[Chamaco]

Hi all.

I am thinking on possible developments of Precision 1D.


CURRENT SYSTEM

In our case 1D is either max 15, 4+diamonds (may have longer clubs) or balanced.
The range of the balanced 1D opener is variable: when white, 1st/2nd seat, it is 13-15 )(because in that case we open 1NT = 10-12) , otherwise, (10)11-13 (when 1NT = 14-16).

Right now the responses are:

1M, 1NT = natural
2C = clubs, invitational+ (if 3C rebid, it is forcing)
2D = inverted raise
2M = strong jumpshift ("SJS"), well defined (selfsufficient 1suiter, 5.5- losers, slammish in hcp or shape)
2NT invitational
3C = invitational one suiter (not 5332; semibal invites with clubs bid 2C then 2NT)
3D = preemptoive
3M = splinter, shortness in suit bid, 3suiter

Another important point of the system is that if bidding (uncontested) goes:
1D-1H-? we rebid 1NT even holding 4 spades if the hand is balanced.

In case of 1D-1H-1S or 1D-1M-1NT we use a XYZ checkback scheme.
-------------------------------------------------------

What are the requirements I am trying to fulfil by changing the system ?

1- include Bourke relay ("BR") in 1D:1M:2D schemes
2- improve partscore scheme when responder has 54/45/55 in majors. IMPORTANT: For weak responder with majors 45/54 there should be BOTH possibilities to be described EXPLICITLY:
......-2a: 5H and 4S: this caters for XYZ sequences, avoiding missing spades when bidding goes 1D:1H:1NT rebid (1NT can bypass spades) and opener has 4S but responder is too weak to bid them;
......-2b: 5S and 4H: this will cater for the Bourke relay sequences that go 1D:1S:2D and now 2H is Bourke relay.
3- responder must be able to describe the Strong Jumpshift hand type below game WITHOUT going via 4sf or Bourke relay: going via BR or 4sf shows only length but a possibly broken suit, not self sufficient. The ability to show a selfsufficient suit below game is useful to start cuebids and for slam search.


Is it too much ?
Maybe.

However, after some thinking, I considered the following possibility:giving up the inverted raise of 2D, and putting all inv+ resposes without a major into 2C (except 3C response = club single suiter, invitational NF).

The scheme of responses to 1D would then become (in purple the changed responses):

1M, 1NT = natural
2C = invitational+ without major. If 3C rebid, it is natural forcing because inv single suiter with clubs just bid 3C; if 2NT or 3D rebid, it is nonforcing.
Basically this answer is almost unchanged but the natural 2NT invite and the inverted raise are added to this response.
2D = Weak flannery-type : 5H+4S
2H = weak Reverse flannery: 4H+5S
2S = strong jumpshift hand type, 2NT asks suit. If over 2NT responder bids 3D, it is NOT a SJS handtype but a strong slammish hand with 5+ diamonds, that wishes to investigate slam there.
2NT= 55 in major GF; it can be 5S+4H GF but not 5H+4S (5H+4S GF are not a problem in XYZ or BR);
It may as well be possible to use 2NT for GF ONLY 5S4H (55 or better should be easy to bid over XYZ or BR relay sequences) I am considering making this 2-way: either GF with majors or weakish 55 minors. What do you think ?
3C = invitational one suiter (not 5332; semibal invites with clubs bid 2C then 2NT)
3D = preemptoive
3M = splinter, shortness in suit bid, 3suiter


1) We lose the inverted raise in diamonds, and gain in the major oriented hands
2) the 2C response becomes nebulous: either inv+ with diamonds OR inv+ (semi) balanced
3) The slammish raise with diamonds could go via the 2S response: this would initially show a strong JS hand type, but after the 2NT ask, bidding 3D would show diamond fit and slam potential.

One added advantage is that using such a scheme, 1D:1S:2D:2H is BR and DENIES 4+ hearts by responder, so opener must not be worried of bidding 3H (losing an entire level) "just in case" responder has indeed 4H.

Comments ?

