[inquiry]

   Bridge Base - Advanced – Summary

           General Approach: 2/1 Forcing to Game

• 1NT = 15-17 HCP
  • Stayman, 4-suit Transfers, 3♣=weak 5-5,
    
  • 3♦=strong 5-5, 3M=(54) minors & singleton
    
  • major, Texas, Smolen, Gerber,
    
  • System on over double, Lebensohl
  
  
• 2NT = 20-21 HCP
  •   Stayman, Jacoby, Texas, Smolen, Gerber
    
  •   3♠-->3N for minor suit hands
  
  
• 3NT = Gambling, no outside Ace or King
  •   ♣=P or correct, 4♦=singleton ask
  
  
• Minor Suit Openings & Responses:
  •   3+ cards, bypass ♦, Inverted raises,
    
  •   2N=10-12 HCP, 3N=13-15 HCP
  
  
• Major Suit Openings & Responses:
  •   5 card majors, 2N=Jacoby, Bergen
    
  •   (3♣=limit), Splinters, 3N=15-17 HCP,
    
  •   Reverse Drury
  
  
• 2♣ = Strong, Artificial
  •   2♦=Waiting
    
  • 2♥=Negative
  
  
• Weak Twos (♦ ♥ ♠)
  • 2N=Feature ask, Raise only non-forcing
  
  
• Weak Jump Shifts, Weak Jump Overcalls,
  
• Negative & Responsive Doubles through 4♦,
  
• Support Doubles & Redoubles through 2♥,
  
• Maximal Doubles
  
• After Opponents T/O Double:
  • New suit: 1 Level=forcing 2 Level=non- forcing,
    
  • 2N=Limit Raise or more, wk jumps
  
  
• After Suit Overcall: New suit forcing 1 rd
  
• After 1N Overcall (15-18 HCP): System on
  
• After Opps 1N Opening: Cappelletti
  
• Roman Keycard Blackwood 1430
  
• 4th Suit = Game Force
  
• Unusual 2N and Michaels
  
• Ingberman over reverses
  
• 2-way new minor forcing over 1N rebid
  
• Wolff signoff over 2N rebid
  
• Serious 3NT (while optional in BBO advanced, for quizes serious 3NT is on)
  
• Last Train to Clarksville (LTTC) ( while optional in BBO advanced, for quizes is on.. see fred's article at "what is last train to clarksville"
  
• 3&5 leads vs. suits; 4th vs. NT
  
• Upside down count & attitude signals

    BBridge Base - Advanced -- Responses to 1NT

• 2♣ - Stayman asks opener if he has a 4-card major
  • After 2♦ response, 3♥/3♠ are Smolen (4 cards in suit bid, 5+ cards in other major)
  
  
  • 2♦ - Jacoby transfer to 2♥ (promises 5+ hearts)
    
  • 2♥ - Jacoby transfer to 2♠ (promises 5+ spades)
    
  • 2♠ - Transfer to 3♣ (promises 6+ clubs)
    • Opener bids 2NT with a hand that would accept a game invitation (3♣ otherwise)
    
    
  • 2NT - Transfer to 3♦ (promises 6+ diamonds)
    • Opener bids 3♣ with a hand that would accept a game invitation (3♦ otherwise)
    
    
  • 3♣ - Weak hand with 5+ cards in both minors (opener's passes or bids 3♦)
    
  • 3♦ - Game force with 5+ cards in both minors
    
  • 3♥ - Game force with singleton heart and 5-4 (either way) in the minors
    
  • 3♠ - Game force with singleton spade and 5-4 (either way) in the minors
    
  • 3NT - Signoff
    
  • 4♣ - Gerber
    
  • 4♦ - Texas transfer to 4♥
    
  • 4♥ - Texax transfer to 4♠
    
  • 4NT - Invitational to 6NT

     Bridge Base - Advanced -- Notes

• Following a 1NT opening:
  • After Stayman and major suit response, 3 level of other major = slam try in major bid; splinters say that opener needs a working maximum for slam.
    
