[yauyunam]

A hand say 5 cards H and 4 cards D

Bidding sequence for pts range 13-15?

Bidding sequence for pts range 16-18?

Thanks

[Zelandakh]

yauyunam, on 2017-December-19, 20:58, said:

A hand say 5 cards H and 4 cards D

Bidding sequence for pts range 13-15?

Bidding sequence for pts range 16-18?

Thanks

What does Responder have? If the response is, for example, 1♠, both hands would rebid 2♦, with the exception of the 18s that can force to game with a 3♦ rebid. You diffierentiate between the strengths on the third round, with the weaker hand passing a minimum rebid (such as 2♥ or 2♠) and the stronger hands making a game try.

[yauyunam]

Zelandakh, on 2017-December-19, 21:11, said:

What does Responder have? If the response is, for example, 1♠, both hands would rebid 2♦, with the exception of the 18s that can force to game with a 3♦ rebid. You diffierentiate between the strengths on the third round, with the weaker hand passing a minimum rebid (such as 2♥ or 2♠) and the stronger hands making a game try.

Thanks.

If both bid 2D after a 1S respond, then his partner has no way to know the pts range of the opener. If he get say 7 or 8 points he may pass if he think the pts range of the opener is 13-15 but will then miss a game if the pts range of the opener is actually 16-18

Thanks

[Tramticket]

yauyunam, on 2017-December-19, 21:36, said:

If both bid 2D after a 1S respond, then his partner has no way to know the pts range of the opener. If he get say 7 or 8 points he may pass if he think the pts range of the opener is 13-15 but will then miss a game if the pts range of the opener is actually 16-18

Thanks

This is true - up to a point. But even if you have (say) 8 points and partner has (say) 17 points on the auction 1♥, 1♠; 2♦ you are only going to pass on a complete misfit and chances of making game will not be as high as you imagine. Consider:

- with doubleton support for partner's hearts you should probably give preference (or false preference) to hearts. So you are likely to have a singleton or void in partner's first suit.
- with four-card diamond support you should raise. So you probably don't have an eight-card diamond fit.
- if partner held three good spades he may have chosen to raise spades rather than bidding diamonds. You probably don't have a spade fit.

These misfit type hands often don't play well - even in no trumps.

[Zelandakh]

yauyunam, on 2017-December-19, 21:36, said:

If both bid 2D after a 1S respond, then his partner has no way to know the pts range of the opener. If he get say 7 or 8 points he may pass if he think the pts range of the opener is 13-15 but will then miss a game if the pts range of the opener is actually 16-18

Tramticket gives a good summary of the reason this is less of a problem in practice as it might seem. The key concept is false preference. An example would be: ♠KJ853 ♥T2 ♦T96 ♣K2. It might seem that with a weak hand and longer diamonds you should pass over 2♦ but that would be a mistake. The correct rebid here is 2♥, which gives Opener the chance to clarify their hand type. With the lower range they will usually pass and with the higher range make a descriptive bid using the "patterning out" principle.

You should try to familiarise yourself with this concept as it is quite an important one in natural bidding. If you find that you are still dissatisfied even after fully understanding it, there are a few bidding systems that somewhat avoid the issue by using limited openings. The best known of these is Precision, where 1M is limited to 15 points. The mixed club family - such as Polish Club and Swedish Club - also help here to some degree, with 1M typically limited to 17 points. These alternative systems obviously have other disadvantages to offset the advantages though.

[yauyunam]

Zelandakh, on 2017-December-20, 06:24, said:

Tramticket gives a good summary of the reason this is less of a problem in practice as it might seem. The key concept is false preference. An example would be: ♠KJ853 ♥T2 ♦T96 ♣K2. It might seem that with a weak hand and longer diamonds you should pass over 2♦ but that would be a mistake. The correct rebid here is 2♥, which gives Opener the chance to clarify their hand type. With the lower range they will usually pass and with the higher range make a descriptive bid using the "patterning out" principle.

You should try to familiarise yourself with this concept as it is quite an important one in natural bidding. If you find that you are still dissatisfied even after fully understanding it, there are a few bidding systems that somewhat avoid the issue by using limited openings. The best known of these is Precision, where 1M is limited to 15 points. The mixed club family - such as Polish Club and Swedish Club - also help here to some degree, with 1M typically limited to 17 points. These alternative systems obviously have other disadvantages to offset the advantages though.

