[kenrexford]

Jlall, on Feb 18 2007, 07:53 PM, said:

re kokish and what can be lost...

Say you are 1543 and partner is 4135 your auction in kokish could easily be 2C-2D-2H-2S-3D-3N-p but in natural it could begin 2C-2D-2H-3C- and help you find a club suit slam.

Also, say responder has 6 spades the auction in kokish will begin 2C-2D-2H-2S-3D-3S showing 5+ spades, but in natural you will have the same auction showing 6+ spades. This makes it easier to find a 6-2 spade fit.

etc etc, lots of things like this where you lose because responder hasnt made a natural rebid and the auction is a tempo behind.

That being said, I prefer playing kokish, but I think it definitely has some potential losses. I just think the gain of being able to bid your super strong balanced hands intelligently is worth it.

This issue br4ings up a "convention" I call "Batchelder." It is named for a friend of mine who gave me a smart-ass response to a question at the table. After his partner explained his Kokish 2♥ as a relay to 2♠, I asked what 2♠ showed, and hence the smart-ass response. "He had to bid that. Stupid question."

I never did think that the Kokish Relay should be a Relay per se, but optional. Why not? Hence, any option other than 2♠ is a Batchelder.

One simple idea I have used is for 3-bids in a suit to show stiffs and 4441 pattern. Many times, this is an anticipatory splinter for partner's hearts (except of course 3♥). However, it might also allow finding that nice minor fit noth otherwise easily bid. Let alone, what to do with 4441 after 2NT?

Another is for 2NT to show 6+ spades. If spades is not trumps, Opener must have hearts AND short spades; this just seems to right-side contracts.

3NT could, similarly, show a minor two-suiter with short hearts, or balanced with 5♠/3♥, limited strength.

This does not solve 4135 pattern. However, one might bersuasively argue for all three-bids to show a stiff heart, or something like that.

The point is that Kokish causes more problems because people rotely bid 2♠ without other options being discussed or considered. Some of these problems would vanish with alternatives to that course.

[kenrexford]

Hannie, on Feb 18 2007, 08:27 PM, said:

I also like to play Kokish in combination with 2D as showing some values. Although I won't deny that there are losses, one can deal with some of the losses (not all) by choosing some hands where responder may choose not to bid 2S. For example, you could agree that responder does not bid 2S with a minimum 5-5 hand with spades. (Minimum should perhaps mean at most a king and a queen.)

Does anybody have agreements like this? Or do you always bid 2S to allow opener to describe her hand?

I just saw this.

Yes (see above).

I just don't understand why this area of bidding has not developed more...

I'm not so sure that IMPACT's idea about the "always have five spades" is so good. I don't have too much difficulty bidding hands with five spades after 2NT. The lead issue is not THAT important to give up 18 bids for a five-card spade suit hand.

It seems better to describe difficult hands after 2NT. If Opener has hearts and unbalanced, this is also usually not difficult. As Justin noted, minors are difficult beasts to handle in either auction. 4X1's also are difficult.

It dawns on me that 2NT-P-3♣-P-3♦/♥/♠/NT could handle all 4-by-1's. Maybe 3♣/3♦ as positives with short heart? I'm not sure what would be best here.

I just don't think the 3+5, 4+5, 5+5, 6+5 idea is right.

[Impact]

Ken,

I used this in a standard/Acol framework with Kokish (before it was known as Kokish or published to my knowledge) and control responses.

If you simply make the puppet you lose the opportunity to show natural long S over Opener's hands with H. THis can be crucial in locating 6-2S fits and/or playing in the weak player's long suit with a double fit. There are other hiddne difficulties with Kokish (which do not outweigh its advantages but which are present nonetheless).


The object is to take out the S hands as the only hnads on which you DON"T want to bid 2S both to rightside the contract AND it serves to give you a stall/artificial bid below 3NT if opener shows a 2-suiter with H & minor (you can rebid 3S either to suggest a fit for the minor but a hand unwilling to proceed past 3NT, or by agreement to transfer the declaration).

Also as an aside you can also modify your responses over Opener's 2NT rebid to take into account that you no longer need or will wish to show at least a 5+ card S suit. Accordingly the transfer to S can be used to differentiate minor suit hands typically (all the more so if you have already eliminated the singlesuiters with 6+ card suit headed by at least QJ). A simple method is to use the transfer to show one minor and a 3S bid to show the other primary minor. A more sophisticated method is to use the 3H "transfer" as a puppet to 3S to allow you to show a range of minor 2-suiters including shortage, reserving a direct 3S bid for minor single-suiters.

regards

[SoTired]

My favorite is:

First... I switch the 2N opening and 2N rebid strengths. So 2N opening = 22-24 and 2C rebid 2N = 20-21.
After 2C:
2M = weak 5+-card suit, 0-3 HCP. Opener can pass with 20-21
3m = weak 6+-card suit, 0-3 HCP. Opener can pass with 20-21
2D = all other hands. Cheapest 3m = 2nd negative (no support & no A/K). After 2C 2D 3D, there is no 2nd negative.

