We were playing a 26 board game. I think there were 16 other pairs in my direction.

Tough call. I'm leaning toward 6c unless your partner is like me and will preempt 3c w/r in 1st seat with QJxxxx and out.

Figure on taking 7 clubs, a heart, and 2 diamonds for 10. Ruff a heart for 11, and establish a diamond for 12. With split spade honors, it's likely that they won't be lead, especially at a club game. You're in bad shape if the spades are AK with RHO, obviously, and maybe even with LHO. Then again, maybe your partner shows up with Kx / xx / xx / AQTxxxx , and 6C is cold...

Edit: There's the added chance that 5Hx is making, albeit fairly slim.

Edit2: Had clubs and diamonds reversed. It's fixed now.

IMP tourney, we are vuln, opps arent, I deal

My Hand

T9754
J8
84
T975

FCBLs Hand

AK
KQ3
AKJT53
J6

Bidding goes

Pass
2c
2d
3d
3s
4s

(opps all pass)

where did we screw up so bad?

With Myrmidon's hand, if it were LHO with the strength and the hearts, I think I might shoot 6C. Unfortunately, its being LHO makes a spade lead much more likely: (1) he's moderately likely to hold AK, a clear lead against a slam; (2) he won't feel any compulsion to lead his partner's suit, and will simply judge from the auction and his hand. Double, but hate it. But you can't let yourself go minus on this hand at matchpoints.

At IMPS, I think 6C isn't bad. If you make it a third of the time you're about breaking even, and it could be better than that.

You don't have your 3S bid (what is double negative in your system over 3d?). To make a forward-going bid, you've gotta have 3 or 4 points.

I might suggest playing 2C-2H as showing less than a king, so 2D is forcing to at least 3N.

I think 4S is right over 3S.

With FCBL's hand, I might open 2NT (playing it there, making, or playing 3S, making), or I might open 2C and rebid 2NT, probably playing 3NT (which is no picnic, but will make with average defense and some luck). But mostly, bad luck.

I'd be surprised if they're playing second negative, else the hand wouldn't have come up. (2C - 2H; 3D - P -- or passing a 2NT rebid) The old-fashioned way to play (2D negative) is perfectly playable -- but if doing that, the 2C bidder has to be a bit stronger than this, or must plan a limited rebid (i.e., 2NT).

Indeed, if 2D is negative and cheaper minor is double negative, then the 2C bidder has to be stronger to make a 3D bid here (leaving partner with no weak bids). 2N is the alternative rebid of course, and it's probably the right spot.

We were playing 2D waiting.

I guess the idea is that there's 2 semi-standard ways to play 2D:

1) strictly waiting

In this scenario, you'd use 2H over 2C as a way to show a complete bust. This way you wouldn't get into trouble. If this is what you're doing, then it's responder's fault that you're in a bad spot.

EDIT: In this case, 2D is forcing to at least 3N.

2) negative OR waiting

In this scenario, 2D could be a bust or it could be waiting. If it's a bust, then usually responder will bid "cheapest minor" (i.e. 3C over anything except 3C, 3D over 3C) to show a bust. If this is the case, then opener is at fault. You need to let partner describe his hand, which may be a bust. 2C-2D;2N-3C;3D-all pass seems reasonable.

FWIW, I don't like this method, because I really want systems on over 2C-2D; 2N-?. But, as Atakdog points out, it is definitely playable (and widely played).

Wyman explains it pretty well. If y'all mean you were playing 2D waiting as opposed to negative (thus promising non-hopeless values -- often played as an ace, a king, or two queens) then you don't have your 2D bid, and should bid your negative, probably 2H, instead. If you are playing it waiting as opposed to positive (thus merely denying the ability to bid a good suit -- at least KQxxx, as it's often played, or the rare positive 2NT response), then the 2C --> 3D requires more strength.

One real danger with 2C sequences, particularly in pickup partnerships (which I sort of specialized in for a long time): when making out the card, you just say "waiting" without deciding which of these you're using. Messy. My solution with this hand and lacking firm agreements: With the weak hand, bid as you did. With the strong hand, 2C --> 2NT. (Notice that with most sets of agreements the only positive response that can possibly occur is 3C -- over that, I'll bid 3D, and if that gets raised we will have a slam, probably in notrump.)

