[hrothgar]

Free, on 2013-January-16, 08:52, said:

Makes me wonder: what do you do with a slam invitational 5-5 (or stronger)? Is 4D forcing?

Here's my current thinking regarding the strong club opener's rebid.

1. Jump shifts should show single suited hands with good suits.
2. In contrast, a simple advance in a new suit could be made on patterns like 5-4, 5-5s, and the like
3. A jump in NT shows an extreme two suiter
4. A rebid in NT shows a balanced hand with extra strength
5. Pass shows a balanced hand without extra strength
6. Double is takeout oriented
7. I think that a cue bid over 1♠ should be natural, suggesting that the opponents are screwing around. Over higher bids, it should be a stopper ask

[straube]

A little surprised there were only three club openers, but it's good that everyone is bidding their system. I'll think about not including such hands because I really prefer to deal with strong club auctions, but I also don't want to avoid hands that may or may not be difficult for our own club structure.

I understand tactical considerations and those who have 1H-1N, 3D available to show a maximum 5H/5D may do better to opt the route of 1H. For us, this shows a good 6H/5D hand so we are stuck rebidding 2D which could be something as meager as x AQxxx Axxx xxx. I.e. there's a danger for us in having too wide a range for our 1H opening. Another reason I open 1C is because our opening hands can't show 10 QPs, except by inference; i.e. partner has to show as 9 and then responder has to work it out after relaying for shape, QPs and then placing cards. I know that not all 10 QP hands qualify for a 16+ hcp 1C opening, but I think these are actually fairly infrequent. We eliminate some of them, too, by having a 14-16 NT. This second reason doesn't affect many and we may or may not be the only ones who relay 1H openings. Maybe Moscito relays limited hands as well.

One can always argue tactical considerations for opening natural and perhaps that's why some systems allow a wider range for 1M (say 11-18). My point is that you have to cut off somewhere and there may be nothing particularly magic as to one spot or another. Give the hand a useful jack and that will add much value to the hand and I bet we will get more club openings, but the opponents can be just as noisome.

I do understand the difference between 2-suiters that do and don't include spades.

I wrote Bergen some time past about a particular 0526 and I've no idea what he would say about just a 1525. There's a difference of a full loser in strength. We were playing a different system at the time....

Me "So I post a hand to BBO where I have void Axxxx Kx AKJxxx. I open a strong club (imps unfav). The auction goes 1C (1S) 2D (3S)

2D is a semipositive response showing 6 diamonds or 5 with an unbalanced hand. Partner has about 5-7 hcps.

I suggested now that dbl by me would show a heart suit but not both heart and club suits."

"Bergen"**As in the other case, that is a new one on me.
It's not crazy, though
For what it is worth, Meckwell plays 2D as game-forcing.

This reminds me of something I came up with that Larry + David did play
1D 3S ???
If you agree w me that virtually all hands that would want to bid a natural 4C should make a Thrump Dbl of 3S,
then you will agree that 4C should show C + H (5+, 5+)."

Me "The criticism I get is for opening a 2-suited hand 1C."

Bergen "1C is clear to me. I hate over-strength 2C bids in Precision.
This "Don't open a Precision Club or a Standard 2C with a 2-suiter is BS"

Me "I appreciate the criticism, but there's danger in opening 2-suited hands in a suit when the range is too wide. What would Meckwell or others do here?"

Bergen "1C"

Me "How strong a 2-suited hand might they open 1H or 2C natural?

Bergen "I believe they are sensible,
although Walter + Doug will open 2C with good hands where I would not."

[straube]

Free, on 2013-January-16, 08:52, said:

First time I see that 4D is LM. Definitely makes sense, since natural seems strange and 5-5 is always difficult to bid after intervention, although I would expect opener to be a little bit stronger. Based on QP's we're not in a GF situation. I'd rather start with a NF 2H. Responder would raise (showing a non-minimum) after which opener would bid game. End result is the same but we keep 3NT by North as an option.

