[hautbois]

Playing XYZ, do reverses still apply? Either way, how would you break down hand types in these auctions when you have distribution that would be appropriate for all 3?

1C - 1D - 1NT - 2C
1C - 1D - 1NT - 2D
1C - 1D - 1NT - 2M

1C - 1D - 1H - 2C
1C - 1D - 1H - 2D
1C - 1D - 1H - 2S

[mike777]

yes of course reverses still apply AND OF COURSE 2C AND 2D ARE XYZ
Assuming opp are passing then:

1) 2C FORCES 2D; SIGN OFF IN D OR START OF INVITE( YOU CAN NEVER PLAY IN 2C)
2) 2D IS ART GF
3) 2M IS NATURAL AND GF.(5d and 4M
4) 2C FORCES 2D, SIGN OFF IN D OR START OF INVITE( YOU CAN NEVER PLAY IN 2C)
5) 2D IS ART GF
6) 2S IS NATURAL AND gf.(5d and 4s)

Please note responder cannot bid this way with 4d and 4M

yOU WILL find that xyz can lead to many many types of auctions. for the most part I just play them natural. It becomes a memory strain to assign unnatural meanings to many of these xyz auctions.

[inquiry]

mike777, on 2013-July-05, 21:57, said:

yes of course reverses still apply AND OF COURSE 2C AND 2D ARE XYZ
Assuming opp are passing then:

1) 2C FORCES 2D; SIGN OFF IN D OR START OF INVITE( YOU CAN NEVER PLAY IN 2C)

I have found that XYZ probably needs a little tweaking. The 2♦ bid is always gameforce, and opener describes his hand, and 2♣ is invitiational, but the concept that 2♣ forces 2♦ needs some modification.

If the bidding goes x-y-1NT, ok, opener's hand has been adequately described by the 1NT rebid, so over 2♣ opener has to rebid 2♦. But other auction like

1c- 1h -1S - 2c
1c -1d -1h - 2c
1d - 1h - 1S -2C

etc, opener's hand is still quite undefined. Depending on your agreements, for instance, the 1♠ bid can be a huge hand still. Too huge to risk a forced 2♦ bid. Even hands without a lot of extra values, there could be shape issues that might need to be expressed.

Let's take just one such auction....

1♣- - 1♥ = 1♠ - 2[cl'

• 2♦ = most weak hands
• 2[he[ - weak hand, with 4♠. 3[her] - 0/1 ♦ 5/6♣
• 2nt - huge balanced hand (if you would have rebid 1♠ with this hand, think 18-19 balanced
• 3♣ -forcing, 5+clubs, 4+♠ good hand not strong enough for a jumpshift to 2♠ on last round, but too strong to risk 2♦ now. Think aomewhere around 15 or 16 hcp at a minimum.

Anyway, Martens and his extended transfer bids come in on these auctions. Something to consider.

Quote

2) 2D IS ART GF
3) 2M IS NATURAL AND GF.(5d and 4M
4) 2C FORCES 2D, SIGN OFF IN D OR START OF INVITE( YOU CAN NEVER PLAY IN 2C)
5) 2D IS ART GF
6) 2S IS NATURAL AND gf.(5d and 4s)

Please note responder cannot bid this way with 4d and 4M

yOU WILL find that xyz can lead to many many types of auctions. for the most part I just play them natural. It becomes a memory strain to assign unnatural meanings to many of these xyz auctions.

[mike777]

sure....opener can break the transfer to 2d but rare very rare but yes....there is always some problem hands when opener has a lot of extras and responder has more than very weak.

Of course we can ignore the hands where opener j/s.


I just don't find them in practice.

[hautbois]

I guess I didn't word the intent of my follow up question very well. Let's say I'm 4252 and the auction starts 1C - 1D - 1NT. With what strength hands will I continue the bidding 2C, 2D or 2S?

It seems that 2D and 2S show the same range and that I wouldn't bid 2D with this shape. That seems inefficient, but if that's the standard that's what I'll play unless partner's willing to try something different.

With an opening NT of 15-17 and playing Walsh, I'd like to bid 2C with 10-12, 2D with 12-16 or 17, 2S with 17 or 18+. I will still have time after 2D to find a major fit or moysian.

As I read write ups on XYZ, I don't see this point covered, and maybe the only distinction is shape with point ranges redundant between 2D and 2M. I don't have the experience to know if that's as important as making a distinction between game forces and slam tries, but it seems likely we're playing NT and high cards will be the primary source of tricks.

[awm]

I think the standard agreement (to the degree there is one) is that:

1♣ - 1♦ - 1NT - 2M = 4M and 5+♦
1♣ - 1♦ - 1NT - 2♦ = includes 4M and 4♦ (as well as some minor slam tries)
1♣ - 1♦ - 1NT - 2♣... 2M = invite with 4M and 5+♦ (with 4M/4♦ and invite only, start with 1M)

[Flem72]

hautbois, on 2013-July-06, 11:39, said:

I guess I didn't word the intent of my follow up question very well. Let's say I'm 4252 and the auction starts 1C - 1D - 1NT. With what strength hands will I continue the bidding 2C, 2D or 2S?

It seems that 2D and 2S show the same range and that I wouldn't bid 2D with this shape. That seems inefficient, but if that's the standard that's what I'll play unless partner's willing to try something different.

With an opening NT of 15-17 and playing Walsh, I'd like to bid 2C with 10-12, 2D with 12-16 or 17, 2S with 17 or 18+. I will still have time after 2D to find a major fit or moysian.

As I read write ups on XYZ, I don't see this point covered, and maybe the only distinction is shape with point ranges redundant between 2D and 2M. I don't have the experience to know if that's as important as making a distinction between game forces and slam tries, but it seems likely we're playing NT and high cards will be the primary source of tricks.

Assuming one of the "normal" versions of XYZ, as I understand them, & Walshish (O may conceal one or both 4M; R bids D first only with GF values) with R = 4-2-5-2 (also, I would think, 2-4-5-2). After 1C-1D/1N:

2C = you would've bid 1S first, so Does Not Exist with any hand that does not want to play 2D (except in one iteration, a big self splinter hand).
2D = Checkback, GF+: You will discover if O holds 5C or 4M or D support or none of the above.
2M = 5+D-4M, GF+, natural bidding to follow.

In one p'ship, 2D denies 4M; in all of them 1D with a GF hand claims 5+D, and using the 2M route is shape, e.g. 4M-5D-(3-1) so the given (4-2)-5-2 shapes would use 2D. Most of these hands can and will decide to blast NT in order to avoid too much info leakage.

So, yes, 2D and 2S are different, one asking one telling, but 2D is possible. Of course awm's non-Walsh version is workable also. Without completely parsing this, I don't see anything wrong with using 2D and 2M the way you suggest. I kind of like our shape agreements though--"shape before strength" and all that, and I don't think one needs the slam zone tip-off right away.

[mike777]

ya shape before strength when discussing to rebid 2d or 2M.

Keep in mind it is somewhat rare to have a gf as responder and 5+d and 4M and pard starts with 1club.