[tseager44]

The system is very simple if you think about the suit and level you can play with your hand
in responding to your partner.

0-3 pts bid your 4+ suit at the 2 level...if you have a 4-3-3-3 with clubs bid 2nt

4-9 pts bid your 5+ suit at the 3 level...if no 5 card suit, bit 3nt

10+ pts bid your 5+ suit or take over and go 4nt asking for aces.

Thats it...if you try it and use it for a length of time, you will find it much
better than 2D waiting or plain steps.

teseager44

[barmar]

This seems very wasteful. If you have the intermediate hand, you may still be trying to find a fit on the 5 level. You may have enough for a slam, but you won't have room to figure out what suit it should be in and whether you have all the necessary controls.

[TylerE]

This is dumb and terrible for the 2N response alone.

[eagles123]

oops meant to give +1 to Barmar's post rather than the OP

seems like a really bad system to me!

[wank]

lol but it's nice that you try

[1eyedjack]

I am not a fan of step responses to 2C of any description, but I have to acknowledge that they have a popular following. Let's try to be constructive.

To the OP, can I ask a question: Would you regard the following as worth a 2C opener?
S:x
H:AKJT9x
D:AKQ
C:KQx

If you do, then perhaps you would explain how the subsequent auction would develop under your methods, given the following four (of many) possible hands that responder might have:

(1)
S:KQTxx
H:x
D:xxxx
C:Jxx
Auction commences: 2C-3S. Objective: to stop in 3N or 4H.

(2)
S:Jxxxx
H:Qx
D:xxx
C:AJxx
Auction commences: 2C-3S. Objective: to stop in 6H

(3)
S:xxxx
H:Qxx
D:xx
C:Axxx
Auction commences: 2C-3N. Objective: to stop in 6H

(4)
S:KQJx
H:xx
D:Jxxx
C:Jxx
Auction commences: 2C-3N. Objective: To stop in 3N or 4H.

[PhilKing]

TylerE, on 2013-June-16, 23:15, said:

This is dumb and terrible for the 2N response alone.

My personal favourite is the 4-9 3NT response. Solid.

[1eyedjack]

Continuing to try to be constructive, it is I think worthwhile remembering that the number of sequences available that get you to a particular end point from various starting points is a function of the starting point and loosely follows a Fibonacci sequence. The number of auctions that get you to 3N (say) from a starting point of 3S is 1. Starting from 3H it is 2. Starting from 3D it is 4. Starting from 3C it is 8. In other words, it is not linear, with a substantially greater amount of bidding space available to lower level responses.

If your desire is to pre-empt the opponents, then you want to concentrate hands into the more expensive sequences, in order to deny the opponents the benefit of those additional bidding sequences that would otherwise be available to them. But after a 2C opener, pre-empting the opponents is generallly not a priority. This argues for a system in which hand types are allocated to responses roughly in proportion to the number of followup sequences available, which in turn suggests that (for example) a 2D response should show vastly more hand types than a 3N response. That principle does not appear to be observed in the proposed structure.

[helene_t]

1eyedjack, on 2013-June-17, 06:53, said:

[...] the number of sequences available that get you to a particular end point from various starting points is a function of the starting point and loosely follows a Fibonacci sequence. The number of auctions that get you to 3N (say) from a starting point of 3S is 1. Starting from 3H it is 2. Starting from 3D it is 4. Starting from 3C it is 8.

The sequence you quote (1,2,4,8....) is exponential, not Fibonacci. The Fibonacci sequence (1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21...) is the one you should use if one of the partners always relays. The exponential sequence is the one to use if both partner's convey information.

[ahydra]

You might also consider that when partner opens 2C it will often be because he has a good suit of his own. For example, a 19-count with 7 hearts is often a clearcut 2H opener, but a 19-count with 5-4 shape is normally bid by opening 1 and then jump-shifting. So to jump to the 3-level with a 5-card suit of your own is not going to help very much; often partner now has to introduce his suit at the 4-level.