Makes me wonder: what do you do with a slam invitational 5-5 (or stronger)? Is 4D forcing?

We also play Leaping Michaels opposite a negative or semipositive hand (i.e. not opposite a GF hand). We also play Rubensohl, so

1C-1H (1S) 16+, any SP

2H would be nf
3D would be invitational+ hearts
4D would be leaping Michaels.

I think our leaping Michaels is forcing. Maybe Rubensohl and a 4D rebid should just be invitational.

[Hilver]

Hilversumse Klaveren (HK)

1♥ - 1NT*
2♦ - 3♥
4♥

Explanation:
1♥ = 10-15 HCP, 5+-card ♥
1NT = forcing; 6-11 HCP, no 4-card ♠
3♥ = 3+ card heartssupport, a hand with good 9 HCP.

In HK in the auction 1♥ - 2♥, 2♥ = 10-11 HCP and exactly a 3-card ♥. 1♥-2NT = either 10-11 HCP and 4+-card support or 16+ HCP and 3+-card ♥.

Jan

[straube]

Hilver, on 2013-January-16, 10:17, said:

Hilversumse Klaveren (HK)

1♥ - 1NT*
2♦ - 3♥
4♥

Explanation:
1♥ = 10-15 HCP, 5+-card ♥
1NT = forcing; 6-11 HCP, no 4-card ♠
3♥ = 3+ card heartssupport, a hand with good 9 HCP.

In HK in the auction 1♥ - 2♥, 2♥ = 10-11 HCP and exactly a 3-card ♥. 1♥-2NT = either 10-11 HCP and 4+-card support or 16+ HCP and 3+-card ♥.

Jan

By your own system, I think you have a 2H raise. Responder has Q93 J97 T5 AQ954 which is actually less than 10-11 and only three hearts. I assume you upgraded it to 10-11 but it can't be worth a limit raise.

[relknes]

The reason that I picked a 1♣ opening here is that oposite as little as

Qxxx
Qxx
Jxx
xxx

I want to be in game, but I don't have any methods that would let me find it, since I expect partner would pass with stronger hands than this. I realize that interference can make life difficult over a 1♣ opener, but if I thought that was a convincing argument not to open 1♣ I wouldn't be playing a strong club system. As it is, I prefer to limit my 1M bids to 5 losers so that hands with a few stray quacks don't have to worry about missing game.

[akhare]

straube, on 2013-January-16, 09:27, said:

I understand tactical considerations and those who have 1H-1N, 3D available to show a maximum 5H/5D may do better to opt the route of 1H. For us, this shows a good 6H/5D hand so we are stuck rebidding 2D which could be something as meager as x AQxxx Axxx xxx. I.e. there's a danger for us in having too wide a range for our 1H opening.

(9)10-15 hardly strikes me as being a wide range. While there's some merit in having 2N to show 6H with 5 of a minor, reserving two 3♣/3♦ to show 6m5♥, comes across as wasteful.

In terms of sheer frequency, it's much better to use those bids to show hands that don't want to rebid 2♣ / 2♦ over 1♥ - 1N.

[relknes]

akhare, on 2013-January-16, 11:17, said:

(9)10-15 hardly strikes me as being a wide range. While there's some merit in having 2N to show 6H with 5 of a minor, reserving two 3♣/3♦ to show 6m5♥, comes across as wasteful.

In terms of sheer frequency, it's much better to use those bids to show hands that don't want to rebid 2♣ / 2♦ over 1♥ - 1N.

That depends on how you define range, and how you are counting your points. Two hands of 10 HCP each can have vastly different playing strength.