Great hand for a strong club system: with my old relay system, but also with less sophisticated systems, you could stop in 2S, or even 2D, depending on what felt right.

You've mentioned this many times, so I thought I'd finally ask: what's the advantage(s) of your old relay system? And did/does anyone else play it?

There are two basic advantages of strong club systems:

• Strong hands, those that are relatively likely to make game and especially slam searches worth bothering with, have lots of room to investigate because you start bidding them at the lowest possible level. Also, artificial bids just convey more information, in some cases, than natural ones, and it is on those big, slam-invitational or better hands that you most want those tools available.
• The most common hands, those of average strength, start out much better defined (in terms of strength), so the partnership can often determine very quickly that there is not a game or slam. This in turn both simplifies and speeds up many auctions, making life harder for the defense. (Example: playing standard, the auction 1H - 4H is a horrible mistake unless responder has five or six hearts and a very weak hand, because opener can have anywhere from 11-20 or so HCP, and opponents can pretty easily judge whether to try 4S over it because responder's hand is known. Playing precision, the opening 1H bid is much more narrowly defined, often 11-15 HCP, so the jump to game would be made on both xx KQxxx x xxxx and Axx KQx Qxx QJxx -- no tipping off the opponents what to bid or lead.) (Second example: you'll often stop in a safe two-level contract when playing standard a game try would both have tipped off the opponents and pushed to the possibly-unsafe three level.)

No system is perfect, but precision-ish systems make complex auctions easier where they're necessary and make common auctions quicker and simpler. Throw in a fair amount of artificiality and you increase efficiency: artificial systems are very good at conserving bidding space, which is often critical.

My own relay system was never played by anyone but my partner and me, but it resembled systems played by other pairs, particularly Hamman and Soloway, with bits and pieces borowed from various other sources. The principal problem it (and other artificial systems) has is the memory strain, and the problems that occur when someone misinterprets or forgets a call's meaning. Artificial systems are more apt tp produce ridiculous results when the wheels come off the tracks. But were it not for the difficulty of learning and memorizing an artificial system, and the limitations various sponsoring bodies place on allowable conventions, there's litte question that artificial systems are better.

The reason I cite my own relay system (which, by the way, we called the Troll Club), rather than something more normal like old-style (a la CC Wei) or mainstream modernized precision (as, e.g., in the Berkowitz book) when pointing out how the bidding would have gone is mostly that I know my own system better, not that I'm arguing that anyone should play it. I believe my system really is very good, and is about as powerful as it's possible to use in ACBL general chart events (particularly because I designed it specifically to push to but not over the exact limits), but it requires so much work to learn any complex relay system that I think all but the most serious partnerships are better off starting with something mre mainstream.

Cool, thanks.

urgh, what the hell now?

r/r imps, pick up partner.

s: 4
h: 7
d: AKT9842
c: AQT2

three passes to me. 1d (obv?), pass, partner bids 1s, now what? as played i rebid 3d, partner passed with 11 opposite and we don't lose a trick...

Partner's error, passing 3D.

You might consider opening 2D; in fourth seat this shows ~6 diamonds and something like 13-16 HCP. You're really too strong for it, though, with the seventh diamond; I think you bid right. Swans (7-4-1-1 hands) are powerful, but you can't do any more without a fit, and only partner knows that.

Another approach is to rebid a quiet 2C, raising a diamond preference to three. Makes it more likely you get to the right slam, less likely you land in the right partial. 2C would be pretty silly with a 5=3=2=4 six count opposite, but if partner holds, say, Axxxx xxx x KJxx you need to be in clubs (and you'd get to six: P-1D; 1S - 2C; 3C - 4H (or whatever your bid for RKC in clubs would be at this point; many people would use 4C, but I think that should be natural); 5C (or whatever else means two without) - 6C; it would also be sensible to bid 3D over 3C, but over a 3S reply I'm not sure what you'd do).

Atakdog's pretty much got it, except I'm somewhat against re-bidding 2C and strongly against opening 2D. I think 1D - 3D is definitely the right route.

But yeah, the big problem was partner passing 3D with an 11 count.

There's actually a decent argument for making a fourth seat 3D opening show this hand, or thereabouts.

This was my first inclination, but too likely to miss 5/6 or not have enough info about 3N it seems. I dunno. 1D-3D seems good. Partner passing 3D with 11 is an abomination.

