BBO Discussion Forums: Kaplan Inversion playing Gazillia/Riton 2C - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Kaplan Inversion playing Gazillia/Riton 2C

#1 User is offline   inquiry 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 14,563
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amelia Island, FL
  • Interests:Bridge, what else?

Posted 2005-August-25, 07:57

I have adpoted Roman Two opening bids (Opening of 2 and 2 to show a minimum opening hand (11 - 15 hcp) with five + in the bid suit and 4+ clubs), and a convention suggesting by Ritong he terms Riton 2. This is gazillia like rebid of 2 after 1M to show a variety of strong hands (since weak hands with a major plus clubs are opened 2M).

This is easy enough... I also play a couple of general non-traditional responses to 1M. First, I use 1M-jump to 3C/3D as invitational (but not forcing) with six in the bid suit. Second, I use 2 over either major can include all invational or game forcing balanced hand types (game force lack three or four card support), However, over 1H, I also use kaplan Inversion, where 1H-1NT = 5+ spades, and forcing 1 round, and 1H-1S = 4 or fewer spades.

After 1-1 I have been using openers 2 over 1 is riton, and traditionally, the 2 response if 4+ and weak hand (since no riton 2 bid). A 1NT rebid over this shows 4 by opener (a flannery type hand). Sometimes I rebid a 3 card diamond suit for lack of another choice.

Ok the problem here is that 1NT is often best used to show a balanced minimum hand, and some hands are unbiddable by my method.. .the worse being 3-5-2-3 and minimum opening. So I started using 1NT to be four spades or minimum balanced. but this causes some confusion in subsequent bidding. However, increasing the frequency of the 1NT rebid is actually a good thing from an xyz view point. So, I am wondering about the following possibility.

OVER 1
1) The 1NT rebid is made with any balanced minimum hand (lacking 4s. The concept being to maximize the frequency of the 1NT rebid (and remember if partner had a balanced hand of game invite values, he is likely to have started 2) so you can stay low when he is weak. This can also include any weak not-balanced hand that has five hearts and four/five diamonds (opener is known not to hold s when weak).

2) A 2 rebid remains riton 2

3) A 2 rebid now shows 4 card spade suit and weak. Responder with out can 1) correct to 2 for the 5-2 fit, 2) pass 2 if this is his long suit, 3) bid 2NT (which is not to invite --- why? Because without 4 and with game invite hand, start 2, so this is transfer to 3 in attempt to signoff there or as lebehnshol game try somewhere else). 4) raise spades.

Now, this solves some problems (mainly those dealing with situations where opener either does or does not have 's). It does introduce a funny 1NT rebid when opener is 5-5 in the reds or 5-4 in the red suits. Of course, responder is alive to the possibility that opener might have four or five diamonds. So you could, if you like, mess with the xyz 2 bid over openers rebid. If opener has four or five diamonds, he could respond 2 over responders 2 with minimum hand, and 2 over 2 with maximum hand. Consider these paradox bids. If partner meant his 2 as a way to play precisely 2, the four or five cards in 's give safety for a 3 contract. If responder meant 2 as general game try, bidding 2/2 with minimum/maximum respectifully can not be harmful, and does alert partner to the fact that you hold a diamond suit.

Anyway, thoughts on this modification?
--Ben--

#2 User is offline   inquiry 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 14,563
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amelia Island, FL
  • Interests:Bridge, what else?