  • After Stayman and 2♦ response, 2♥ shows both majors weak hand, 4♦/4♥ are Texas with 6-4 in majors.
    
  • After a transfer to a minor, opener super-accepts by bidding the step in between. The next bid by responder shows shortness regardless of whether opener super-accepted or not.
    
  • If opponents interfere with double, system is on. If opponents interfere with 2♣ (unless for majors), double=Stayman and system is on. Lebensohl = Fast denies.

• Following a 2NT opening:
  • After Stayman and major suit response, 3♠ over 3♥ = heart slam try, 4♥ over 3♠ = spade slam try.
    
  • After 3♠ forcing 3N, 4♣ = Single suited Clubs, 4♦ = Single suited Diamonds,
    4♥/♠ = shortness with 5-5 in minors.

• Following a 3NT opening:
  • After 4♦ singleton ask,
    
  • 4♥/♠ = shortness,
    
  • 4N = shortness in other minor,
    
  • 5♣/♦ = 7222.

• Minor Suit Openings:
  • After an inverted raise, 2 level bids show stoppers, 3 level bids show shortness.
    
  • Over 1 of a minor, 2 and 3 level jump shifts are pre-emptive and more pre-emptive.
    
  • After 1 of a minor-1 of a major-1NT, 2♣ = Invitational checkback, 2♦ = Forcing checkback, 3 of minor = To play.
    
  • After 1 of a minor-1 of a major-2NT, 3♣ = Forces 3♦ for get-out hands, 3♦ = Checkback.
    
  • After 1♣-1♦-1NT new suit bids are forcing. After 1♣-1♦-2NT all bids are natural and forcing.
  
  
• Major Suit Openings:
  • Single raise is a 3 card constructive raise.
    
  • After a Jacoby 2N raise, 3 level bids show shortness, 4 level bids show good 5 card suits.
    
  • After 1♥-1♠-1NT, 2♣ = Checkback.
    
  • After 1♥-1♠-2NT all bids are natural and forcing.

• Cue-bidding and Serious 3NT
  • We are said to be in a cue-bidding auction if we are known to have an eight+ card major suit fit, game forcing values and the bidding is below four of our major. There are a few exceptions:
    1m 1M
    3M
    
    1M 2m
    3M
    
    2♣ 2♦
    3M
    
  • In the first example we are not forced to game but all structures (including serious 3NT) are on. In the second and third examples we are not known to have an eight+ card fit but opener has shown a suit that needs no fit.
    
  • Once any of the above auctions are established, we cannot play 3NT.
    
  • Cue-bidding is done up the line. If you skip a step, you have denied what you would have shown by bidding that step.
  
  
• Cue-bids have the following meaning:
  • A bid of the trump suit below game shows 2 of the top 3 honours if you were the first member of the pair to bid the suit. Otherwise it shows one of the top 3 honours.
    
  • When a side suit has been bid naturally, a bid of that suit by the bidder shows 2 of the top 3 honours in that suit. Otherwise it shows one of the top 3 honours.
    
  • We do not cue-bid singletons and voids in partner's suits.
    
  • The bid of a side suit never bid naturally shows any first or second round control.
    
  • We do not cue-bid at the five level, this is Exclusion RKCB 1430 (should we change this for the forum polls? - inquiry)
    
  • When hearts is the agreed suit, 4♠ is RKCB and 4NT=Exclusion RKCB for spades.
    
  • We play Serious 3NT. Serious 3NT is a way to allow the partnership to investigate for slam even if one of the hands is minimum. Playing Serious 3NT, you do not need to jump to game to show a minimum hand so the jump to game can be used as a picture bid (controls only in the suits you have bid).
    