Thanks and my God the example you gave was almost identical to the hand I got few days ago. I was pass hand and the bidding went on 1H-1S, 2D-? Considering that my partner didn’t made a forcing bid I chose to pass which happened he got 18 points and missed a 3 NT.

Dear Zelandak and Tramticket, will an artificial bidding like new minor forcing may help in this situation.

Thanks

[yauyunam]

Zelandakh, on 2017-December-20, 06:24, said:

Tramticket gives a good summary of the reason this is less of a problem in practice as it might seem. The key concept is false preference. An example would be: ♠KJ853 ♥T2 ♦T96 ♣K2. It might seem that with a weak hand and longer diamonds you should pass over 2♦ but that would be a mistake. The correct rebid here is 2♥, which gives Opener the chance to clarify their hand type. With the lower range they will usually pass and with the higher range make a descriptive bid using the "patterning out" principle.

You should try to familiarise yourself with this concept as it is quite an important one in natural bidding. If you find that you are still dissatisfied even after fully understanding it, there are a few bidding systems that somewhat avoid the issue by using limited openings. The best known of these is Precision, where 1M is limited to 15 points. The mixed club family - such as Polish Club and Swedish Club - also help here to some degree, with 1M typically limited to 17 points. These alternative systems obviously have other disadvantages to offset the advantages though.

Thanks and my God the example you gave was almost identical to the hand I got few days ago. I was pass hand and the bidding went on 1H-1S, 2D-? Considering that my partner didn’t made a forcing bid I chose to pass which happened he got 18 points and missed a 3 NT.

Dear Zelandak and Tramticket, will an artificial bidding like new minor forcing may help in this situation.

Thanks

[Stephen Tu]

You are going to miss game occasionally because of the super wide range of opener's rebid. It's against the odds for responder to bid more, because the weaker hands are substantially more common and continuing to bid is more likely to achieve a minus score rather than finding a game. It's also against the odds for opener to jump shift, because again might find some weak misfitting responder, and most (but not all) hands that make game will scrape up another call. So game is simply going to be missed sometimes when opener has a normal 2d rebid and responder's sensible bid is pass, and sometimes even after a preference since with 16/17 and 1543 or whatever it's not super clear opener should keep bidding after 2h either which might be a 6 count. The good news is that others playing a natural system will have the same problems. If they find a way to bid the game (because either opener or responder overbids, or if they systemically have some sort of 2nd round strength showing mechanism e.g. Gazzilli), they will have problems on other weaker hand combinations being able to stay in a making 2m contract, losing swings back on other boards.

It's the price you pay for not playing some sort of artificial strong club or similar system. (which would in turn have its own drawbacks on other hand types)

[Cthulhu D]

13-15 and 16-18 isn't a great pair of ranges either to think about your system. You might have more joy if you think about 11-14, 15-17 and 17-20ish (or whenever you open your strong forcing opening).

[Tramticket]

yauyunam, on 2017-December-20, 20:22, said:

Dear Zelandak and Tramticket, will an artificial bidding like new minor forcing may help in this situation.

My bidding in this situation is natural and I don't find the need to introduce artificial bids into this sequence - the problem with an artificial strength-showing bid is that you can't now use it in a natural sense. You will solve one problem, but create another problem - in this case: what do you do when you have a weaker hand and want to bid the suit naturally?

[Zelandakh]

yauyunam, on 2017-December-20, 20:22, said:

Dear Zelandak and Tramticket, will an artificial bidding like new minor forcing may help in this situation.

NMF applies after a NT rebid so that is not going to be useful here. What can help on the artificial front are transfer rebids and Gazilli. Using transfers, Opener rebids 2♣ to show diamonds and then gets a chance to bid again over Responder's 2♦ preference. Of course it means that hands with clubs have to rebid much higher, which tends just to move the problem rather than being a complete solution. Gazilli moves the stronger hands into an artificial 2♣ rebid, which works well enough but is a fair bit more complicated. Both methods prevent us from playing in 2♣ when it is right.

The other form of artificiality that can help here is the one I mentioned previously - changing the opening bid structure. Polish Club and Swedish Club remove the 18+ hands from the 1M openings while Precision caps them at just 15hcp. In all 3 systems the stronger hands then get dropped down into the 1♣ opening. Again, this approach has advantages but there are corresponding disadvantages elsewhere to offset these.