Posted 2005-August-25, 08:13

Forgot to add, but it is obvious, even playing the original way, we could never play 2 after opening 1 with a minimum hand and hearing a 1 or 1NT response, because we use riton, opener can not rebid 2 with minimum (it is possible responder to pass the "strong artificial" 2 rebid, but it is very rare, but with minimum, opener can not rebid it). And we could always play 2 (xyz to it). It is still possible to play precisely 2 or 3 with this new response, and it adds the possibilty to play 1NT when holding minimum hand and diamonds.
--Ben--

#3 User is offline   glen 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,604
  • Joined: 2003-May-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa, Canada
  • Interests:Military history, WW II wargames

Posted 2005-August-25, 08:20

As I noted on rgb yesterday (a little later due to ISP having problems posting to newsgroup):

For ETM Gold Premium, version 3.1 out this fall will see this change:

1 can be a 5-3-3-2 when playing the Kaplan Inversion response. The combination of Kaplan Inversion and Gazzilli will be:

After 1-1(like forcing NT, may have 4s):
-- 1NT: balanced or 5s & 4 card minor, not big hand and no void.
-- 2: 6+s or big hand, in a Gazzilli-like approach (responder often bids 2 if 7/8+, or 2 if less).
-- 2: Delayed Flannery: 5+s, 4s, up to 16.
-- 2: 5s and a 5 card minor (or 0=5=4=4), 10-14.
-- 3m: 5+s, and 5 card minor, 15-17 or so.
etc.

Currently in ETM Gold Premium 6+s or the big hand are shown via 1NT, and 5-3-3-2 is excluded from the opening. That is:
-- 1NT: 6+s, or s and extras, or big hand
-- 2: Natural
-- 2: Delayed Flannery: 5+s, 4s, up to 16.
-- 2: 5s and 4+s, 10-13
-- 3m: 5+s, and 5 card minor, 15-17 or so.

Review over the summer showed that 1-1--1NT as 11-16 balanced or semi-balanced works well, and is able to stop in 1NT or minor suit contracts or 2.

With 1XYZ, after 1-1--1NT-2, opener with s bids 2 if minimum, and above that if maximum, since 3 will be safe in both cases if responder had a signoff for using 1XYZ. Thus 1-1--1NT-2--2 denies s and shows either balanced or s, and now 2 by responder invites with about 9 to 10.

To compare with semi-forcing 1NT response:
a ) Kaplan Inversion right sides 1NT - opener with values plays it
b ) With semi-forcing NT, opener can pass and find out responder is unsuitable for 1NT (long minor suit etc., or fit) - in this method responder decides whether it is best to play in 1NT
c ) Responder is able to show 9-10 with 2s, staying at a safe level - in forcing or semi-forcing 1NT approach, 1-1NT--2/-2 is wide ranging, 5 to 10 or so, and now opener needs to decide whether to move again if 15-17.
d ) The usual advantages of Gazzilli.
'All you are is mean / And a liar, and pathetic, and alone in life / And mean, and mean, and mean, and mean ... And all you're ever gonna be is mean / Why you gotta be so mean?' Taylor Swift
0

#4 User is offline   inquiry 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 14,563
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amelia Island, FL
  • Interests:Bridge, what else?

Posted 2005-August-25, 09:31

Great Glen, so you have experience with this. Your advice will be most helpful... I love your webpage and so many of your ETM conventions and treatments. I push a lot of them here (your jacoby 2NT+, your responding scale to takeout dbl, the 2/3 doubles, and especially your structure over opening 1NT.. it is absolutely the best, I can't imagine why eveyone isn't playing it). I guess I can now add your kaplain inversion treatment. :-) For anyone who hasn't visited the bridgematters site, go there now!!!

I have been played kaplain inversion off and on for years, Riton 2 is a very new addition to my methods however. I never liked gazzillia, but when Ritong explained adding roman 2M to a system with artificial opener 2 rebid, it all clicked for me. In the past, over kaplain inversion, a rebid on a 3 Card minor over 1 was no problem. However, the addition of riton resulted in the problem being discussed in this thread.

Hannie was the first pointed out the "stuck" nature of the system as I constructed it and posted on the web after I added "riton" to in.. he said over two months ago...

Quote

Please explain what opener does with 2-5-3-3 shape after the auction 1H-1S.

1NT shows 3 spades, 2C is strong and 2D shows 4 diamonds. Seems you're stuck!