    A bid of 3NT carries the message, "Partner, I have interest in slam, please cue-bid your first control even if you have a minimum hand and carry on with cue-bids as available." If you do not have a slam-going hand, you bypass Serious 3NT and cue-bid which carries the message, "Partner, I do not have serious slam interest or else I would have bid 3NT, but here is my first available cue-bid in case you do have slam interest.
    
    Cue-bidding and Serious 3NT
    1s-2d-2s-3s-3n
    
    For example, this auction says, "Partner, I have slam interest, please give me your first available cue-bid."
    
    1s-2d-2s-3s-4c
    
    compared to this auction which says, "Partner, I do not have slam interest, but in case you do I want to let you know that I have first or second round control of clubs".
    
    In this auction if partner now cue-bid that would show he had serious slam interest as you have denied it; he can bid 4♠ with no slam interest himself.
    
    In the same way, if North had cue-bid 4♦ instead of 4♣ denying a club control, South would know if the partnership was off 2 quick club tricks and could sign off even with slam interest. If South had a club control and was still interested, he would cue-bid or bid RKCB.
    
    After one partner has shown slam interest, either by bidding Serious 3NT or cue-bidding after the other partner has denied slam interest, the non-serious partner must make any cue-bid he has available.
    
    1s-2d-2s-3s-4c-4d-4h=4s
    
    Here is an auction where South showed Serious slam interest by cue-bidding after North's denial. North had a heart control and so was forced to show it. He could have bid RKCB if he thought it was warranted. South said, "I do have better than a minimum, but I need your opinion." North can bid RKCB if he wants, but he knows that South does not think slam is great without North's help. NOTE: You do not have to get to slam because someone has slam interest!
    
    1h-2c-2h-3h-3s
    IMPORTANT: In auctions where hearts is the agreed suit, a 3♠ cue-bid is mandatory, but does not say anything about Serious slam interest. If you do not bid 3♠ it tells partner you do not have a spade cue-bid so he can know if you are off two quick spade tricks. Serious slam interest will get resolved later. For example, if you have a spade control and bid it, partner will either bid Serious 3NT after or cue-bid denying Serious slam interest. You will continue according to your hand. If you do not have a spade control, you will either bid Serious 3NT or cue-bid your first available cue-bid. Partner will know that you do not have a spade control and carry on according to his hand (or sign off because you have two quick spade losers).
    
    This applies in auctions that start 1♠-2♥-3♥ -- Here hearts become the agreed suit (regardless of whether you intended to support spades) and 3♠ is a spade cue-bid.

[pclayton]

Ben:

After everything is place, I'd like to see frequent polls among the panel on modifications / clafifications of the system. Perhaps this can be done 1x month.

[Gerben42]

Good idea! I already see one place where inquiry put a questionmark. I agree with exclusion instead of cuebidding on the 5-level.

[inquiry]

Jlall, on Apr 29 2005, 03:20 PM, said:

this system is too advanced for me.

Does this mean you are not going to particpate? IF so that is unfortunate, as I am sure we were all looking forward to your participation.

[awm]

There are some pretty major stylistic differences between players in bidding, and it's interesting that no one ever seems to specify these things in system descriptions, even though they come up WAY more often than a lot of the conventions that do get mentioned. Two easy examples:

(1) After 1m-1M, how often does one raise with three card support? I know some people who will essentially NEVER raise on three, and others for whom a non-raise almost DENIES three cards. This has ripple effects through the system, on things like whether opener can rebid 1NT on singleton, whether responder should rebid a five card suit over 1NT, what the assumed meaning is of delayed support after 4th suit or checkback, etc.

(2) After 1M-2x, which bids show extras? We had a thread on this earlier, and there was a pretty strong consensus that three-level high reverses in new suits do show extras (although I know some people who play that they don't). But how about 1♥-2x-2♠ (Max Hardy says doesn't show extras in the classic 2/1 book)? How about 1M-2x-3x? 1M-2x-2NT? Is it permissable to rebid 2NT without a true balanced hand?

