[dickiegera]

Partner and I play Mini Roman 4-4-4-1 or 4-4-5-0

10-12 pts always having 4 Spades

We are having a disagreement on 2NT asking for shortness.

She prefers bidding the suit where shortness exist and

I prefer using submarine approach where one bids suit under shortness.

Opinions and comments welcome

[pescetom]

Do many people still play this convention?
It seems odd to dedicate 2♦ exclusively to three suited hands when you could bundle this into a multi if it really seems a problem.

[johnu]

pescetom, on 2020-March-01, 15:25, said:

Do many people still play this convention?
It seems odd to dedicate 2♦ exclusively to three suited hands when you could bundle this into a multi if it really seems a problem.

You could bundle lots of types of hands into a specific bid, but that doesn't make it a good idea.

[pescetom]

johnu, on 2020-March-01, 15:32, said:

You could bundle lots of types of hands into a specific bid, but that doesn't make it a good idea.

Agreed, but any specific bid should be appropriately loaded in a well designed system.
Dedicating a 2 level opening to a 3% freak hand doesn't look ideal.

[johnu]

The one under shortness method allows you to use the next step (ie bidding the short suit) as an asking bid (or start of asking bids).

[TylerE]

pescetom, on 2020-March-01, 15:25, said:

when you could bundle this into a multi if it really seems a problem.

Not in the ACBL..

Generic mini-roman is total garbage though.

[nullve]

2♦-2N; ?:

3♣ = 0-1 D
...3♦ = relay
......3♥ = 4414
......3♠ = 4405
......3N = 4504
...(...)
3♦ = 0-1 H
...3♥ = relay, "asking for 5 C" (1)
......3♠ = 4144
......3N = 4054
......4♣ = 4045 (2)
...3♠ = relay, "asking for 5 D" (3)
......3N = 4144 or 4045 (4)
......4♣ = 4054 (5)
...(...)
3♥+ = 0-1 C
In detail:
3♥ = 4441
3♠ = 4450
3N = 4540

(1) Responder may be interested in slam only opposite 5 C
(2) good news if Responder is interested in slam only opposite 5 C, so can bypass 3N
(3) Responder is interested in slam only opposite 5 D
(4) both sapes are bad news
(5) good news, so can bypass 3N

[helene_t]

If you want to be able to make a non-forcing second bid as often as possible, it is best to bid the singleton.

If you want to be able to make a non-forcing bid whenever opener is short in hearts (makes sense: responder could have a 13-count with hearts or so), you should make 3♣ show short hearts.

[Zelandakh]

As Helene alludes to, I think this boils down primarily to whether you want to be able to make an invite on the second round. Take the auction 2♦ - 2NT; 3♣ - 3♥. Is that forcing or invitational for you? If invitational then Opener rebidding the shortage is more efficient. If instead 2NT was GF then using the suit below allows for (as johnu mentioned) very efficient slam bidding starting with a relay bidding the short suit. In general, I think Strong Roman tends to bid the suit under and Mini-Roman the shortage itself but as I have limited experience with the Mini-version I am not certain which is actually best. My best advice would therefore to be to use the method espoused by the player more likely to forget. In the end, forgets are, for most club-level players, probably going to provide a bigger change in expected score than the difference in methods.

[Vampyr]

johnu, on 2020-March-01, 15:52, said:

The one under shortness method allows you to use the next step (ie bidding the short suit) as an asking bid (or start of asking bids).

That’s what I used to play ~30 years ago. I played 11-14 with any shortness, if that makes a difference. It didn’t come up very often, so I agree with those who have said it is a bit of a waste to use a low-level bid for an infrequent hand-type.

[msjennifer]

Sir, there are too many considerations to be discussed when such a 10/12 limited 2D bid is practised.Since you have specifically asked whether to play submarine approach or not ,I.personally ,would like to bid the submarine way.(bid suit below the singleton).It resembles, only somewhat, the bids in SUPER PRECISION.and having said this I shall be more comfortably placed for the further auction.(This shall require a detailed analysis of your all other opening bids and certainly that is beyond conception of this problem) THANKS.

[daffydoc]

I have one partner with whom I play a big Roman - 17-24 - we use the one under the singleton approach, allow u to bid the singleton to. either ask total controls or min max. Seems clearly more effective than bidding the singling - gives you an extra bid which can mean something.

[sopociak]

sopociak, on 2020-March-02, 17:52, said:

I have one partner with whom I play a big Roman - 17-24 - we use the one under the singleton approach, allow u to bid the singleton to. either ask total controls or min max. Seems clearly more effective than bidding the singling - gives you an extra bid which can mean something.

One of my partners loves 2D Mini Roman. So we play 11-17 to cover 1 NT level opening with singleton or void. I believe Mini Roman gives way too much info to opponents and if you have 11-12 with partner being weak you already on the loosing side. I normally keep 2 D for Flannery