[awm]

Seems pretty good. Personally I like natural minor suit responses on inv+ hands because this can help reach a better game/partial than notrumps at times. A few comments to this effect:

(1) I'm not sure the 2NT bid is necessary. Can't strong 5-5's bid 1M and go via bourke relay if need be? Also, what is 1♦-1♠-2♦-3♥?

(2) There may be some benefit here to playing reversed major suit responses. So 1♦-1♥ shows 4+ spades and 1♦-1♠ shows 4+ hearts. Then opener's 1♠ rebid can show hearts with an unbalanced hand and otherwise bid naturally. The main advantage here is, there is no longer a problem with the hand holding 5S and 4H. This hand bids 1♥ (spades) and if partner rebids 2♦ no fit will be missed. If partner rebids 1NT, you can bid 2♥ showing 5-4 or better and weak. This frees up one of the "flannery" responses.

-- Adam

[Chamaco]

Quote

(1) I'm not sure the 2NT bid is necessary. Can't strong 5-5's bid 1M and go via bourke relay if need be? Also, what is 1♦-1♠-2♦-3♥?

1♦-1♠-2♦-3♥ can be 55 D+H, picture jump slammish. The 2NT bid might have a "normal 55 major, not slammish.
Anyways, the 55M could be removed from 2NT.

Another idea is that 55 GF hands start the bidding by 1H response instead of 1S, ready to reverse later.

BUT, the hand with 5S and 4H is cumbersome to rebid after 1♦-1♠-2♦. If I bid 2H now I do not want that opener with 4H bids 3H, nor that he raises "artificially" with 2S.
I much prefer the idea that now, the 2H Bourke relkay specifically denies 4H (might have 5, perhaps, if we remove the 55 from 2NT)

awm, on Apr 17 2005, 04:00 PM, said:

(2) There may be some benefit here to playing reversed major suit responses. So 1♦-1♥ shows 4+ spades and 1♦-1♠ shows 4+ hearts.

In such a scheme, say bidding (uncontested) goes:

1D:1S(=4+H):?

Now, say responder has: AJxx-x-AQJxx-xxx

What does he rebid ? I like 1NT rebid always show a balanced hand and never a singleton in pard suit.
Also, in many situations (at white, 1st/2nd seat), 1NT rebid shd be 13-15, and I do not like to lie on both hcp AND distribution (one lie might be ok).

[awm]

All the flip of 1♠ and 1♥ really does is to reverse the problem hands.

AJxx
x
AQJxx
xxx

This is hard to bid after 1♦-1♠ showing hearts. It would've been easy to bid after a natural 1♥ call from partner. But on the other hand, consider:

x
AJxx
AQJxx
xxx

This hand is awkward after 1♦-1♠ natural. But after 1♦-1♥ (spades) you can rebid 1♠ showing hearts.

I don't think these kinds of hands argue strongly for or against flipping the major suit responses. The flip can win when opener is the stronger hand and gets to declare in a major, but can also lose when responder is stronger. The vast majority of the time, it will not greatly matter whether you play natural or flipped major suit responses.

However, you noticed that you had a problem with 5♥ and 4♠ opposite a 1NT rebid, whereas there is a different problem (5♠ and 4♥) opposite the 2♦ rebid. Notice that each of these hands is easy to bid opposite the other rebid. Inverting the major suit responses flips things around so that the problem hand is always 5♥ and 4♠ regardless of opener's rebid. The hand with longer spades is now easy. So you only need the one flannery response (2♥ showing weak hand with 5♥ and 4♠) and not two.

As for the relay, I'm not sure exactly what structure you propose for 1♦-1♠-2♦-2♥ but it seems like most relay sequences should be able to uncover a heart fit (via opener's shape showing rebids). There should not be many problems when responder has a good hand.

[Free]

awm, on Apr 17 2005, 11:41 PM, said:

All the flip of 1♠ and 1♥ really does is to reverse the problem hands.

