BBO Discussion Forums: System for untangling opener's 3-card major suit raises - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

System for untangling opener's 3-card major suit raises

#1 User is offline   Jinksy 

  • Experimental biddicist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,852
  • Joined: 2010-January-02
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-December-03, 11:15

What's a good (and not super complicated) system for untangling sequences such as 1m 1M / 2M, where opener's rebid might be on only 3-card support?


(I'm sure I posted a thread about this a while ago and got some good answers, but can't find it now - so feel free to just respond with a link to that if you can remember where it is)
The "4 is a transfer to 4" award goes to Jinksy - PhilKing
0

#2 User is offline   P_Marlowe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,072
  • Joined: 2005-March-18
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-December-03, 11:30

Hi,

linking to Bridgewinner may or may not be allowed.
http://bridgewinners.../spiral-raises/

The alternative use your favourite search engine: Gavin Wolpert Spiral Raises.
It was alos described by Justin Lall, some Blog Entry, but I was not able to
locate the day.

If I recall it correctly, it was not too complicated.

With kind regards
Marlowe
With kind regards
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
1

#3 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,761
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Enschede, the Netherlands
  • Interests:matching LaTeX delimiters :(

Posted 2017-December-03, 11:31

Two options:

1. 2NT asks, whereupon opener bids naturally under 3M with 3, or bids 3M+ with four. I like this. If our major is hearts, you should invert 2S/N to let opener bid 2NT showing spades. (say, 4351 after 1D-1H; 2H-2S*; 2N) Note that this implies you do not raise on a 5m3M32 as you'd be out of luck. This is my favorite scheme, it is natural, easy to remember, and helpful.
2. non-forcing 3m game tries (opener passes with 3 cards or evaluates with 4).
3. technically this is an overflow but some people like 2NT asks and then 3CDHS means 3 min-3 max-4 min-4max ("ogust"). I think it's hacky and pointless. But someone will mention it here, it might as well be me.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
2

#4 User is offline   Jinksy 

  • Experimental biddicist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,852
  • Joined: 2010-January-02
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-December-03, 12:06

View Postgwnn, on 2017-December-03, 11:31, said:

Two options:

1. 2NT asks, whereupon opener bids naturally under 3M with 3, or bids 3M+ with four. I like this. If our major is hearts, you should invert 2S/N to let opener bid 2NT showing spades. (say, 4351 after 1D-1H; 2H-2S*; 2N) Note that this implies you do not raise on a 5m3M32 as you'd be out of luck. This is my favorite scheme, it is natural, easy to remember, and helpful.


I think this is the one I was trying to remember. But we couldn't figure out obvious continuations. After 1m 1M / 2M 2N, is 3m forcing. If not, what does opener do with a max and only three cards?

Also what would 3N, 3S over 2S, and 4m responses to the enquiry show?
The "4 is a transfer to 4" award goes to Jinksy - PhilKing
0

#5 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,761
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Enschede, the Netherlands
  • Interests:matching LaTeX delimiters :(

Posted 2017-December-03, 12:16

There is no such thing as a min or a max in this case. The idea is that distribution is more helpful than strength (which is quite a narrow range to begin with - opener can bid their second suit and raise with a king or so extra). I learned this from gnasher, if you don't like it, take it up with him. :)

the jumps you mentioned would be splinters (for people who like 1m-1M; 3M to be really strong). 3N might be serious, or a non-specific max.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#6 User is offline   Jinksy 

  • Experimental biddicist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,852
  • Joined: 2010-January-02
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-December-03, 12:37

Does it have any effect on other game try sequences? What about 1m 1M / 2M 2M+1 / 3m 3M? Is that a GF with 5+ of the suit?
The "4 is a transfer to 4" award goes to Jinksy - PhilKing
0

#7 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,761
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Enschede, the Netherlands
  • Interests:matching LaTeX delimiters :(

Posted 2017-December-03, 12:48

I haven't given this a lot of thought in fact.. I'd just assume that responder has a 5+card suit and doesn't particularly care about our 3/4 cardedness.

Correction about 1m-1M; 2M-2S/N; 3NT:this should be a very notrumpy (perhaps specifically 4M333) maximum raise. This should be the case no matter what the other responses to the relay are IMO.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#8 User is offline   Jinksy 

  • Experimental biddicist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,852
  • Joined: 2010-January-02
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-December-03, 13:22

Also, what about 1C 1M / 2M 2N / 3D?