After 2C 2D:
2N = 20-21, balanced
2S/3C/3D = natural, near GF... 2S followed by 3S is not 100% forcing
3H/3S = natural, sets trump, GF
3N = solid minor, 8.5 to 9 tricks, 1.5 - 2.5 outside stoppers
2H = Kokish, relay to 2S

After 2C 2D 2H 2S:
2N = 25+, balanced, GF
3H = natural, near GF, not 100% forcing
3m/3S = 2nd suit, GF, 1st suit is hearts
3N = solid minor, 9.5 to 10 tricks, 2.5 to 3 outside stoppers

[kenberg]

Here is an extremely everyday sort of hand that arose while I was kibbing

---

2C Pass 2D Pass
2H Pass ?

OK, I agree that judgment is the name of the game. What is my judgment here? In increasing order of strength I can bid 3C (second neg) followed by 4H, I can bid 4H directly over 2H, or I can bid 3H. I could also wait with the hearts and bid my spades. I can't say I know what is best and I can't say that I see how any other method would help me much. Playing controls may help a little since 2D would show at most one control which might free me up to be a little more positive in my next response. Playing 2H as a negative I suppose it starts 2C-2H and I have to choose a call after 2C-2H-3H, is that right? Playing a Kokish relay it goes 2C-2D-2H-2S-3H? Then what? Or maybe after the Kokish relay opener will bid some side values showing hearts plus some side suit? Maybe this will help?

This is a simple enough hand so that decent methods should handle it. Do they?

[kenrexford]

kenberg, on Feb 19 2007, 07:39 AM, said:

Here is an extremely everyday sort of hand that arose while I was kibbing

---

2C Pass 2D Pass
2H Pass ?

OK, I agree that judgment is the name of the game. What is my judgment here? In increasing order of strength I can bid 3C (second neg) followed by 4H, I can bid 4H directly over 2H, or I can bid 3H. I could also wait with the hearts and bid my spades. I can't say I know what is best and I can't say that I see how any other method would help me much. Playing controls may help a little since 2D would show at most one control which might free me up to be a little more positive in my next response. Playing 2H as a negative I suppose it starts 2C-2H and I have to choose a call after 2C-2H-3H, is that right? Playing a Kokish relay it goes 2C-2D-2H-2S-3H? Then what? Or maybe after the Kokish relay opener will bid some side values showing hearts plus some side suit? Maybe this will help?

This is a simple enough hand so that decent methods should handle it. Do they?

This hand has a relatively good solution, if you add in another little tool.

First, an enhanced response structure. Maybe, 2♣-P-?

2♦ = GF, waiting
2♥ = double negative
2♠ = minor(s) (Opener can relay 2NT, whereafter bid minor or short amjor if both)
3♣ = positive with hearts
3♦ = positive with spades
3M = preemptive

Now, with one Queen, a stiff mind you, you respond 2♥. With a long minor, you would have bid 2♠. So, after 3♥ you bid 4♣, a control with heart support.



Kenberg. I see how showing spades might be difficult after Kokish to a degree. However, with four spades, you have no problem because partner will bid 2♥...3♠. If you use the structure above, then after 3♠ you can use flags (4M = relative weakness; 4min = matching rank major, relative strength).

With five spades (5-3 fit possible), you bid 3♠ after any heart-based rebid.

The problem seems to be a sixth spade; hence 2NT instead of 2♠ after Kokish.

[kenberg]

OK, I think I give a point here to the negative 2H response. After 2C-2H(weak)-3H, a four club bid, at least if understood as definitely shortness rather than a fragment, would be useful to opener. Weak hand, some hearts, short clubs. Not a bad description of the hand. It's an argument for having a specific understanding about follow-ups over 3H. I assume 3S over 3H would be spades, presumably w/o a heart fit.

I usually decline to play the negative 2H simply because I fear I will not be able to interpret what happens next. There seems to be something to this fear, but maybe it can all be laid out to avoid misunderstanding.

[fred]

Here is what I play in my regular partnerships:

2D=waiting (then 2H=an improved version of Kokish)
2H=negative (defined as a hand that will Pass a 2NT rebid or use a Jacoby transfer and then Pass)
2S=8-10 balanced
2NT=positive response in either major

The 2S bid is a relatively new innovation (at least for us) and so far it has proven itself to be useful. The idea is to use this bid to describe a hand that is strong enough to make a slam try if the 2C opener rebids any suit, but not strong enough to drive to slam. 2S allows you to get your values off your chest and this takes a lot of pressure off the remainder of the auction.