AJxx
x
AQJxx
xxx

This is hard to bid after 1♦-1♠ showing hearts. It would've been easy to bid after a natural 1♥ call from partner. But on the other hand, consider:

x
AJxx
AQJxx
xxx

This hand is awkward after 1♦-1♠ natural. But after 1♦-1♥ (spades) you can rebid 1♠ showing hearts.

I don't think these kinds of hands argue strongly for or against flipping the major suit responses. The flip can win when opener is the stronger hand and gets to declare in a major, but can also lose when responder is stronger. The vast majority of the time, it will not greatly matter whether you play natural or flipped major suit responses.

However, you noticed that you had a problem with 5♥ and 4♠ opposite a 1NT rebid, whereas there is a different problem (5♠ and 4♥) opposite the 2♦ rebid. Notice that each of these hands is easy to bid opposite the other rebid. Inverting the major suit responses flips things around so that the problem hand is always 5♥ and 4♠ regardless of opener's rebid. The hand with longer spades is now easy. So you only need the one flannery response (2♥ showing weak hand with 5♥ and 4♠) and not two.

As for the relay, I'm not sure exactly what structure you propose for 1♦-1♠-2♦-2♥ but it seems like most relay sequences should be able to uncover a heart fit (via opener's shape showing rebids). There should not be many problems when responder has a good hand.

Wrong, since 1♠ denies 4♠s, you don't really have a problem of missing a Major suit fit. When you reverse these bids, you'll always primary show ♠s, even with longer ♥. This actually solves a lot of problems!

[awm]

Free, on Apr 18 2005, 01:33 AM, said:

Wrong, since 1♠ denies 4♠s, you don't really have a problem of missing a Major suit fit. When you reverse these bids, you'll always primary show ♠s, even with longer ♥. This actually solves a lot of problems!

This has more to do with your canape responding style than reversing the majors. Notice that:

(1) You will miss 5-3 heart fits with 5♥ and 4♠ when partner rebids 2♦ after 1♦-1♥.
(2) You will not be able to distinguish the longer major after 1♦-1♥-1NT -- presumably you now rebid 2♥ with 5-4 or 4-5 in the majors.

One could equally well always respond 1♥ with 4+, so that 1♦-1♠ (natural) denies four hearts. This causes no real problems when opener rebids 1NT (playing 2-way nmf it is easy enough for 2♠ rebid to be signoff), and you will never miss a major fit when opener has four of the major, but you do run into problems (again) when the auction goes 1♦-1♥-2♦ and you have a 5-3 spade fit.

[Free]

awm, on Apr 18 2005, 07:47 AM, said:

(1) You will miss 5-3 heart fits with 5♥ and 4♠ when partner rebids 2♦ after 1♦-1♥.
(2) You will not be able to distinguish the longer major after 1♦-1♥-1NT -- presumably you now rebid 2♥ with 5-4 or 4-5 in the majors.

Wrong again.

If responder bids 1♥ followed by 2♥, he shows 5+♥ and 4+♠, so no lost 5-3 ♥ fits. And there's no real need to distinguish the longer Major, after a 1NT rebid from opener, since he denies a 4 card ♥ (by not bidding 1♠). So 2♠ just shows 5+♠s, can still have 4♥s. Ok, I know, sometimes 4-3 fits play better than 5-2's, but if you want to play precision with 5 card Majors, there's some price you have to pay (and this is a very small price imo).
For opener, this means you ALWAYS have to bid 1♠ when you have a 4 card ♥...

[Chamaco]

Free, on Apr 18 2005, 08:27 AM, said:

For opener, this means you ALWAYS have to bid 1♠ when you have a 4 card ♥...

No thx, I want to bypass an unbid major when I have a balanced hand.
That's all the point of my post.

I am trying to keep all these 4 options:

1) being able to bypass a major to rebid NT
2) use XYZ over 1S/1NT opener rebids, Bourke relay over 2D rebid, 4sf over 2C rebid;
3) being able- as responder - to bid differently a GF hand with a long major whose texture is, say AQ9xxx (I'll show only extra length by rebidding it after 4sf or BR) or KQJTxxx (this would need a specific bid/sequence showing not only length but guaranteing also a selfsufficient suit, either a SJS or anything else)
4) being able to find the best partscore when responder is weakish with 54/45/55M

The solution I present here sacrifices the 2D inverted raise in diamonds (but only for invitational or GF hands; for slammish hands there is a way to show it) in order to comply with the 4 points above.