Anyways there are lots more examples of this (how light to open/GF and how aggressively to limit raise come to mind) where it's extremely important for a partnership to agree and yet as best I can tell there is no "standard." If I had a few minutes to discuss with a pickup partner, I'd much rather know these stylistic things than discuss about our Wolff signoff sequences after 2NT rebid.

[mike777]

awm, on Apr 29 2005, 02:58 PM, said:

There are some pretty major stylistic differences between players in bidding, and it's interesting that no one ever seems to specify these things in system descriptions, even though they come up WAY more often than a lot of the conventions that do get mentioned. Two easy examples:

(1) After 1m-1M, how often does one raise with three card support? I know some people who will essentially NEVER raise on three, and others for whom a non-raise almost DENIES three cards. This has ripple effects through the system, on things like whether opener can rebid 1NT on singleton, whether responder should rebid a five card suit over 1NT, what the assumed meaning is of delayed support after 4th suit or checkback, etc.

(2) After 1M-2x, which bids show extras? We had a thread on this earlier, and there was a pretty strong consensus that three-level high reverses in new suits do show extras (although I know some people who play that they don't). But how about 1♥-2x-2♠ (Max Hardy says doesn't show extras in the classic 2/1 book)? How about 1M-2x-3x? 1M-2x-2NT? Is it permissable to rebid 2NT without a true balanced hand?

Anyways there are lots more examples of this (how light to open/GF and how aggressively to limit raise come to mind) where it's extremely important for a partnership to agree and yet as best I can tell there is no "standard." If I had a few minutes to discuss with a pickup partner, I'd much rather know these stylistic things than discuss about our Wolff signoff sequences after 2NT rebid.

In BW solver club these issues are raised all the time. The point of the club/forum is for the Master players to discuss what they prefer and argue why their choice is better given the system restrictions not what their pet system says to bid.

All the points you raise are great fodder for solver hands. If the Masters all agreed these would not be issues. Of course all aspects and bidding consquences you raise cannot be fully resolved. The club has been around for over 50 years and is still ongoing. The goal is for us poor schmucks to improve whatever the heck we are playing now, not to solve the riddle perfectly.

[inquiry]

Jlall, on Apr 29 2005, 04:12 PM, said:

Lol no Ben I'd be glad to participate. I don't agree with some of the things on this list, but I don't agree with everything in BWS or even systems that i play. Such is life.

Well, I don't agree with some on this list either. This is the "official" BBO Advanced. I lifted this from the BBO gaming site (gosh, hope I don't get in trouble for copyright violation).

I guess what we mght can do with a panel of experts from around the globe is fine tune this and call it something else (I would never change Fred's version and keep it the smae name)... maybe we can develop by consensus here a BBF=advanced as a derivative of BBO Advanced....

Anyway, welcome on board.

[Chamaco]

What do you folks suggest as best choice for the following:

1) Game tries after 1M:2M
2) Game/slam tries after 1m:1M:2M
......a. if 2M promises 4 card raise
......b. if 2M promise 3+
3) Game/slam try after Bergen mixed and inv. raises

[Gerben42]

Justin what is advanced in this system? Just because it is detailed? Detail is a good thing.

[Double !]

Ben:
At the risk of me appearing stoopid, please define the criteria for a weak jump shift as I know of two school of thought on this.
1) one school says it (usually) a 6 bagger with 0- to some low number of hcp
2) another school has it more structured: 3-7hcp plus or minus, semi-constructive, in order to better clarify the range should responded respond in and then rebid a major (invitational).

Thank you in advance. Don

[inquiry]

Double !, on Apr 29 2005, 06:45 PM, said:

Ben:
At the risk of me appearing stoopid, please define the criteria for a weak jump shift as I know of two school of thought on this.
1) one school says it (usually) a 6 bagger with 0- to some low number of hcp
2) another school has it more structured: 3-7hcp plus or minus, semi-constructive, in order to better clarify the range should responded respond in and then rebid a major (invitational).