My reply at the time was vague (essentially make the smallest lie type of reply) where I said...

Quote

Now to being stuck with 2-5-3-3 if partner bids 1S (not 1NT).

Ok, you are only "stuck" if you opened a 11-13 hcp hand. If you had 14-16, you would have opened 1NT. If you have 16 or more, easy 2C rebid.

So now you have some trashy 13 or less hcp hand. Something like, S-xx H-KQxxx D-Axx C-Kxx. Here, like always, you have to tell the best lie. One option is to rebid 2H, one is to bid 1NT, one is to create a fourth diamond with 2D. This is hardly worse than standard 2/1 GF after 1H-1NT (where they can not pass). Nor is it too different from standard 2/1 with 4S and 5H and 2-2 in the minors and partner bids 1NT. Stuck? Well yes. Three strong diamonds, bid 2D, five strong hearts, bid 2H. Those are options one and two, I lean towards 2D if no clear choice.


But looking at a lot of hands, this solution I so glibbly put foward to Hannie was no solution at all. The normal auction went 1H-1S-1NT - pass, or 1H-1NT (if sayc), pass. And here aI am rebidding a three card diamond suit or a five card heart suit. And it gets worse if you have 3 spades and 2 diamonds (yes you could pretend to have 4 and rebid 1NT, but it is the same problem).

The inability to bid "Better minor" here clearly became a recurring problem. That is opener with a weak hand had too few useful responses after 1 - 1... he had to try to show support, show , and show balanced hand with just two available bids, 1NT and 2. If 1NT had to be , the balanced hand have to rebid 2 or 2. This is just unworkable. So it was throw out Riton 2 or find a solution to the problem, I considered bidding 2 wiht four card spade suit, so responder could pass, bid 2, 2 or 2 to play. This allows 2 to still be and 1NT to be balanced. But I have lost the riton 2 bid on this auction.

I also decided I really wanted to rebid 1NT with balanced hands, but you can't rebid 1NT with 2, 3, or 4 for if you miss your 4-4 fit, and when you do the field kills you. So this meant, 2 had to be (can't afford for 2 to be , as it gives up on 2 and 1NT as contracts. Even the solution where 1NT can be or can be balanced is not perfect. But it gets you to 1NT when it is right 100% of the time, it gets you to when it is right 100% of the time, the problem is 2 contracts. You miss some of these when both opener and responder has diamonds.

Some of your advantages of kaplan inversion are not avalable for me, because certain hand types are removed earlier by my responding schedule. However, the good news came to me with a realization of what hands partner can have and he bids 1 without having spades. In my system, such hands never have: 3card heart support, balanced 10+ hcp, nor invitational hands with six card minor, nor inviational semi-balanced with five card minor. In otherwords, they are either weak balanced or weak with a long minor. Period. This turns out to be very good for me as it makes openers 2 rebid with perfectly safe bid. If parnter is weak balanced, he is weak and we can play in 5-2 fit in hearts or maybe 4-3 fit in spades (reverse mosysein). If he is weak with just a long minor, we can play in exactly 2 or 3. It also makes the 1NT response perfectly safe when partner has the same weak hands without spades. We can play in all the same contracts plus 1NT.

Also, I have a slight advantage over your methods in that my 1NT rebid can never include clubs. So the 5/4 hands will never be there. I am considering what a 2NT rebid should be over 1.

So the downside would be when partner has four or more diamonds, or without four spades, and opener lacks spades. Now opener will rebid 1NT. Responder, may very well pass 1NT with weak balanced hand with four diamonds and a 5-4 fit in diamonds be missed. But if we are weak and have a nine card fit in diamonds, surely they can make something in one of the black suits. And 1NT isn't always horrible.

So far this is only theoretical. But last time I made a theoretical change (adding riton 2) I overlooked the gapping problems it introduced. The solution you posted seems just about right for me too (some systemic differences make the followups different). I can't wait to read other treatments in this area when you publish the new version.