I wonder whether:

a. my solution has holes (please pinpoint them)
b. the price to pay (losing the diamond inverted raise) is too much

[david_c]

Chamaco, on Apr 18 2005, 03:42 AM, said:

I wonder whether:

a. my solution has holes (please pinpoint them)

I didn't find any.

Quote

b. the price to pay (losing the diamond inverted raise) is too much

With good methods after 2♣ or 2♠ you will probably be able to get back some form of forcing diamond raise. But it's not as good as having a natural inverted raise, so you need to consider whether your new meaning of 2♦ is really necessary. And I don't think it is - see previous threads on how to solve the problem of 5♥4♠ hands after 1♦:1♥,1NT.

[Chamaco]

david_c, on Apr 18 2005, 09:48 AM, said:

But it's not as good as having a natural inverted raise, so you need to consider whether your new meaning of 2♦ is really necessary. And I don't think it is - see previous threads on how to solve the problem of 5♥4♠ hands after 1♦:1♥,1NT.

Do they allow opener to bypass a major to rebid 1NT ?
This is very important to me.

Ok, perhaps
1D:1H:1NT:2S would be canapè, signoff with 5S4H, whereas 1D:2H = 5H4S.

BUT
what shall we do in such cases ?
(PLEASE NOTE THAT OPENER WILL NEVER REBID 1NT WITH A SINGLETON IN PARD'S MAJOR)

Hand 1
Opener
Qxx-x-AKxx-AJxxx

Responder
KJxxx-KJxx-xxx-x

Using the canapè style bidding goes
1D:1H:2C and now ?
A signoff in either minor is a MP disaster.


Hand 2
Opener
Qxx-x-AKxxxx-AJx

Responder
KJxxx-KTxx-x-xx

Using the canapè style bidding goes
1D:1H:2D and now ?
2S would be Bourke relay and passing 2D is a MP disaster.

[david_c]

Chamaco, on Apr 18 2005, 04:52 AM, said:

david_c, on Apr 18 2005, 09:48 AM, said:

But it's not as good as having a natural inverted raise, so you need to consider whether your new meaning of 2♦ is really necessary. And I don't think it is - see previous threads on how to solve the problem of 5♥4♠ hands after 1♦:1♥,1NT.

Do they allow opener to bypass a major to rebid 1NT ?
This is very important to me.

Yes. I'm sure I've posted this before, but what we play after 1♦:1♥,1NT is

2♣ = puppet to 2♦ (either weak with ♦ or invitational)
2♦ = transfer (either weak or GF)
2♥ = weak, 5♥4♠

[Chamaco]

[quote name='david_c' date='Apr 18 2005, 10:02 AM'] Do they allow opener to bypass a major to rebid 1NT ?
This is very important to me.[/QUOTE]
Yes. I'm sure I've posted this before, but what we play after 1[di]:1[he],1NT is [/QUOTE]

Alright, I see.
You are not advocating canape responses but transfer checkback.
[u]Yet those distributions (weakish 54) might cause you a problem if opener rebids 2C or 2D, so having a 1st-bid shape-showing response anticipates such problems[/u].

[Chamaco]

BTW, in Precision, maybe lumping the inverted raise (not slammish) into 2C may be not such a disaster.
Assume we play the following Kokish scheme, with some reworking due t the fact that 1D is limited:

1♦ -2♣ ; ?
....2♦ = 5+♦ , 1R forcing
....2♥ = 4441 exactly
....2♠ = good club raise
....2NT = balanced
....3♣ = bad club raise
....♦3 = 16+, good 6-card diamond suit
....3♥ , 3♥ = splinters in support of clubs
....3NT = 18-19, balanced

Ok this is for "Standard" better minor opener, however I think it can be easily reworked. Basically opener will describe himself.