The other day I was playing on BBO with a non-regular partner and I held:

AQxx
J10x
Q10xx
xx

My partner opened 2C. We were not playing the 2S convention so I bid 2D (waiting). Now he bid 3C, endplaying me.

I thought my hand was too good for 3NT. Probably 4NT is natural here, but I did not want to make this call for several reasons. Obviously bidding a 4-card suit is not very appealling here so I decided on 4C.

This worked well on the actual deal (because partner had 7 solid clubs) but it is easy to see that it could have worked out poorly if he had a lesser suit or a 2-suited hand.

Had I been able to bid 2S the first time, I would have been happy to bid 3NT over my partner's 3C rebid and leave further exploration (if any) to him.

I don't like control responses at all, but many expert swear by them. I think 2H negative is excellent, but many experts think it is terrible. In America Kokish has been almost universally adopted by the expert community (for good reason in my view).

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[mikeh]

Fred, after the 2N either major response, do you use any gadgetry?

I currently play 2N either major as well, and we use 3♣ by opener as either natural or balanced: responder's first duty is to transfer into his major. This obviously seems destined to cause some problems later... when opener has ♣s and an inability to distinguish between the natural club hand and the big balanced hand. However, it does get opener on play, and facilitates major slam bidding.


As for the hand you posted, it has long been my practice to use 3♦ over opener's 3♣ as a 'noise', the purpose of which is primarily to allow opener to show a 4 card major or to bid 3N. I recognize that there will be times when one may miss a 5-3 ♦ fit.. if responder has 6+♦s and slam values, he can usually get back to ♦s over opener's rebid... so the 6-3 or 6-2 is not going to be missed very often.

[fred]

mikeh, on Feb 19 2007, 04:36 PM, said:

Fred, after the 2N either major response, do you use any gadgetry?

I currently play 2N either major as well, and we use 3♣ by opener as either natural or balanced: responder's first duty is to transfer into his major. This obviously seems destined to cause some problems later... when opener has ♣s and an inability to distinguish between the natural club hand and the big balanced hand. However, it does get opener on play, and facilitates major slam bidding.


As for the hand you posted, it has long been my practice to use 3♦ over opener's 3♣ as a 'noise', the purpose of which is primarily to allow opener to show a 4 card major or to bid 3N. I recognize that there will be times when one may miss a 5-3 ♦ fit.. if responder has 6+♦s and slam values, he can usually get back to ♦s over opener's rebid... so the 6-3 or 6-2 is not going to be missed very often.

I use the same methods that you do after 2C-2NT, Mike.

After 2C-2NT-3C-3x, opener completes the transfer to agree the major. 3NT says "I have a balanced hand with only 2 of your major". Any other bid says "I have clubs".

3NT directly over 2NT would also show clubs (and is non-forcing).

I agree that in theory this is less than ideal. I can't really speak for how well it works in practice since I don't recall it ever coming up. Given the awkwardness here we do not exactly go out of our way to use the 2NT response to 2C.

I also normally play 2C-2D-3C-3D=noise, but that doesn't work so well unless you play immediate 2H=negative because 3D is useful as a "2nd negative".

When the hand in question came up, 3D would have been a "2nd negative" for our partnership. I toyed with the idea of making this call and then trying to catch up later, but I did not want to open that particular can of worms.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[glen]

Fred, what is the "improved version of Kokish"?

Btw, 2C-2NT as postive balanced is not working well for my partnership, and my study shows that 2C-2♠ as 8+ balanced or 8-10 (even better) will work very well.

[1eyedjack]

Here is a link to the method that I quite like with a regular partner:
http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...indpost&p=17948

It is something of a strain on the memory, as commented in that thread, but the strain is to some extent alleviated by bolting the same structure onto the responses to a 2N opener:
http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...indpost&p=33201

and also by replicating the singleton structure after 2C-2D-2S+ as with 2C-2S+

[fred]

officeglen, on Feb 19 2007, 08:58 PM, said:

Fred, what is the "improved version of Kokish"?

Btw, 2C-2NT as postive balanced is not working well for my partnership, and my study shows that 2C-2♠ as 8+ balanced or 8-10 (even better) will work very well.