Axxxx
KQJxx
xx
x

is a much stronger hand than:

Axx
xxxx
Kxx
QJx

The first has 6 losers and the second has 9, despite both of them having 10HCP. The first is a clear 1♠ opener for us, while the second is a clear pass. These are not even that extreem of examples; both are hand you might expect to see if you play an evening of bridge.
If hands that you bid 1♥-1N-2♦ include hands that have aywhere from, say, 4-8 losers, then that is a wide range in my opinion.
I do agree with you, however, that reserving 1♥-1N-3m for 6-5 hands is not the most efficient use of space. For us, that sequence means a two suited hand with 14-15 HCP and 5 losers that doesn't have both of the other suits stopped (so, a hand like the one in the OP if the ♦6 had been the ♠6), which also might not be the best but seems to make life easier. Of course this may also be influenced by the fact that a 1N response in our system is non-forcing, easing pressure on the 1M-1N-2m sequences.

[akhare]

relknes, on 2013-January-16, 12:42, said:

That depends on how you define range, and how you are counting your points. Two hands of 10 HCP each can have vastly different playing strength.

Axxxx
KQJxx
xx
x

is a much stronger hand than:

Axx
xxxx
Kxx
QJx

The first has 6 losers and the second has 9, despite both of them having 10HCP. The first is a clear 1♠ opener for us, while the second is a clear pass.

Completely agree -- we too would pass the second hand and open the first.

relknes, on 2013-January-16, 12:42, said:

If hands that you bid 1♥-1N-2♦ include hands that have aywhere from, say, 4-8 losers, then that is a wide range in my opinion.

Yup -- the 1N isn't forcing for us either and so the rebid of 2m always shows a unbalanced hand with 4+m.

One can argue that it probably isn't such a big problem and that opener can always rebid the minor to show the extra playing strength after responder corrects to 2M, but it's something to think about.

[straube]

akhare, on 2013-January-16, 13:32, said:

Yup -- the 1N isn't forcing for us either and so the rebid of 2m always shows a unbalanced hand with 4+m.

One can argue that it probably isn't such a big problem and that opener can always rebid the minor to show the extra playing strength after responder corrects to 2M, but it's something to think about.

Sorry to get too far off topic, but if we use jump rebids of 2N and 3m to distinguish goodish 6/5s from goodish 5/6s then we have..

1H-1N,
2D-2H,
2N

to show a maximum 5/5 (not that we'll play there often but we might)

and

1H-1N,
2D-2H,
3D

to show a poor 5H/6D

I imagine we'll categorize a 6/5 as good probably 2/3rds of the time, but there are those other.

[FM75]

1H 2H
4H

[mycroft]

I'm going to bid (in fairly basic Precision-with-asking-bids) 1♥-2♥; 4♥. Enjoy leading. Exactly because if I don't get a raise, 3♦ perfectly describes my hand (good 14-15, 5-5). I would only upgrade 15s into 1♣ if I worry about showing them if I don't, and I don't here.

If I do open it 1♣, it will go:

1♣-1♠ [club GF] - (X, I assume)
2♥-(pass by OP fiat)- 2♠ [NAT; <3 controls, <Qxx hearts]; alternatively (2♠) - X [same explanations]
3♦-3♥ [all NAT after negative response]
4♥-p.

[Which goes into "Enjoy leading" as to why I don't want a strong club auction]

[Siegmund]

Happy to see Leaping Michaels getting some love. I have experimented off and on with using otherwise idle jump shifts to take pressure off the strong rebids since the 90s, though no solution is exactly perfect.

[Hilver]

straube, on 2013-January-16, 10:28, said:

By your own system, I think you have a 2H raise. Responder has Q93 J97 T5 AQ954 which is actually less than 10-11 and only three hearts. I assume you upgraded it to 10-11 but it can't be worth a limit raise.

Indeed, it is close to a 2♥ response.

In HK the structure after opening 1M is:
2M = 10-11 HCP, 3-card support. The advantage is that responder isn't obliged to make a limit raise to 3M. With a bare minimum opener can pass. With a good 13 HCP opner can make a help suit.

2NT = 10-11 HCP and 4+-card support. Opener can describe his holding. You are still able to play 3M.

