[RunemPard]

At our local club, most of the good players tend to play this...

Short club, 5cM...normal so far, but..

After a 1C opening, they all like to play 1D as showing a hand with no 5cM and 1H/1S promising 5. OK for MPs I guess if you find your 5/3 major fit in hands that normally might just pass out a 1NT rebid, but otherwise to me 100% useless. Some play that 1C-1D denies 4/4 in the minors where 1C-1N promises 4/4+ in them.

Any time I play against them I try to preempt after 1C-1D far beyond what may be considered aggressively. I just fail to see the point of ruining our chances to show distribution and know immediately about a 5/4 major fit to find 5/3 part scores.

For example, when I play with this method...I have a much more difficult time judging if I should go further after a fit is discovered thinking...well if partner does have 4 card support, I would really like to consider game, otherwise, I really hate the thought of being higher than 2. Another issue is that if playing more standard showing 4cM after 1C, most would play 1C-1H; 2H-2N as a sort of asking bid. When we use this method it would go... 1C-1D; 1M-???

Now what? What do we do with hands that want to force game w/ a fit. What do we do with balanced invites with spades. Do we even really have 4SF?

I normally play with xyz or 2-way checkback. I strive to show distribution over 1C-1x rather than bid 1C-1D-1H on Sxxx Hxxxx Dxxx Cxxx just because partner most likely has a 4cM. I cannot even do this because most have no method of finding out after and will assume I have no major if I bid 1N.

In conclusion...My main question, how bad is this method? What can I possibly do more to get them to stop using it with me! I have tried explaining to any I play this with that I cannot stand it and think it creates more problems than it solves. I find it unnatural. Using this method severely hurts my judgment and confidence while bidding and if I wish to play with any of these top players at our club, I am stuck! (They are all brilliant players, I just question their bidding choices a lot.)

Thanks for the input as always,

Don

[Cthulhu D]

It's called Montreal Relay. Ken Rexford was an advocate. It has big pluses and minuses - It makes it much easier to find 5-3 fits and ensures you never play in 4-3 fits, but it can make it hard to show 4-4 fits in competitive auctions. If you google 'Montreal Relay' there is a ton of discussion.

If you really hate it, suggest playing transfer walsh where 3 card support accepts the transfer (F1) and 2 card or less supports bids as though you had bid the suit you are transfering into. This has the same effects (always play in 5-3 or 4-4 fits, never in 4-3 or 5-2). Discuss continuations over 1C-1S! (showing diamonds) as that auction sucks. Call it a day.

Incidentally, your third seat pre-emption strategy is probably not as hot as you might like. It may be better to overcall 1M with 3 card suits.

[kenrexford]

The main problem with Montreal Relay is not the style itself. The main problem is that most people who play Montreal Relay have a lazy disposition and thus have not developed the auctions well. Hence, the questions you have and the problems you see are "real" because the Montreal Relay community hasn't done anything to resolve these issues as a matter of what could be called Montreal Relay Expert Standard. "

This suggests three possible solutions. First, ride the lazy train and deal. Second, get off the train. Third, work out the solutions and then try to educate your partners in your area.

As a simple example, Opener needs the ability to make Negative Doubles. No one thinks of this in the Montreal Relay world. Explain that 1C-P-1D-1S-X is a negative double, and you have taken the first step in education.

[fromageGB]

I would have thought that talking to these "good players" would give you the answers, as they must have come across the situation and resolved it. I have never played it, but I would imagine that after an unopposed 1♣ 1♦ 1M they employ an artificial 2♣ and possibly 2♦ with invitational or better hands, and if you want a parallel with xyz then there is no reason why you could not do so.

[ggwhiz]

150 miles down the road, when the Montreal relay appeared we set out to crush it once we stopped laughing. Pre-empts not so much but one of the best suggestions was to overcall 1♠ blind which became liberal 4-card Major overcalls. It's rarely played even in Montreal anymore.

[jallerton]

 RunemPard, on 2014-October-08, 16:46, said:

At our local club, most of the good players tend to play this...

Short club, 5cM...normal so far, but..

After a 1C opening, they all like to play 1D as showing a hand with no 5cM and 1H/1S promising 5. OK for MPs I guess if you find your 5/3 major fit in hands that normally might just pass out a 1NT rebid, but otherwise to me 100% useless. Some play that 1C-1D denies 4/4 in the minors where 1C-1N promises 4/4+ in them.

Any time I play against them I try to preempt after 1C-1D far beyond what may be considered aggressively. I just fail to see the point of ruining our chances to show distribution and know immediately about a 5/4 major fit to find 5/3 part scores.

For example, when I play with this method...I have a much more difficult time judging if I should go further after a fit is discovered thinking...well if partner does have 4 card support, I would really like to consider game, otherwise, I really hate the thought of being higher than 2. Another issue is that if playing more standard showing 4cM after 1C, most would play 1C-1H; 2H-2N as a sort of asking bid. When we use this method it would go... 1C-1D; 1M-???

Now what? What do we do with hands that want to force game w/ a fit. What do we do with balanced invites with spades. Do we even really have 4SF?

I normally play with xyz or 2-way checkback. I strive to show distribution over 1C-1x rather than bid 1C-1D-1H on Sxxx Hxxxx Dxxx Cxxx just because partner most likely has a 4cM. I cannot even do this because most have no method of finding out after and will assume I have no major if I bid 1N.

In conclusion...My main question, how bad is this method? What can I possibly do more to get them to stop using it with me! I have tried explaining to any I play this with that I cannot stand it and think it creates more problems than it solves. I find it unnatural. Using this method severely hurts my judgment and confidence while bidding and if I wish to play with any of these top players at our club, I am stuck! (They are all brilliant players, I just question their bidding choices a lot.)

Thanks for the input as always,

Don

Perhaps I should put you in touch with Tony Forrester, arguably the United Kingdom's most successful player over the last 25 years. Tony rarely plays anything else over his 1♣ opening. Having played against it quite a lot, I can say that whilst it has some downsides, this system also has a number of upsides. For example, put yourself in the shoes of an opponent. After the uncontested auction 1♣-1♦[relay,no 5-card major]-2♣-3NT, you have very little information about declarer's shape. These hands are easier to defend when declarer has bid his (joint) longest suit during the auction.

Ken is right: to make the most of an unusual system, you need detailed agreements about the continuations.