.....3D-5D, minimum
.....3H-5C, maximum
.....3S-6S, maximum
.....3N-maximum, other

I think that this can be tweaked a little more to make it slightly less complex. How about using the proposed 1♥ - 2♦ structure for 1♠ as well? The idea is that 2♥ would be 5+ and would be much more frequent than the 6+ GI hand.

After 1♠ - 2♦, opener's 2♥ can be used for minimum hands that may have 4+♥.

[straube]

1S-2D (3+ diamonds, GI, nf)
.....P-4 diamonds, minimum
.....2H-3+ hearts, forcing
..........2S-2-fit
...............2N-4 hearts, minimum
..........2N-misfit, 4+D
...............3C-artficial GF
....................3D-waiting
....................3H-4 hearts
...............3D-e.g. 5341
...............3H-5S/5H, nf
...............3S-6S/4H, f
..........3C-4D/6C
..........3D-6D
..........3H-5H
.....2S-6 spades, not maximum
..........P-short
..........2N-5 hearts
..........3C-4D/6C
..........3D-6D
..........3S-2-fit
.....2N-other
..........3C-4D/6C
..........3D-6D
.....3C-5C, minimum
.....3D-diamod fit, forcing to 3N or 4D
.....3H-clubs, GF
.....3S-six spades, GF
.....3N-to play

1S-2H-GI 6 hearts

1S-2N-GI, 4-5 hearts, 4+ clubs, 2 or fewer spades and diamonds
.....3C-to play
.....3D-artificial GF
..........3H-5 hearts
...............3S-6 spades
..........3S-2 spades
.....3H-to play
.....3S-to play

1S-3C-GI clubs

1S-3D-LR

1S-3H-MR

1S-3S-WR

Now for 1S-1N....

.....2C-4+ not min 5224
.....2D-4+ not min 5242
.....2H-4+ not min 5422
.....2S-6S
.....2N-6S, max, poor suit
.....3m-5S/6m, max
.....3H-6S/5H, max
.....3S-6S, max, good suit

and 1H-1N...
.....2S-6H
..........2N-short hearts
..........3m-6-cd minor
..........3H-2-fit
.....2N-4S/6H, max
.....3m-5H/6m, max
.....3H-5S/6H, not minimum
.....3S-5S/6H, maximum






.

[awm]

Just out of question:

---

Assess the blame for playing an excellent slam at the two-level.

[straube]

awm, on 2013-May-20, 20:52, said:

Just out of question:

---

Assess the blame for playing an excellent slam at the two-level.

1S-2D
2H-2N 3+H, misfit (could present this as just diamonds)
3D-etc 5341

I'm sure hands will fall through the cracks. This structure doesn't cater particularly to GI club hands or GI minor suited hands at all for that matter. We like having our GF relay auctions and we have to pay a price for that. We wouldn't have to pay such a high price if our 2C bid was not necessarily game-forcing so that's a legal cost. I'm liking how this works in the main and Atul and I tested it and it seemed to do pretty well.

Here's the breakdown for 100 hands that held 2 or fewer spades by GI responses...

2D-79
2H-10
2N-8
3C-3


Another sample of 100 hands I tallied just for 2H responses yielded 15.

[akhare]

straube, on 2013-May-20, 21:19, said:

1S-2D
2H-2N 3+H, misfit (could present this as just diamonds)
3D-etc 5341

I'm sure hands will fall through the cracks. This structure doesn't cater particularly to GI club hands or GI minor suited hands at all for that matter. We like having our GF relay auctions and we have to pay a price for that. We wouldn't have to pay such a high price if our 2C bid was not necessarily game-forcing so that's a legal cost. I'm liking how this works in the main and Atul and I tested it and it seemed to do pretty well.

Here's the breakdown for 100 hands that held 2 or fewer spades by GI responses...

2D-79
2H-10
2N-8
3C-3


Another sample of 100 hands I tallied just for 2H responses yielded 15.

What were the constraints on the GI hands? I still think that it's worthwhile to look at 2H with 5+ and a heavy invite.

Also, it's unclear whether it's necessary to stop on a dime with NF 2D / 2H responses. Even assuming opener has a balanced 10 count, there should be sufficient strength to make some part score most of the times.

The idea of using canapé is clever, but by forcing 2D to be 3+ to make room for a rarer GI hand with 6H seems misplaced to me.

[straube]

The only constraint was 0-2 spades. I did zero hand evaluation (had it set at 12-13 but might as well have been 0-37) and sorted the responses by pattern.

[akhare]

straube, on 2013-May-20, 22:05, said:

The only constraint was 0-2 spades. I did zero hand evaluation (had it set at 12-13 but might as well have been 0-37) and sorted the responses by pattern.

The range of interest is 11 - 13. Most 14+ hands will GF anyway and the real question is whether 2D should be forcing for one round. In fact, you can probably make the case for a 3+ response by making it forcing for one round and 2H NF.

Using 2C comes at the cost of missing occasional superior part scores in say 2M, but I think that both 2D and 2H as forcing for one round should be evaluated as part of a comparative analysis.

[straube]

ok. I looked at a few hands and you seemed to be right. So...

1S-2H
.....P-minimum, 2-hearts
.....2S-6 spades
.....2N-any minimum

now the question is how to proceed with GF hands. I think some artificiality is called for at the 3-level. We need a checkback for the majors, certainly and ways to show minors as well.

This does take the pressure off of 2N. I suppose it would be GI with 4H and 5+C

[awm]

This seems to cover most everything in response to 1♠:

1NT = one of (1) weak misfitting hand willing to pass opener's rebid (2) any "weak invite" without a fit (3) "sound invite" with 4-5♣
2♣ = GF relay
2♦ = sound invite or some minimum GF hands with 4+♦, F1
2♥ = sound invite or some minimum GF hands with 5+♥, F1
2NT = sound invite 6+♣
3x = weak natural

1♠ - 1NT - 2♣ (pass only if 5(332) and rejecting sound invite):
... Pass = weak misfitting hand
... 2NT = light invite with 4-5♣
... 3♣ = sound invite with clubs (if partner has only three clubs he's accepting anyway)
... Other bids = light invite

1♠ - 1NT - 2Red:
... Pass = weak misfitting hand
... 2NT = sound invite with clubs
... Other non-jump = light invite natural
... sound invite including 4♥ forces to game opposite opener's 2♥ rebid (upgrade for major fit)

1♠ - 2♦:
... 2♥ = relay
-----> 2♠ = doubleton, sound invite like 2452 or 2254 or 2353
-----> 2NT = short spades with 1444 or 1453 or 1354 etc invite
-----> 3♣ = 5/5 minors invite
-----> 3♦ = 6+♦ sound invite
-----> 3♥ = 4-6 or more shape min GF (don't want to relay with this much shape)
-----> 3♠ = GF "picture" hand
... 2♠ = 4+♥
-----> 2NT = balanced or 1354-ish
-----> 3♣ = 5/5 invite
-----> 3♦ = 6+♦ sound invite
-----> 3♥ = GF (4-4 major fit is an upgrade)
-----> 3♠ = GF "picture" hand
... 2NT+ = GF (max) hands of various description, perhaps 2NT = 6+♠ and others natural

1♠ - 2♥:
... 2♠ = relay, min hand or fairly balanced
-----> 2NT = flat or short spades, not 5/5
-----> 3m = 5/5 invite (NF)
-----> 3♥ = 6+♥ sound invite
-----> 3♠ = GF "picture" hand
-----> 4m = self splinter with great hearts
... Others = natural, GF