3M = weak, preemptive.

So we do have some problems in HK with the actual deal. In HK we decided that hands as in this bidding problem, are bid as I mentioned. The reason is that we don't want to miss a vulnerable game in teams.

Jan

[straube]

Hilver, on 2013-January-17, 04:11, said:

Indeed, it is close to a 2♥ response.

In HK the structure after opening 1M is:
2M = 10-11 HCP, 3-card support. The advantage is that responder isn't obliged to make a limit raise to 3M. With a bare minimum opener can pass. With a good 13 HCP opner can make a help suit.

2NT = 10-11 HCP and 4+-card support. Opener can describe his holding. You are still able to play 3M.

3M = weak, preemptive.

So we do have some problems in HK with the actual deal. In HK we decided that hands as in this bidding problem, are bid as I mentioned. The reason is that we don't want to miss a vulnerable game in teams.

Jan

So 1H-2H is stronger than 1H-1N, 2m-3H. It seems you'd be safer switching these around, but perhaps you want to announce the better hand first before it gets lost in competition. I'd still switch their meanings around, but I hope you don't mind the suggestion.

[Hilver]

straube, on 2013-January-17, 08:10, said:

So 1H-2H is stronger than 1H-1N, 2m-3H. It seems you'd be safer switching these around, but perhaps you want to announce the better hand first before it gets lost in competition. I'd still switch their meanings around, but I hope you don't mind the suggestion.

I do welcome your suggestion.
We do use these agreements for several years now. No problem untill now

Jan

[Free]

Hilver, on 2013-January-17, 09:42, said:

We do use these agreements for several years now. No problem untill now

I don't claim the suggestion is an improvement, it's much more complex than that. However, I've heard that excuse many times and I always wonder: why is this relevant?

Suppose you have a theoretical improvement at minimum cost, why wouldn't you make the change? If you don't make the change, some day, sooner or later, you'll get that hand where it poses a problem. Maybe then you'll want to change the system, maybe not. But why wait anyway? If you change it now, you'll have 1 more good deal.

[straube]

Free, on 2013-January-17, 10:20, said:

I don't claim the suggestion is an improvement, it's much more complex than that. However, I've heard that excuse many times and I always wonder: why is this relevant?

Suppose you have a theoretical improvement at minimum cost, why wouldn't you make the change? If you don't make the change, some day, sooner or later, you'll get that hand where it poses a problem. Maybe then you'll want to change the system, maybe not. But why wait anyway? If you change it now, you'll have 1 more good deal.

Yeah, but he didn't say he wouldn't change it. He just received the suggestion and probably has to decide if it's a priority for discussing with his partner. We make lots of changes to our system but we also have to weigh whether it's a sufficient gain for the memory load.

[Free]

straube, on 2013-January-15, 23:31, said:

1H S Zelandakh (1H opening

This can't be right

[nige1]

straube, on 2013-January-15, 23:31, said:

#06. You are South and 2nd seat. Favorable vulnerability. Scoring is imps. Dealer passes. I think South's hand qualifies in most strong club systems for a 1C opening, but make your normal opening. If possible your RHO will overcall 1S. If possible your LHO will raise to 2S unless responder establishes a game force AND the 2S bid takes up no room. For example, if the auction goes P 1C P 1D* (1S) 2H he will pass.

Jasmine Club
North ♠ K2 ♥ AK854 ♦ KQ976 ♣ T: 1♣ 2♥ 4♦
Aouth ♠ Q93 ♥ J97 ♦ T5 ♣ AQ954: 2♣ 3♥ 4♥

• 1♣ = 16+.
• 2♣ = 8+, No 4 M.
  
• 2♥ = Nat.
• 3♥ = Nat.
• 3♠ = Key-ask.
• 4♣ = 1/4.
• 4♥ = Nat.

Marks, IMO: 4♥ = 10. Partscores = 8. 3N = 5.