[straube]

Yeah, we didn't design our relays with the idea of not being in a GF. Perhaps we can simply switch 2H and 2N+ so that

1S-2C,
.....2H-2N is just like a standard

1S-1N
.....2H-2N

Much better.

And then we probably have to be careful about intending to break relay with 13 and shortness in opener's major or we wind up in 3M on 6-1 fits.

So

1M-1N could be 13 with short major.

So regarding the other issue, if we slotted all the GF hands with a fit into 2C and we slotted all the constructive+ raises into 2M-1. How would you order the other bids? What would 2N be?

I like the idea of a mixed raise for hearts. Care less about a mixed raise for spades but am still inclined to have it.

Also, I'm a little surprised that you don't want to separate 3 from 4 trump raises (especially for hearts but also for spades). Thinking how Robson-Segal, Bergen et al have spent so much effort on showing that fourth trump.

[akhare]

awm, on 2012-January-21, 15:31, said:

A couple comments:
(2) I'm still not sure you need all these raises. In particular, you could probably bid 2♣ on a GF raise and bid 2M-1 on a four-card limit raise (planning to bid again if opener signs off). This tends to conceal hands better on some game-only sequences, and also might help you on invites where opener needs help (for example you could play 1M:2M-1:2M:3x as a mini-splinter or concentration of values in a 4-card LR). This would free up 2NT (for example to handle another weak jump type hand either directly, or by swapping for the mixed raise).

I too am skeptical about the need to split hairs when showing major suit raises (3 vs. 4 does bear some merit). Also, as Adam noted, there's something to be said about revealing as little information as possible during the auction.

Rob F. had a compressed Bergen scheme that encompassed LR and mixed type raises and it has the potential to free up other responses...

[straube]

I can see devoting less energy. However, a lot of these big fit hands get competitive quickly and it's useful to know about that 9th trump. If opener is 2-suited (for example) or has a poor trump holding, that 9th trump can be huge. It can mean the difference between losing control of the hand or not. Like if I have Axxxx x AQxxx xx I want to bid 4S over 4H if partner has 4, but if he has only 3 then the suit could break badly and I will get tapped immediately.

[awm]

There are two reasons to want to show the fourth trump:

(1) It can help you decide how high to compete.
(2) There are some hand types where it's important to game or slam decisions.

Two reasons not to show the fourth trump:

(1) It may help opponents decide whether to compete, or what to lead.
(2) Assuming showing the fourth trump forces you to the three-level, you may be able to play in 2M rather than 3M.

Given that the opponents have not (yet?) bid anything in an auction starting 1M-Pass, you may well benefit more in competition from ambiguous raises. Your gains from playing 2M instead of 3M and from concealing the fourth trump from them on opening lead will more than compensate you for the times when the opponents balance and this enables them to compete past 3M or make better leads/defensive decisions.

On the second reason to show the first trump (game/slam decisions), I'm saving a lot of space by bidding 2M-1 or 2M instead of 3M-1. This gives opener space to ask further about my hand (including perhaps asking about the fourth trump). It does mean I will play 3M on a slightly different set of hands. Essentially the question is whether I would rather play 3M on: (1) Hands where responder has a 4-card raise and opener has no game interest opposite that (2) Hands where responder has a 3-card raise and opener would want to be in game opposite only a four-card raise. My feeling is that the odds of making 3M are pretty similar in these two cases, but that I play 3M less often because opener's balanced hands (that never want to be in game opposite less than a limit raise) are much more common than the shapely hands that fall into the second category.

Whatever the merits here, you have an additional raise at the two-level that most people don't have. I'd encourage you to put as many raises as you can into 2M-1, with some of them planning another call if opener tries to sign off. It's dangerous for opponents to come in over 1M-Pass-(2M-1) since it shows real values, and you can actually distinguish even more types of raises this way, plus any time opener bashes game over 2M-1 you have reduced information to the opponents.

[straube]

I've never liked to religiously follow Bergen raises. With many hands that have four trump, bad trump, balanced pattern, and soft values, I prefer to stay at the 2-level. Hands that are more offensive (high ODR) and especially those with hearts I like to preempt. I think I would feel uneasy bidding 2M-1 (or 2C) with those sorts of hands. These auctions can ratchet quickly and I want to communicate offense at my first opportunity. So I don't want 2M-1 to deny a fourth trump. I want it to communicate a hand with a lower ODR. This means that I still need to consider keeping 2N or 3M-1 for more offensive hands.

[straube]

How about this...