Ben
--Ben--

#5 User is offline   inquiry 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 14,563
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amelia Island, FL
  • Interests:Bridge, what else?

Posted 2005-August-25, 10:27

A side issue. There is some question about rather or not I need xyz on the auction:

1-1-1NT, where 1 is kaplain, if 1NT denies four spades.

The reason is that a 2 rebid by responder is now a freebie as an artificial game force thingee, or artificial game invite (your choice). And if responder is strong with values in either minor, a jump to 3 or 3 is always available. So this raises the interesting possibilty that 2 and 2 rebids can go back to being normal, every old "let's play this minor". Based on the presumption of a fit. Or you could use just one of the minors as a game try, maybe 2 with presumed fit, and 2 as a signoff (still keeping 2 as artificial game force). The fact that 2 can't be a rebiddable suit offers some interesting possibilities when combined with the limited options available when opener rebids 1NT over the 1. Maybe the simpliest choice is:

2/2/2 all to play
2NT = natural invite with four card suit
2 = game force with or without four card major
3/3 = game invite, this suit and four spades.
--Ben--

#6 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,227
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2005-August-25, 10:37

officeglen, on Aug 25 2005, 05:20 PM, said:

For ETM Gold Premium, version 3.1 out this fall will see this change:

1 can be a 5-3-3-2 when playing the Kaplan Inversion response.  The combination of Kaplan Inversion and Gazzilli will be:

After 1-1(like forcing NT, may have 4s):
-- 1NT: balanced or 5s & 4 card minor, not big hand and no void.
-- 2: 6+s or big hand, in a Gazzilli-like approach (responder often bids 2 if 7/8+, or 2 if less).
-- 2: Delayed Flannery: 5+s, 4s, up to 16.
-- 2: 5s and a 5 card minor (or 0=5=4=4), 10-14.
-- 3m: 5+s, and 5 card minor, 15-17 or so.
etc.

Silly comment:

At what point in time, do you stop call this the Kaplan Inversion and start admitting that you're playing a relay system...

Oh yeah, you aren't ALLOWED to admit that you're playing a relay system...
Alderaan delenda est
0

#7 User is offline   inquiry 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 14,563
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amelia Island, FL
  • Interests:Bridge, what else?

Posted 2005-August-25, 10:46

hrothgar, on Aug 25 2005, 12:37 PM, said:

Silly comment:

At what point in time, do you stop call this the Kaplan Inversion and start admitting that you're playing a relay system...

Oh yeah, you aren't ALLOWED to admit that you're playing a relay system...

It's your birthday (happy birthday) so we will happily entertain this question. But richard, don't you recognize 2/1 when you see it. :-)
--Ben--

#8 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,227
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2005-August-25, 10:55

inquiry, on Aug 25 2005, 07:46 PM, said:

It's your birthday (happy birthday) so we will happily entertain this question. But richard, don't you recognize 2/1 when you see it. :-)

Sorry: I shouldn't make snarky comments
However, this is just SO very amusing

I've been preaching the same basic philosophy for as long as I can recall: "If you play light opening, then you need make serious adjustments to your response structure"

I've also stated that

1. I personally prefer relay methods
2. If you're going to play relay, you might as well use the first step as your relay rather than 2 (or some such...)

Given the complexity of the "Kaplan Inversion", I suggest that you embrace the dark side and openly admit that you're playing relay. Who knows. You might even be able to use your 2/2 openings for preempts again...
Alderaan delenda est
0

#9 User is offline   pclayton 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,151
  • Joined: 2003-June-11
  • Location:Southern California

Posted 2005-August-25, 12:28

Ben, without getting into the nuts and bolts of your Gazzilli idea, do you really need it when you play the limited 2 opening?
"Phil" on BBO
0

#10 User is offline   glen 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,604
  • Joined: 2003-May-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa, Canada
  • Interests:Military history, WW II wargames

Posted 2005-August-25, 12:39

hrothgar, on Aug 25 2005, 04:55 PM, said:

I've also stated that

1. I personally prefer relay methods
2. If you're going to play relay, you might as well use the first step as your relay rather than 2 (or some such...)