More on weird relay systems:

One thing that I did with my relay system to take full advantage of the limited openings other than 1C, and put maximum pressure on opps, was use what were, in effect, negative responses. After a 1M opening, a 2m response (and also 1S - 2H, though I'm not sure it was right to do that) showed invitational strength (around 7-11 HCP), a good 6+ card suit, zero interest in opener's suit, poor support for any other major suit opener might rebid, and no better than average support for the minors.

(To understand the rest, you also need to know that we were using canapé openings: with two-suiters, we opened the shorter suit, and rebid the longer; this rebid was never forcing. The basic advantage is that it was easier to stop in a sensible two-level contract with ill-fitting hands. A lesser advantage is that frequently opening four-card majors makes competition easier for us and harder for the opps; obviously, to do this one has to be comfortable playing 4-3 fits [because you often have to raise with three-card support]. Recall that our strong hands open 1C, so the canapé aspect doesn't adversely affect game-going auctions too badly, nor slam auctions much at all.

Also, we played that a 1NT response to 1M was forcing and unlimited, and could be made on anything form a slam force to a zero count. After a 1NT response, opener's first rebid was basically natural, which is why this wasn't a prohibited "relay system". Most strong responding hands went through 1NT, though we had available preemptive, limit, and forcing raises, plus the equivalent of strong jump shifts and a weird bid to show a game-forcing two-suiter.)

An example will illustrate. Suppose responder holds Kx x xxx KQxxxxx. Partner opens 1H. For us, this promises 4+ hearts and 8-15 HCP (16 if 5-3-3-2), and does not deny a longer second suit. A misfit looms: if opener has a one suiter or a heart-spade two-suiter, getting too high is a live possibility and game a near impossibility. If he has a heart-diamond two-suiter then 2D is the best contract, and if he is 6=4=x=x we want to play 2S, but these are narrow targets; most of the time partner is weak I want to play 2C, while if partner is strong I want him to judge his hand knowing that I'm one-suited in clubs. Also note that if partner is weak the opponents may have game, in any of three suits (hearts is quite possible) or NT, while if partner is strong but misfitting, the best possible result is an opponent overcall followed by a standing-on-the-chair double.

With this hand we respond 2C (alert: natural but not forcing). With a crappy hand, partner passes; we are almost certainly in a profitable contract, making or a cheap save. With middling to strong misfit, partner can still pass, and opponents had better judge carefully. With decent fit and strength, partner invites or bids game.

So, for opener:

1. xxx Jxxxxx AKx x: pass; good luck to opps to find their spade game
2. AQxxx Axxx KQx x: pass, and saw opps off in anything they bid (particularly as heart ruffs will usually be available)
3. Axx QJxxxx x Axx: raise to 3C, invitational, so pard can show a diamond stopper
4. Axx QJxxx Kxx Ax (NV, as this would be opened 1NT vul): bid 2NT, natural and invitational
5. AQ Jxxxxx KQ Axx: bid 3NT, which will usually make
6. AQJxxx Axxx xx A: bid 2S, as 3C will be safe if responder hates spades (thus nearly promising the seventh club), but in this case probably leading to the good spade game.

With those same hands playing standard, the auctions go:

1. P - 3C, or 2H - P, arriving at either a bad contract, or a somewhat worse one than 2C, and making a spade contract for the bad guys easier to find after fourth seat doubles or bids spades (which is far from safe against us)
2. 1S - 1NT; 2H - 2S; maybe a winner at matchpoints but have fun if trump doesn't split
3. 1H - 1NT; 2H - P; probably making but definitely inferior
4. 1H - 1NT; 2H - P (or 3D), again arriving at some inferior spot (but if 1NT isn't forcing, getting to play 1NT, which admittedly is best)
5. either as in (3), or an inspired 1NT opening that ought to lead to 3NT
6. 1S - 1NT; 2H or 2S (opinions differ on how to bid these hands) - 2S or pass, though it's possible game could be reached.

In general, we get to at least as good a spot as the natural bidders more often than not, and it is nastily hard for opps to judge what's best, while opener will almost always know what to do over competition. It is this somewhat less of an advantage against really good opposition, which helps explain why (1) top pairs don't, as far as I know, play this way; and (2) why Bob Hamman had little problem working out what to do over one of these auctions, when we played him in a sectional. But against non-experts, it rocked.