Thank you in advance. Don

I didn't write the words posted about the system, i cut and paste from bbo gaming area. As far as what qualifies for a weak jump overcall, I suspect we will learn as the experts vote on certain hands and we see what the expert standard is when playing weak jumpshifts (I am not playing weak jumpshifts currently).

Ben

[pigpenz]

yes, and so much depends on the game imps vs matchpoints.

[Fluffy]

When something is unclear either it will be natural or will be shown on the given problem I guess, ranges for specific bids may be shown as well.

[mike777]

Fluffy, on Apr 29 2005, 07:39 PM, said:

When something is unclear either it will be natural or will be shown on the given problem I guess, ranges for specific bids may be shown as well.

I think many of you are missing the point that has been repeated over and over. There are many ambiguities and that is what the Master players will discuss. They point out what is common Master assumptions in an auction and what still does not have general acceptance of understanding. In those areas they put forth what they believe is the best solution and why. It is expected there will be disagreement among the Masters and the readers. Among these issues are range and shape and etc for many many auctions. All of these are put forth within the constraints of the system Ben has posted. It is expected that this system is incomplete, confusing and just plain bad in many areas.

Hopefully even those players who only play full relay, strong club or Acol can gleem some value from the competitive or preempt auctions.

It is Ben's job to move or edit the discussion in a fruitful direction, point out conflicting logic, add some humor and if necessary translate the Master answers into plain English. As the system is edited Ben could let us know how and the logic behind the general acceptance.

[luke warm]

the whole point, imo, is for those chosen to bid according to one system... the interesting part comes about when we get to see how other players evaluate hands from within the same basic structure

to answer mauro's question re: game tries, maybe ask the ones involved? i've yet to see any real weakness to kokish long/short suit tries

[fred]

Bridge Base Advanced (and Bridge Base Basic) date back to the very first days of BBO. My original plan was to eventually turn these areas of our site into comprehensive system notes with plenty of example hands and quizzes so that people could test their knowledge of these systems.

I recall thinking that this was an important goal to achieve. I figured that Goren and Culbertson were so successful partly because the managed to establish a monopoly on "standard bidding" in their respective eras. I thought that if we could do the same thing then perhaps a lot of people would start playing on BBO (in those days we would get excited when the number of people online went into double digits).

Well since that time we have almost no work on this area of the program and BBO has managed to become successful anyways. That being said, I think it would be great if these areas of our site actually did evolve into something useful.

Probably there are people out there who would be interested on working on this project (which would involve trying to come up with a consensus as to what various bids should mean and then creating .lin files to present the information).

Then again, perhaps we should use Bridge World Standard. We have excellent relations with The Bridge World magazine and they have already done a lot of work to try to define an effective system for advanced players that most experts (in America at least) are comfortable with.

Any thoughts on this?

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[hrothgar]

fred, on Apr 30 2005, 05:36 PM, said:

Then again, perhaps we should use Bridge World Standard. We have excellent relations with The Bridge World magazine and they have already done a lot of work to try to define an effective system for advanced players that most experts (in America at least) are comfortable with.

Any thoughts on this?

1. Never was a big fan of reinventing the wheel (particularly when a LOT of work went into building that wheel. In the case of BWS, the Bridge World has spent enormous amounts time to develop/present their version of standard. While we might be able to create a different version of "expert" 2/1, I doubt that we could create a better version of 2/1

2. In an ideal world, promoting BWS in this manner might help to promote the Bridge World as well. (Certainly a worthwhile goal)

3. At some point in the future (once the new Convention Card utility is available) we'll need to think abot developing convention files for a variety of different systems. I suspect that (one way or another) we'll need to support BWS. Better to bite the bullet now...

[Gerben42]

Well of course I'd like to support BWS but its bidding style is different from my own.

Some things that are BWS that are simply not my bidding style:

* Cappelletti
* Strong jump shifts
* 1D not promising 4 cards
* That convention that sounds similar to my name

I'm sure if I go through the script I'll find many more...