Is opener supposed to do that with 3145? If not, what would the sequence mean? (though it sounds like you might not have discussed this either?)
The "4 is a transfer to 4" award goes to Jinksy - PhilKing
0

#9 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,761
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Enschede, the Netherlands
  • Interests:matching LaTeX delimiters :(

Posted 2017-December-03, 14:08

That is 3145 yes; 3H would be 3415 as well. Worst case scenario, you stop in 3S in a 4-3, which responder needs to be prepared for anyway. Yes, we might be unlucky and miss a club fit if responder 3-4 clubs, but that's the way it goes. At least we gave ourselves a shot, and responder knows opener's hand within a card or so..
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#10 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,761
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Enschede, the Netherlands
  • Interests:matching LaTeX delimiters :(

Posted 2017-December-03, 14:15

Showing shortnesses and so on (as P_Marlowe linked) could be better than "my" scheme. The argument would go that responder might not care if opener has a 3136 or 3145, but cares much more about the heart shortness. In "my" scheme, opener rebids 3C with either a 3136 or a 3316. On the other hand, you can sign off in more part scores. Shrug. I kind of consider this as an emergency situation, where responder often is very happy to be in game opposite 4 but wants to stop as low as possible opposite 3. I think natural bidding maximises the chances of a safe landing.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#11 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,761
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Enschede, the Netherlands
  • Interests:matching LaTeX delimiters :(

Posted 2017-December-03, 14:21

View PostJinksy, on 2017-December-03, 11:15, said:

(I'm sure I posted a thread about this a while ago and got some good answers, but can't find it now - so feel free to just respond with a link to that if you can remember where it is)

http://www.bridgebas...plum-p-1m-p-2m/
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#12 User is offline   gordontd 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,711
  • Joined: 2009-July-14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London

Posted 2017-December-03, 14:23

Here's a scheme I've used and liked.
Gordon Rainsford
London UK
0

#13 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,761
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Enschede, the Netherlands
  • Interests:matching LaTeX delimiters :(

Posted 2017-December-03, 14:26

PS you can also combine "my" schemes 1 and 2, and allow responder to offer 3m (opener's suit) if they have 4-card support or 3om if they have a 6-carder themselves. Maybe it's a bit 4-3ophobic, but yes. I don't really see why responder, if they have slam interest, wouldn't want to use the 2NT relay. So why not have everything as natural as possible? #SayNoToGMO
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#14 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,676
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-December-03, 18:20

Which scheme to use depends a lot upon what hands are allowed to raise with 3 card support. Gordon's scheme, for example supports raising on 3 with a balanaced hand, which many pairs prefer not to do. The simplest method I know, and one that is perfectly adequate for the majority of pairs, is 3344, which means you bid the first step with 3 card support and a min; the second with 3 and maxn; the third with 4 and min; and the fourth (3M) with 4 card support and a max. Some prefer to switch the middle two responses, making it 3434.

There are plenty of more exotic schemes around though. One example (which assumes that Opener cannot have a balanced hand with 3 card support):-

1m - 1; 2 - 2NT
==
3 = 3 spades (with shortage)
... - 3 = relay (min-1max-0max-trick)
... - ... - 3 = 0-1 in om, min
... - ... - 3 = 0-1 hearts, min
... - ... - 3NT = singleton in om, max
... - ... - 4 = singleton heart, max
... - ... - 4 = void in om, max
... - ... - 4 = heart void, max
... - ... - 4 = trick source in m, max
3 = 4 spades, no shortage
... - 3 = relay (min, 3max, 4max, trick)
... - ... - 3 = min
... - ... - 3NT = 3 in m, max
... - ... - 4 = 4-5 in m, max
... - ... - 4 = 45m(22), max, trick source in m, control in om
... - ... - 4 = 45m(22), max, trick source in m, control in hearts
... - ... - 4 = 45m(22), max, trick source in m, QJ or less in both fragment suits
3 = 4+ spades, 0-1 in om, min
3 = 4+ spades, 0-1 hearts, min
3NT = 4+ spades, singleton in om, max
4 = 4+ spades, singleton heart, max
4 = 4+ spades, void in om, max
4 = 4+ spades, heart void, max
4 = 4+ spades, trick source in m, max
--

You could of course choose to differentiate between 5 and 6 cards in the minor instead of between a singleton and void for the cases where this applies.