1H-
.....2D-constructive or limit raise, more likely 3 trump
.....2H-less than constructive raise
.....2S-WJS
.....2N-LR+ 4 trump
.....3C-WJS
.....3D-WJS
.....3H-mixed raise


1S-
.....2D-6 hearts or 5+ hearts GI+
.....2H-constructive or limit raise, more likely 3 trump
.....2S-less than constructive raise
.....2N-LR+ 4 trump
.....3C-WJS
.....3D-WJS
.....3H-WJS
.....3S-mixed raise

So with a weak preemptive raise, one would have to choose between 2 and 4. This is a loss.

OTOH, the mixed raise is pretty common and bidding 3M directly applies more pressure. We also get 1H-3D as a WJS and 1S-3H as a WJS. The latter may seem redundant, but now
1S-2D, 2S-3H is invitational

I don't even know if I like this.

[straube]

So I looked at a few hands and it became apparent that the really important decision was about how to separate the constructive from the simple raise. I had originally based the constructive raise on about 9 points and three trump and I now think this was too conservative. The best dividing line to get approximately equal raises of 2M and 2M-1 seems to be using loser count....9 or more losers for 2M and 8.5 or fewer for 2M-1.

So here's what I found for 1S responses

P-9
1N-18 denies 3 trump and promises 8 if vulnerable
2C-14 could have fit if GF, could have 5+ hearts
2D-4 shows 6 hearts or 5 hearts with GI+
2H-11 8.5 to 7 losers with three and occasionally four trump
2S-9 9 or more losers with three or more trump
2N-1 a limit raise of 7 or 7.5 losers with four+ trump
3C-1 a WJS
3D-0 a WJS
3H-2 a mixed raise with 8.5 losers
3S-1 a preemptive raise with 9 losers
4C-1 splinter
4S-3 wide-ranging

However we decide to use the 2N+ level is not nearly as important as our first few responses. I think including the 13 point hands with doubleton support into a 2C response is a winner. I was raising to 2S with all manner of crap which I wouldn't obviously do vulnerable. Any opinions about raising with Hx? not vulnerable?

[straube]

So we tried it out and I really like it. We did notice that

1S-1N, 2m-2H

can be used for a good raise of the minor. We play then that we're in a forcing auction until at least 3 of the minor.

That leaves 1S-1N, 2m-3m as a more distributional type raise.

[straube]

While on the subject of having distributional raises...the most important raise is for the major.

After 1S-1N, 2H

suggesting....

2S-constructive hand with 2S/4H (about a ten count hoping for a rebid)
2N-invitational, could have 4 hearts
3H-constructive raise with 5 hearts
4H-invitational hand with 5 hearts

[Fluffy]

straube, on 2012-January-21, 02:07, said:

Why are you playing this way?

Because it covers most of the 6-12 hands possible including weak 2 suiters and 3 raises than are allowed to stop at the 2 level.

[straube]

I like your structure. So how do you continue after each of these responses?

1S-2D
.....2H-doesn't like hearts?
.....2S-likes hearts but wouldn't move opposite 10-12 support?
.....2N-asking?

1S-2H,
.....2N-asking?

Any trouble in competition?

[Fluffy]

we 80% rebid the transfer and let the other explain. The aim is to stay in the transfer bid when partner is weak. But 2♠ over 2♦ is no heart tolerance, others show GF over invitational range and possible game opposite the weaker one.

In competition

1♠-2♦ Bidding later spades, double or no trumps shows 10-12, bidding a minor or hearts show 5-9

1♠-2♥ Bidding spades shows 8-10, bidding double, NT, hearts or a minor is 10-12. We are still testing them.

1♠-2♠ is kind of preemptive, hands that don't wellcome an invitation, to not make them a must for opps to compete with anything we want to seldom throw in some hands with doubleton honnor support also.


Over 1♥ We do the same with 2♣ and 2♦ both showing diamonds/heart support with cross ranges. But this is is only possible because our GF relay is 1NT wich won' fit in your system. Anyway having 2♦ as hearts constructive or real diamonds invitational is possible for you as well I think.


So far we haven't encountered much competition directly, but this is probably due to lack of preparation in casual online opponents.