Here's the basic idea:

2C-2D
2H

Responder must bid 2S, then:

2NT=lots of points (24+ for me)
3C=hearts+diamonds
3D=1-suited hearts
3H=hearts+4 spades
3S=hearts+clubs
3NT=non-forcing (typically 6 hearts 322)

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[kenrexford]

fred, on Feb 19 2007, 04:27 PM, said:

officeglen, on Feb 19 2007, 08:58 PM, said:

Fred, what is the "improved version of Kokish"?

Btw, 2C-2NT as postive balanced is not working well for my partnership, and my study shows that 2C-2♠ as 8+ balanced or 8-10 (even better) will work very well.

Here's the basic idea:

2C-2D
2H

Responder must bid 2S, then:

2NT=lots of points (24+ for me)
3C=hearts+diamonds
3D=1-suited hearts
3H=hearts+4 spades
3S=hearts+clubs
3NT=non-forcing (typically 6 hearts 322)

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Again, why must Responder bid 2♠ with all hands? This seems like a major waste of space.

Submarine by Opener at least allows agreement below 3NT in the side suit a lot more often. The big problems left by always bidding 2♠ are:

1. long spades hands,
2. clubs but not hearts hands, and
3. difficult-to-bid after 2NT hands.

Can't any of these be solved through alternatives to 2♠?

Not picking on you, Fred. I'm just meaning to continue/return to the discussion as to alternatives to 2♠.

[pclayton]

Ive played with Winston's transfer positives, but im a little stumped on continuations. If someone can come up with a good idea Id be interested.

Heres what i play now and Im pretty happy with it.

2D is automatic.

2H is Kokish.

After 2C - 2D - 2S - 2N and 3S are transposed. This gets the NT rightsided and it saves space. I heard about this from Mike Shuster.

2C - 2D - 3 major shows 4 of the major and 5 plus diamonds. Since this implies a huge hand it creates a game force.

2C - 2D - 3C - 3D is more than noise - its stayman (or negative). Similar to 3 major it shows a very strong hand and if opener has a 4 card major it shows a GF.

[Winstonm]

Quote

Ive played with Winston's transfer positives, but im a little stumped on continuations. If someone can come up with a good idea Id be interested.

Most popular methods for positves are 1) some number of controls, i.e., an Ace and a King or 2) some quality of suit, i.e., 2 of the top 3.

The idea of transfer positives is to be able to ask when needed.

For example: 2C-2H (trx to spades)
2S = either control ask if suit quality is known or suit quality ask if
minimum controls are known.


A hand with no fit can ignore the transfer, and a NT hand can bid a minimum NT to show range and allow the weaker hand to take over.

[glen]

Afte 2♣-2♦-2♠ I like:

2NT: 3+♠s
3♣: more waiting around
3♦: ♥s
3♥: ♣s
3♠: ♦s

This will come up every 1000 hands or so, so best of luck with the memory.

[mikeh]

pclayton, on Feb 19 2007, 06:25 PM, said:

After 2C - 2D - 2S - 2N and 3S are transposed. This gets the NT rightsided and it saves space. I heard about this from Mike Shuster.

I played this for a short time: it came up only a few times before we abandoned it. We knew it as JAWS, altho I have no idea where this name came from.

The problem was not when we had a fit (2N worked fine then, preserving bidding space beautifully) but when we had no immediate major suit fit. After the auction 2♣ 2♦ 2♠ ... having to bid 3♠ with all 4432 or 4441 hands with short ♠s (which is hardly uncommon) was destructive of bidding space.

And experience showed, very quickly, that normal bidding (2♣ 2♦ 2♠ 3♠) worked fine anyway: the gain of bidding space from the inversion was nice, and definitely an edge... but not a huge edge. On the other hand, the loss of bidding space when we had to deny a fit was huge: especially if opener had a 4 card side suit. Opener, with a big 5422 for example, would have to decide whether to end the auction with 3N or bid 4 new suit.... with no assurance that any fit existed anywhere or that partner held any particular range of strength.

JAWS was one of those sexy ideas that works great when the conditions are perfect (the only examples the promoters of the bid ever use) and poorly when they are not: and the downside outweighs the upside, at least in my opinion.

As an addendum, I just read Glen's adjunct, and that certainly appears to address some of the issues, but not all of them: does it turn the sow's ear into a silk (or at least a nylon) purse? I'd need to play his approach to find out, and I doubt that I will

[the hog]

Several very strong Aust. players used the following, which I really like:

2D = all positives
2H = very negative
2S = 5 to about 8 semi pos bal
2N = semi pos 3 suiter
3C = semi pos with D
3D = semi pos with H
3H = semi pos with S
3S = semi pos with C
3NT = semi pos 5/5+ Ms
4C = semi pos 5/5+ ms
4D = semi pos 5/5+ reds
4H = semi pos 5/5+ blacks

It is easy enough to devise "sexy" continuations.