BBO Discussion Forums: unusual NT to show unspecified major - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

unusual NT to show unspecified major

#1 User is offline   zzxjoanw 

  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 2017-June-13

Posted 2017-June-13, 21:50

In the standard treatment of Michaels and Unusual NT, there are two "gaps".

Over 1C, Michaels would show both majors and Unusual NT would show diamonds and hearts. If you have diamonds and spades, then you can't use either convention.

Likewise over 1D there is no way to show clubs and spades.

Would it be sensible to define Unusual NT over a minor to show "other minor and unspecified major"? With both majors, advancer bids hearts and interferer can correct to spades if they actually had spades and a minor.

Michaels already has this pass-or-correct property when it's used over a major and advancer has both minors---in fact this agreement would create a "symmetry" between the two conventions.

I realize this would be less useful in an auction such as

(1D) 2NT* (3D) ?

where holding 5 clubs and 5 hearts, advancer would really like to bid 4H if I have hearts, but can't be sure I actually do.
0

#2 User is offline   zzxjoanw 

  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 2017-June-13

Posted 2017-June-13, 21:51

I meant *3+ clubs and 3+ hearts (but 2- spades)
0

#3 User is offline   spotlight7 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 342
  • Joined: 2009-March-21

Posted 2017-June-13, 23:33

Various methods to show two suiters exist.

1C-2C* can show two suits of the same color. Colorful cuebids.

Likewise 1D-2D* would show the black suits.


Top and Bottom cuebids 1C-2C* show Ds and Ss.

1D-2D* is Hs and clubs here.


In Europe, 1C-3C* often show two suits.

Since 1C-2N* is the two lowest suits and 1C-2C is majors, 1C-3C is Ss and Ds.
0

#4 User is offline   steve2005 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,162
  • Joined: 2010-April-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hamilton, Canada
  • Interests:Bridge duh!

Posted 2017-June-14, 04:52

View Postzzxjoanw, on 2017-June-13, 21:50, said:

Would it be sensible to define Unusual NT over a minor to show "other minor and unspecified major"? With both majors, advancer bids hearts and interferer can correct to spades if they actually had spades and a minor.

Not knowing which major overcaller has will often be fatal. Not knowing which minor overcaller has isn't as critical but can also create problems.
As spotlight7 points out there are lots of methods which show exact 2-suiters, Ghestem being the most obvious. These methods while showing which 2suits while solving that problem have other problems that you can find in any discussion of this type of bid. Ghestem is said to have forgotten his own 3 convention.


Sarcasm is a state of mind
0

#5 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,698
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2017-June-14, 07:47

There are many conventions around designed to show 2-suited hands. Of those that show all variations specifically the most popular are Ghestem and variants (Questem, etc) and CRASH (aka CRO). I would usually recommend Dave Stevenson's website here as he has a handy summary of most of these but unfortunately this site is currently down. Instead I will mention an unusual method of my own that you will not find anywhere else:

Over (1m)
==
2m = weak jump overcall in a major; or + om, strong
2 = both majors, weak
2 = + om, weak
2NT = + om
3 = both majors, strong

As with all of these methods, there is a trade off to be had. Here (aside from the local regulatory issues) it is the loss of the immediate WJOs in exchange for getting both suits in quickly in a non-forcing way.

Finally, if you do take up one of these methods, please be sure to review your UI obligations and be prepared to do act upon them and accept the resulting silly result. This is a common scenario and sadly too many club players are happy to cheat use the UI unlawfully rather than acting in the ethical way.
(-: Zel :-)
0

#6 User is offline   nullve 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,300
  • Joined: 2014-April-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norway
  • Interests:partscores

Posted 2017-June-14, 08:16

View Postzzxjoanw, on 2017-June-13, 21:50, said:

In the standard treatment of Michaels and Unusual NT, there are two "gaps".

Over 1C, Michaels would show both majors and Unusual NT would show diamonds and hearts. If you have diamonds and spades, then you can't use either convention.

Likewise over 1D there is no way to show clubs and spades.

Would it be sensible to define Unusual NT over a minor to show "other minor and unspecified major"? With both majors, advancer bids hearts and interferer can correct to spades if they actually had spades and a minor.

I've played

(1m)-2m = 5+M5+Om (=> 2N = inv+ relay (=> 3 = MIN))
(1m)-2N = 5+S5+H (=> 3 = inv+ relay (=> 3 = MIN)),

allowing invites below 3 of Overcaller's suits in all cases.
0

#7 User is offline   m1cha 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 397
  • Joined: 2014-February-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 2017-June-14, 08:24

View Postzzxjoanw, on 2017-June-13, 21:50, said:

Would it be sensible to define Unusual NT over a minor to show "other minor and unspecified major"? With both majors, advancer bids hearts and interferer can correct to spades if they actually had spades and a minor.

Michaels already has this pass-or-correct property when it's used over a major and advancer has both minors---in fact this agreement would create a "symmetry" between the two conventions.

This is not a symmetry. Because in Michaels you specify a major and in this version of Unusual you would specify a minor but that's not the same for various reasons.

The standard approach is that you focus on bidding the majors as precisely as possible. This is why Michaels over (1m) shows both majors, Unusual shows hearts, and if you have spades and the other minor, you bid spades. Bid the minor in the next round if you still want and can. If not, never mind, it's just a minor.

What you can do if you think it's worth it, play
(1) 2 for both majors and
(1) 2 for spades and diamonds
or vice versa if you think it's worth it. I did for a while but I believe there are better uses for the jump to 2. Obviously this approach does not work if opponents open 1.

For a while I played
(1m) 2m to show spades and an unbid suit and continue like with Michaels after a 1M opener. I don't any more but it's playable and certainly better than playing 2NT with an unspecified major.

Alternatively, as others have said already, you may try something like Ghestem.
0

#8 User is offline   Kungsgeten 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 943
  • Joined: 2012-April-15
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-June-16, 05:10

In Sweden (and I believe Germany) it is very common to play (1X)-2X as showing 5-5 in the highest unbid suit and another suit, and 2NT as regular unusual. So:

- (1S)-2S = Hearts and a minor.
- (1H)-2H = Spades and a minor.
- (1m)-2m = Spades and another.

It is a bit awkward not knowing the other suit, especially after 1m when it could be both majors. It usually works fine though (and you can use 3C for preemptive purposes). Over 1m you could play 3m as both majors, but that forces you to the 3-level. We use the following continuations after the cuebid overcall:

- Cheapest new suit = Pass or correct
- Their suit = Invitational with major support (doesn't work after [1S]-2S).
- 2NT = Invitational+, asks suit. Now overcaller bids his suit with min, or bids cheapest "non-natural" bid with max and lower ranking suit, and higher "non-natural" bid with max and the higher ranking suit.

Edit: I just saw m1cha had posted the idea already (although only for 1m opening), sorry!
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users