[Zelandakh]

I honestly cannot understand why you would want to play 1♠ - 2♣ as INV+ rather than using 1♠ - 1NT for this. You have so many hand types here you want as much space as possible to unravel everything. If using 2♣ as a power bid I think it is better for it to be GF. Hanlon-McGann is a good model in that case (over 1♥, 1♠ nat, 1NT semi-forcing, 2♣ GF, 2♦ ♥ raise and over 1♠, 1NT semi-forcing, 2♣ GF, 2♦ hearts INV+, 2♥ ♠ raise). This looks to be fairly close to what you are moving towards anyway.

[straube]

1S-2C will be either a GF or a 13-ct with two spades. When opener is balanced, has four+ clubs, or five+ diamonds he will rebid 2D which allows for an easy relay break of 2S. When opener has four+ hearts and rebids 2H, we have an easy relay break of 2N. My only concern is when opener has exactly four diamonds (and then we have a relay break of 3D or 3S). In a contested auction, we'll be in a GF. So I'm not very worried about the invitational hands...we're mostly trying to avoid not getting to game with 13 opposite 13.

If 1N is a GF relay, then responder has to start describing his hand at the 2-level and this doesn't make sense to me. Why reverse course and have responder interrupt opener's description with his own? We have, in effect, a weak relay (1N) which allows opener to continue to describe his hand and a strong relay (2C) which also allows responder to continue to describe his hand.

Do you have a link to Hanlon-McGann?

[mgoetze]

awm, on 2012-January-19, 21:49, said:

What's wrong with the following simple structure for opener's rebids:

2♥ = 0-2♥ not qualified for higher bids, or 3♥ in a min balanced hand
2♠ = very short hearts, 6+♠, not enough for 3♠
2N/3m = same hand that bids these over 1♠-1NT, with the additional inference of less than 3♥
3♥ = 3♥ and not a balanced min, or 4♥ with a very min/flat hand
3♠ = same as 1♠-1NT-3♠, but also denies 3♥
4m = splinter with 4(+)♥

Am I missing something or do you not have a bid on 5422 hands?

[straube]

mgoetze, on 2012-January-25, 16:09, said:

Am I missing something or do you not have a bid on 5422 hands?

He was suggesting a 3H rebid with that.

[mgoetze]

Ah so that was supposed to read "very min OR flat"? But then the bid effectively becomes forcing and you end up in some extremely thin games, non?

[straube]

mgoetze, on 2012-January-25, 18:22, said:

Ah so that was supposed to read "very min OR flat"? But then the bid effectively becomes forcing and you end up in some extremely thin games, non?

I think the idea is that with a 5S332 12-13 point hand, opener will rebid 2H. With most 5S3H41 or 5422 he'll rebid 3H. With a 5S4H31 he'll splinter. I'm not sure what we'll do with a maximum 53H41 but most likely bid 4H. I suppose we'll misjudge and get too high sometimes when responder has only six hearts and like six points, but with that sixth heart, it seems like we ought to usually have a play for game.

[awm]

There are many ways to raise hearts here. I didn't list them all. Basically:

2h does not deny 3-card support, but if it has such a fit it will be a bad hand.
3h shows a fit and a decent hand (any hand with four card support upgrades to a decent hand). Generally the expectation is that an INV hand bids game over this (fit is a mild upgrade and you know opener isn't a flat min).
3nt,4m,4h are all raises. Usually they have four hearts, but in any case they want to be in game opposite 6h and 6 points.

[Zelandakh]

straube, on 2012-January-23, 10:27, said:

1S-2C will be either a GF or a 13-ct with two spades. When opener is balanced, has four+ clubs, or five+ diamonds he will rebid 2D which allows for an easy relay break of 2S. When opener has four+ hearts and rebids 2H, we have an easy relay break of 2N. My only concern is when opener has exactly four diamonds (and then we have a relay break of 3D or 3S). In a contested auction, we'll be in a GF. So I'm not very worried about the invitational hands...we're mostly trying to avoid not getting to game with 13 opposite 13.

If 1N is a GF relay, then responder has to start describing his hand at the 2-level and this doesn't make sense to me. Why reverse course and have responder interrupt opener's description with his own? We have, in effect, a weak relay (1N) which allows opener to continue to describe his hand and a strong relay (2C) which also allows responder to continue to describe his hand.

Do you have a link to Hanlon-McGann?

Sorry, I missed this, Hanlon-McGann is here.

The max invite hand with 2 spades should be specific enough not to worry too much about. Seems funny that you do not have space for it somewhere else though. I was not suggesting 1♠ - 1NT as a GF relay; I think this is problematic on too many hands. 2♣ GF or 1NT INV+ are both better overall imho. From your initial description it sounded like the 2♣ response covered a wider array of invitational hands.