There is quite a lot of bidding space in these auctions so the number of feasible solutions is quite high. In essence you just choose the features most important to you and design a structure to show them that is as memorable as possible. If it can also use the same structure for 3-4 directly over 2NT (or 3-4 over 2 when the major is hearts) as with 3 - 3 added, as in the scheme above, so much the better.
(-: Zel :-)
0

#15 User is offline   ahydra 

  • AQT92 AQ --- QJ6532
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,353
  • Joined: 2009-September-09
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-December-03, 19:51

View Postgwnn, on 2017-December-03, 11:31, said:

If our major is hearts, you should invert 2S/N to let opener bid 2NT showing spades.


Does one not just bid 1S rather than making a 3-card raise if holding 43(51)? Or maybe you raise if opener's spades are very poor?

ahydra
0

#16 User is offline   awm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,797
  • Joined: 2005-February-09
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Zurich, Switzerland

Posted 2017-December-03, 21:18

I play the following method:

2NT = NF, game interest with four trumps
... Pass = three trumps and min
... 3M = four trumps and min
... 4M = four trumps and max
... all others = 3 trumps and max, as descriptive as possible

3M = NF, game interest with five (or more) trumps

Others = Natural and GF, often only four cards in major and looking for the best game
... 3M = confirms four-card raise
... 3NT = short/weak in responder's second suit
... others = 3-card raise, as natural as possible

When compared to the "2NT asks" methods a lot of people seem to play, this has the following advantages:

1. When opener raised on three, focuses on the reason WHY the raise was made (i.e. what is the short/weak side suit). This is key to deciding where to play.
2. Allows us to play in 2NT when we have no eight card major fit.
3. Very natural and easy to remember.
Adam W. Meyerson
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
0

#17 User is offline   gordontd 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,711
  • Joined: 2009-July-14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London

Posted 2017-December-04, 01:29

View Postahydra, on 2017-December-03, 19:51, said:

Does one not just bid 1S rather than making a 3-card raise if holding 43(51)? Or maybe you raise if opener's spades are very poor?

ahydra

Standard in a 5cM system is to raise. If you bid 1S you have a problem if partner rebids 1NT as 2H now shows a stronger hand.
Gordon Rainsford
London UK
0

#18 User is offline   Stephen Tu 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,904
  • Joined: 2003-May-14

Posted 2017-December-04, 01:52

My concoction:
2nt, 3 opener's minor, 3M, all natural game tries nf. Difference from some other methods are you can play in 3m when responder is min 4cM and good fit for opener minor instead of 2nt when opener min and distributional and 3 cd raise.

3nt choice of games, opener leaves in with 3cd support, usually pulls with 4, unless like 4333 and notrumpy values.

Higher new suit= 4cd gf only looking for 4 supp or stopper in lower suit.

Lowest new suit=gf, either 4cd seeking best contract or 5+ seeking shape info for slam hunting purposes.
Then, first 3 step are 3cd raises, balanced/low short/high short. 4th step 4cd balanced. Higher are splinter with 4 supp.
0

#19 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,761
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Enschede, the Netherlands
  • Interests:matching LaTeX delimiters :(

Posted 2017-December-04, 07:09

View Postahydra, on 2017-December-03, 19:51, said:

Does one not just bid 1S rather than making a 3-card raise if holding 43(51)? Or maybe you raise if opener's spades are very poor?

ahydra

Depends... If you generally raise on 4351/4315, you have the advantage of a correction to 2M on 3rd round clearly showing extras. I'm not convinced either way. Worst case scenario, opener just doesn't show spades very often because he doesn't have them very often :)
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#20 User is offline   nullve 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 865
  • Joined: 2014-April-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norway
  • Interests:partscores

Posted 2017-December-04, 07:31

View Postahydra, on 2017-December-03, 19:51, said:

Does one not just bid 1S rather than making a 3-card raise if holding 43(51)? Or maybe you raise if opener's spades are very poor?

ahydra

I've seen Thomas Bessis (Bessis-Volcker?) play something like

1m-1; 1-1N; 2Om = 3 H, extras
1m-1; 1-1N; 2 = 3 H, no extras
0

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 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