[MrAce]

We play

-2/1

-XYZ

-1♣-1♦-1M unbalanced.

-1♣---1♦ can not be weak if has a side major.

There are too many spaces available after;

1♣---1♦
1♥----------1♠ ?

We do not need 4th suit forc here due to xyz (or even w/o xyz 2♠can be used for it) It can't be natural also due to initial 1♦ response, unless responder has 12+ hcp, which in this case he will have time to find ♠ fit if there is any, later.

So i decided to use this 1♠ here as artificial, slamish relay that scans partner's shape, which will be very easy since partner can't be balanced, and then have enough space to kick in the denial cuebid that scans all the way down to jacks b4 4 NT level. I am checking here if i may have missed something that can go wrong with this plan.

Also playing xyz;

1♣--1♦
1X----2X (of course X is a major) This can't be natural in the sense of limitation. Support of course is natural, but can not be weak due to initial 1♦ response.

Also;

1♣---1♦
1X----3X can not be invitational due to 1 ♦ bid and also due to xyz.


I mean, if u play these conventions together, which i believe except xyz, rest are common anyway, there are rich source of space available right there, waiting for partnerships to drill it. What you all think ?

[Phil]

Playing 1♠ as a GF relay makes a lot of sense. So does dropping xyz after any 1♣]-1♦ start. As long as you define an artificial forcing continuation, you are ahead, but I don't think you really need xyz + the artificial 1♠ call. Discuss what the forcing call is over 1♣-1♦-1♠, but 2♥ makes as much sense as anything.

In original Walsh, 1♣ - 1♦ - 1M - 2M wasn't a GF, but rather a constructive raise (8-10) with 3 pieces.

[mike777]

I suppose that is fine.


I play 1s as natural, gf showing 5+d and 4+s. I still think it is ok for a cooperative auction rather than having responder take control.(xyz still on after 1c=1d=1h)

[MrAce]

Phil, on 2010-December-06, 18:24, said:

Playing 1♠ as a GF relay makes a lot of sense. So does dropping xyz after any 1♣]-1♦ start. As long as you define an artificial forcing continuation, you are ahead, but I don't think you really need xyz + the artificial 1♠ call. Discuss what the forcing call is over 1♣-1♦-1♠, but 2♥ makes as much sense as anything.

In original Walsh, 1♣ - 1♦ - 1M - 2M wasn't a GF, but rather a constructive raise (8-10) with 3 pieces.

I thought about not having xyz with 1♠ as forcing relay, but i decided to still keep it because i still don't like the idea of getting into forc relay auction, if what i am shooting for is just a choice of games. Also, xyz when kept, allows me to free a lot of bids that are used as invitation bids without xyz.

[dake50]

1S relay plus xyz frees 2-bids 3-bids for
mini-spl, fitbids, adv Q-bids with solid diamonds -- choose.
Abundance of riches!

[MrAce]

dake50, on 2010-December-06, 21:23, said:

1S relay plus xyz frees 2-bids 3-bids for
mini-spl, fitbids, adv Q-bids with solid diamonds -- choose.
Abundance of riches!

Exactly! You actually gave me an idea to name it "FREELAY" since it frees s...loads of space!

[BillHiggin]

dake50, on 2010-December-06, 21:23, said:

1S relay plus xyz frees 2-bids 3-bids for
mini-spl, fitbids, adv Q-bids with solid diamonds -- choose.
Abundance of riches!

Of course you will also use 1♣-1♦-1z-2N as a relay to 3♣
You may have room for some serious food asking bids!

[mike777]

"What?


1c=1d=1h=1s(nat, gf)


conserves alot more space than 2n lol

in any event you need to tell pard your hand is not conserve space....

[Fluffy]

I use 1♠ as 4SF wich can be natural, and works fine, althou it doesn't come up very often. You certainly can get some use of 2♣ natural now.

The insane ammount of space avaible make sme wonder if it could be a good idea to throw some 6-3 and 5-4 minors hands into 1♥. But complicating unnusual sequences is not worth it.

[andy_h]

From experience I don't think 1C-1D-1M being unbalanced meshes well with XYZ (or vice versa however you want to read it).

[Free]

andy_h, on 2010-December-07, 08:10, said:

From experience I don't think 1C-1D-1M being unbalanced meshes well with XYZ (or vice versa however you want to read it).

Why not?

After 1♣-1♦-1NT you can play 2♦ as GF relay denying 5+♦-4M, and 2M as GF 5+♦-4M.
After 1♣-1♦-1M you know 3 suits. You have XYZ and 4th suit GF if you want.

[Fluffy]

Because you are much more likelly to want to play 2♣ now that if partner is or could still be balanced

[Phil]

MrAce, on 2010-December-06, 21:26, said:

... "FREELAY" since it frees s...loads of space!

I'm stifling my fingers to not type anything about a floozie that hangs out in an Amarillo truck stop.

[Phil]

andy_h, on 2010-December-07, 08:10, said:

From experience I don't think 1C-1D-1M being unbalanced meshes well with XYZ (or vice versa however you want to read it).

One of the big bonuses of Walsh is to get out in 2♣ when you discover pard is unbalanced and unsuitable for 1N. While I play xyz in one partnership after 1♣ - 1♦, I've dropped it in my other.

[MrAce]

Phil, on 2010-December-07, 10:36, said:

One of the big bonuses of Walsh is to get out in 2♣ when you discover pard is unbalanced and unsuitable for 1N. While I play xyz in one partnership after 1♣ - 1♦, I've dropped it in my other.

Very small target, thinking you have a ♣ fit and you will be let to play there. Doesn't worth to ignore all other good stuff just for aiming to be able to play 2♣. And why do we fear from 1 NT when both opponents fail to bid 1♠. If they dont bid it, they dont have it, if they have it they may not lead it, if they lead it they certainly don't have too many tricks in that suit, even if they have too many tricks, we are playing only 1 NT after all

Phil, on 2010-December-07, 10:33, said:

I'm stifling my fingers to not type anything about a floozie that hangs out in an Amarillo truck stop.

Actually, since i run 48 states long haul, i think there haven't been any truck stop that i didn't spend the night except Maine and Seattle.