Personally I feel that when partner opens 2C we should just sit back and find out what he's got. Maybe we can suggest a good 6+ suit of our own as trumps but I wouldn't want to eat room bidding a 5-card suit.

ahydra

[TylerE]

PhilKing, on 2013-June-17, 06:23, said:

My personal favourite is the 4-9 3NT response. Solid.

That actually makes a certain kind of sense, as there is a decent chance you're actually right siding the contract.

[PhilKing]

TylerE, on 2013-June-17, 07:15, said:

That actually makes a certain kind of sense, as there is a decent chance you're actually right siding the contract.

But partner will have trouble guessing the level.

[ArtK78]

ahydra, on 2013-June-17, 07:05, said:

Personally I feel that when partner opens 2C we should just sit back and find out what he's got. Maybe we can suggest a good 6+ suit of our own as trumps but I wouldn't want to eat room bidding a 5-card suit.

ahydra

With all due respect, this is a common misconception of how one should conduct auctions with a strong hand facing a much weaker hand.

The best method is where the strong hand asks and the weak hand tells, as the weak hand has far less information to convey (with rare exceptions), and the strong hand is likely to be in a better position to make use of the information.

This is the basis behind strong club systems, and, especially, relay systems.

I have found that a control showing response to a strong 2♣ opening works nicely, as the first response will often clarify to opener whether the hand is a game, small slam or grand slam hand (those rare hands where opener rebids 2NT and it goes all pass or transfer and drop take care of themselves). But most players are not comfortable with control showing responses.

[TylerE]

+1 for control asks.

The scheme I prefer is as follows:

A=2, K=1
2♦ = 0-1 controls
2♥ = 2 controls
2♠ = AK
2N = KKK (Likely right siding any NT contract)
3♣ = 4+ controls, 3♦ relays for count if desired, then 3♥=4,3♠=5, etc
3♦-3♠ show a decent 6 card with no more than one control. Something like KQxxxx xx xx xxx type hand.

After 2♣, we are 99% GF...the only passable auction is 2♣-2♦-2N, and then only with 0 controls.

[aguahombre]

PhilKing, on 2013-June-17, 06:23, said:

My personal favourite is the 4-9 3NT response. Solid.

With frequent upgrades, of course -- for instance, the Queen and Jack in the same suit.

[manudude03]

Gotta say the responses above are beyond bad, not that I'm a fan of the regular step responses.

edit: deleted nonsense.

[glen]

tseager44, on 2013-June-16, 18:42, said:

...0-3 pts bid your 4+ suit at the 2 level...if you have a 4-3-3-3 with clubs bid 2nt ...

If you have a single suited hand with 5+♣s and 0-3 pts the structure has no bid.

[gwnn]

I agree with the principle of constructive feedback and loathe bullying, especially newcomers. But there comes a point where a method is so wrong that trying to put together constructive criticism thereof is itself wrong.

https://www.youtube....h?v=iLwAjOGQcHo

[PhilKing]

"Informative" posts couched in this way are fair game imo. It's immoral not to flame them.

[blackshoe]

Point count is not the most important thing, to my way of thinking, when partner opens 2♣. It doesn't tell you enough. I like control showing responses, though mine are different from Tyler's:

2♦: 0-1 control
2♥: 2 controls
2♠: 3 controls
2NT: 4 controls
3♣: 5+ controls
3♦: a transfer to ♥, showing in essence a minimum weak two. GF.
3♥:a transfer to ♠, showing in essence a minimum weak two. GF.

There are higher level responses, but they're very rare.

Also, 2♣ shows the following possible hand types:

balanced (possible 5 card major), 23-24 HCP, 8 controls.
balanced (possible 5 card major), 29-30 HCP, 11 controls.
unbalanced, any primary suit except diamonds, one or two suited, 3 or fewer losers (2 if the suit is clubs), at least 6 controls.

The auction 2♣-2♦-2NT is not forcing. All other auctions are forcing to at least game.