It is not the relay aspect of the system that makes this method work, but the limited nature of the opening bid, so it would work even better in a more normal precision context in which opener promises 11-15 HCP, not our ridiculously weak requirement of a shapely 8 count.

In general, the more limited bids you have available, the better equipped you will be; this is just an example, though one of my favorite ones.

Um...awesome post and you rock...

Well, thank you. You asked a question to which I knew the answer while many people don't, and which was about something I dearly love to think about. That, and I like to help.

I may do some other examples later, showing some of the other strengths of artificial approaches to bidding (particularly my own), if anyone cares (and perhaps even if no one does...).

Wow.

That is so many levels over my head, I cannot even begin to tell you!

Honestly, it shouldn't be, but people get turned off by the number of different things to think about in bridge, which is the eventual cause of many people's plateauing in the game: they think they can't learn some aspect of it, so they don't.

It's not as if what I wrote is a brilliant treatise, but it could be instructive; I suggest you consider working through it. Ignore the stuff about canapé bids and superlight openings, and just focus on the example hands.

Partner has shown a one-suiter in clubs with 7-11 HCP. Do you have enough for game? The answer for some of those hands is a clear no; for others, it depends. He has a good club suit, but really can't have a great one, so you'll need to fit him to have a source of tricks in notrump or for discards at a trump contract.

He also has no interest in hearts, even though you bid them and will often have five or six -- so how many does he probably have? Usually not two (because you might not rebid a six-card suit here, if you had club tolerance), definitely not three, so probably one or zero. But partner isn't terribly interested in hearing about your second suit, so he can't have a ton of cards in spades or diamonds... so exactly one heart is far more likely than zero.

If you have a top honor in clubs that's great, as they may run in notrump; also, that means he's likely to have some values outside. This will rarely be in hearts, so figure he'll have about a king in one of the pointed suits. Use that to try to evaluate the prospects for a spade contract, on the hand with long strong spades, and for notrump.

Partner doesn't care about your hearts and isn't particularly interested in spades, so how good would those suits have to be for you to bid or rebid them now? It depends on whether you have a safe resting place those times that he really hates your rebid. If you bid 2H he will pass, so you'll need a good suit and a good reason to do it (like a club void). If you bid 2S he will usually pass, too, because his likely length there is two -- but because you're reversing he'll know your spades are really or good or your hand is really strong (it's not forcing, but it's also not weak unless you have a death wish, because he's telling you that 2C is playable regardless your hand), so he will raise with a good hand. What's a good hand? He's already described his clubs, so a good hand means a maximum in context and, especially, a better than average spade fit -- xxx or Kx, probably. If you can stand that raise, and can stand a 3C bid when partner is 1=1=4=7, then you can bid 2S.

Also, think about the opponents' silence. Partner almost can't have four spades and usually won't have three, so on some of the hands shown the opponents have lots of spades. Also, on some of those hands the opponents have at least half the points. Why haven't they bid? It would be much easier for your LHO to bid than your RHO, so he probably has more of the strength. You can therefore guess that finesses for kings will be on side more often than not -- except in hearts, because LHO could bid 2H now but RHO would have had to wait for his partner's double if he held a heart stack. That allows you to upgrade some kings and queens and downgrade others.

When you have exactly four hearts, how many do the opponents have? Answer: usually eight, because partner usually has one. Why didn't they bid hearts? Answer: they couldn't, because 2H would have been conventional by LHO (probably) and possibly also by RHO.

Look at the range of hand types you could have that will pass the 2C bid. Notice that sometimes it's the opponents' hand by a country mile, but sometimes any action by them will end very badly for them. How would you defend against this?*

Just a few things to think about. And once you start thinking, you realize how likely it is that many of the decisions you consider routine in your own bidding really shouldn't be -- there's a wonderful lot to this game.


* The only time I played this sort of sequence against Bob Hamman (for those who haven't heard of him: top ranked player in the world for something like 24 consecutive years), he smoothly bid 2H as RHO, over which I had to raise to 3C (I was opener), and there we rested in what turned out to be the normal spot. How dull.

r/w imps. I have

s: QT5
h: AKQJ63
d: KQ52
c:

lho bids 1c, partner passes, rho bids 2s. do we interfere? if so, how?