For what it is worth, my own preferred system takes the 18+ hands out of the 1M openings in a way similar to that of Polish Club, so I am not unsympathetic to the issue. However, I do think you should play with the natural solution a while before making the decision whether you can live with it or not. It will improve your bidding in the long run, as well as giving you a better understanding of opponents' bidding even if you later switch to a system that avoids the issue.

[Cyberyeti]

Tramticket, on 2017-December-20, 02:43, said:

This is true - up to a point. But even if you have (say) 8 points and partner has (say) 17 points on the auction 1♥, 1♠; 2♦ you are only going to pass on a complete misfit and chances of making game will not be as high as you imagine. Consider:

- with doubleton support for partner's hearts you should probably give preference (or false preference) to hearts. So you are likely to have a singleton or void in partner's first suit.
- with four-card diamond support you should raise. So you probably don't have an eight-card diamond fit.
- if partner held three good spades he may have chosen to raise spades rather than bidding diamonds. You probably don't have a spade fit.

These misfit type hands often don't play well - even in no trumps.

The danger hand is where partner has a hand good enough for game to be possible but not enough to force it 3541. You probably rebid 2♦ and partner passes with his 5134 when 4♠ makes. While partner often bids 2♠ with 3, they don't bid 3♠with 3.

Playing 4SF not FG can help you out in other situations but not this one as you can have one go with 2♦ after 1♥-1♠-2♣.

[nige1]

!

yauyunam, on 2017-December-19, 20:58, said:

A hand say 5 cards H and 4 cards D
Bidding sequence for pts range 13-15?
Bidding sequence for pts range 16-18?

Gazzilli might help. I like a simple variant: After e.g. 1♥ - 1♠ -

• 1N = BAL 12-14.
• 2♣ = ART. 16+ HCP or 6+ ♥s.
• 2♦ = NAT 11-15 4+ ♦s.
• 2♥ = NAT 4 + ♣s or 4+ ♠s.
• 2N = ART 14-15 HCP. 6+ ♥s 4 other.
• 3♣/3♦ = NAT 14-15 HCP. 5+ ♥s 5+ m.
• 3♥ = NAT 14-15 HCP 6+ ♥s.

After 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♣ -

• 2♦ = ART. 8+ HCP
• Others = NAT

After 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♣ - 2♦

• 2♥ = NAT. 11-13 HCP, 6+ ♥s.
• Others = 16+

That's the gist. There are many versions of Gazzilli. Others prefer transfers.

[yauyunam]

Stephen Tu, on 2017-December-20, 21:38, said:

You are going to miss game occasionally because of the super wide range of opener's rebid. It's against the odds for responder to bid more, because the weaker hands are substantially more common and continuing to bid is more likely to achieve a minus score rather than finding a game. It's also against the odds for opener to jump shift, because again might find some weak misfitting responder, and most (but not all) hands that make game will scrape up another call. So game is simply going to be missed sometimes when opener has a normal 2d rebid and responder's sensible bid is pass, and sometimes even after a preference since with 16/17 and 1543 or whatever it's not super clear opener should keep bidding after 2h either which might be a 6 count. The good news is that others playing a natural system will have the same problems. If they find a way to bid the game (because either opener or responder overbids, or if they systemically have some sort of 2nd round strength showing mechanism e.g. Gazzilli), they will have problems on other weaker hand combinations being able to stay in a making 2m contract, losing swings back on other boards.

It's the price you pay for not playing some sort of artificial strong club or similar system. (which would in turn have its own drawbacks on other hand types)

Thanks Stephen, you are right. I once had skimmed through Blue Club but it,s just too artificial to master the system.

[yauyunam]

Zelandakh, on 2017-December-21, 06:18, said:

NMF applies after a NT rebid so that is not going to be useful here. What can help on the artificial front are transfer rebids and Gazilli. Using transfers, Opener rebids 2♣ to show diamonds and then gets a chance to bid again over Responder's 2♦ preference. Of course it means that hands with clubs have to rebid much higher, which tends just to move the problem rather than being a complete solution. Gazilli moves the stronger hands into an artificial 2♣ rebid, which works well enough but is a fair bit more complicated. Both methods prevent us from playing in 2♣ when it is right.

The other form of artificiality that can help here is the one I mentioned previously - changing the opening bid structure. Polish Club and Swedish Club remove the 18+ hands from the 1M openings while Precision caps them at just 15hcp. In all 3 systems the stronger hands then get dropped down into the 1♣ opening. Again, this approach has advantages but there are corresponding disadvantages elsewhere to offset these.

For what it is worth, my own preferred system takes the 18+ hands out of the 1M openings in a way similar to that of Polish Club, so I am not unsympathetic to the issue. However, I do think you should play with the natural solution a while before making the decision whether you can live with it or not. It will improve your bidding in the long run, as well as giving you a better understanding of opponents' bidding even if you later switch to a system that avoids the issue.

Dear Zelandath, thanks and got it. I plan to switch to two over one when I have good understanding of sayc

[rmnka447]

Zelandakh, on 2017-December-20, 06:24, said:

Tramticket gives a good summary of the reason this is less of a problem in practice as it might seem. The key concept is false preference. An example would be: ♠KJ853 ♥T2 ♦T96 ♣K2. It might seem that with a weak hand and longer diamonds you should pass over 2♦ but that would be a mistake. The correct rebid here is 2♥, which gives Opener the chance to clarify their hand type. With the lower range they will usually pass and with the higher range make a descriptive bid using the "patterning out" principle.

Good points. Also, as far as 7 card fits go, 5-2 fits usually play better than the 4-3 fits.

[yauyunam]

rmnka447, on 2017-December-26, 17:38, said:

Good points. Also, as far as 7 card fits go, 5-2 fits usually play better than the 4-3 fits.

Really...I would think 4-3 fit play better than 5-2 fit

[rmnka447]

yauyunam, on 2017-December-26, 22:55, said:

Really...I would think 4-3 fit play better than 5-2 fit

The issue is that there are 6 trumps held by your opponents.

The percentages for the way those trumps will break are:

3-3 about 36%
4-2 about 48%
5-1 about 14.5%
6-0 about 1.5%

So a 4-2 break is the most likely break. That can become a problem if a ruff can be forced in declarer's long trump hand in a 4-3 fit as the defending hand with 4 trumps can then probably control the trump suit. Even if declarer isn't forced, a 4-2 break would require declarer to exhaust all his trump to pull the opponents trumps and then the hand would essentially be played at NT.

With a 5-2 fit, there's more of an option that you could drew all the opposing trumps in 4 rounds, if necessary, and still retain a trump to control any suits the defenders set up.

[blackshoe]

yauyunam, on 2017-December-23, 01:08, said:

I plan to switch to two over one when I have good understanding of sayc

One of my partners has been saying that for several years now.

[Winstonm]

yauyunam, on 2017-December-19, 20:58, said:

A hand say 5 cards H and 4 cards D

Bidding sequence for pts range 13-15?

Bidding sequence for pts range 16-18?

Thanks

Approach forcing systems like SA and 2/1 all have an inherent flaw - the opening 1-bid range is huge so each subsequent bid must try to clarify the holding. Reverses, jumps, and jump shifts are necessary to narrow the range held. It is up to the partnership to determine how bad of hand can be held to keep the bidding open when partner opens, and that will determine how strong of hand opener needs to make a secondary game-forcing bid. There are general standards on this but they are basically suggestions and some play lighter while old folks like me tend to use higher standards.

So, with your question, the auction is:
1H-1NT
2D- would show anywhere from your worst opening hand to as high as 18 if the hand is imperfect or has Qx, Jx as part of that 18.

Most good players I know would treat a solid 18-count as a game forcing hand and jump shift to 3 diamonds - but this is risky if your partnership routinely keeps the bidding alive with 4-5 point hands. As you can see, part of the reason most standard systems suggest a 6-point lower limit on responding hands is so opener can be more secure in jumping to announce an upper range 1-opening.

Just as bidding history, you might try to find an old copy of the book written by Howard Schenken called Big Club - in it Schenken writes about his frustration in playing in the Bermuda Bowl against the Italians' strong opening 1C systems while the Americans only had approach-forcing systems to use. Schenken helps one to understand better the inherent problems with systems like SA, 2/1 and Acol.