Fallenius-Welland use the first step over 1M as the forcing NT, and I think it is essential if you want to have any hope of effectively unwinding the constructive and game invite hands over the openings. For a whole bunch of years I worked on embedding relays into 1NT forcing, but not a success. First step works fine on transfer openings if playing insect systems.

Once doesn't need to play 2M openings as 5+ in a M and 4+s to still have these types of structures. One level openings make it easier to find a 5-3 fit in OM. For example over a 2 opening showing 5+s and 4+s, a 2 response cannot cover both 6+s to play and finding a 5-3 fit while staying low.

Ben - like the idea of 2 as the game force over 1NT. Still need something for a range check over 1NT. Perhaps 2 as the range check, and 2 as 4-4 or better minors (or 5-3 with 5s), often with singleton/void in s. This needs work but the overall structure feels very right. Thanks for the kind words on BridgeMatters.
'All you are is mean / And a liar, and pathetic, and alone in life / And mean, and mean, and mean, and mean ... And all you're ever gonna be is mean / Why you gotta be so mean?' Taylor Swift
0

#11 User is offline   inquiry 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 14,563
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amelia Island, FL
  • Interests:Bridge, what else?

Posted 2005-August-25, 13:17

pclayton, on Aug 25 2005, 02:28 PM, said:

Ben, without getting into the nuts and bolts of your Gazzilli idea, do you really need it when you play the limited 2 opening?

The "limited" nature of my 2 opening bid is very limited indeed.

When I open 2 I have either.

1) Game force Balanced hand, say 25+

2) Game force Minor one suiter or Major one suiter. For my purposes, one suiter is defined as five or more in one suit. I may have a second four card suit. But it is game force opposite a blizzard

3) Strong 3 suiter (4-4-50, 4441, 40-45, all with 5 losers or less, or 54-40 with 3 losers or less).

4) Or an Acol two in a major, characterized by 6+ suit, 5+ controls, and promises 8 tricks in the major.

The strong two suiters go through MisIry, the very strong minor one suiter (the acol types) go through 2. This means there are some fairly big hands (18-21) that are not opened with one of the speciallize bids. IF they are not balanced, they tend to bd 6-4. I find Riton 2 useful to seperate a few hand types. Noteable, 6-4 hands from 5-5 hands not good enough for Misiry, and to ahve a useful bid when I end up with one of the very few hand types that don't fall nicely into my bidding structure.

For instnace, lets take just a major one suiter for example. The GF one, we all agree starts 2. But I will also open 1 on AKQJxxx J A Jxxx (A hand I held last night). I have 7S + 1D, I have five controls. Just too strong for 4D opening.

Let'st weaken it a tad bid, how about, AQJxxxx J A Jxxx? Now I open 1S and jump rebid 3. Will my partner get excited by my jump rebid? No, because this is well defined. Good suit, but not able to open 2.

Change it again, to... AJxxxx KQ A Jxxx, now I open 1S and rebid 2 over forcing 1NT. Then when I bids 2 next, partner knows I ahve a nice hand, but my suit is not suitable for opening 2 or jump rebidding 3 or even jumping to 3 after 2. Now move a few cards around, giving me...

AJxxxx xx x AKQx, now I rebid 2 after opening 1 then rebid 3, partner knows I have only 4 clubs becasue I didn't jump to 3 over 1NT. Change it again, AJxxx xx x AKQxx, now I do jump to 3 directly over 1NT. Partner knows I am 5-5 or better, but hand not suited for misiry. Something like this.

So the answer is yes, I like the added flexibility that Gazzilli like structure offers me here.
--Ben--

#12 User is offline   Echognome 

  • Deipnosophist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,386
  • Joined: 2005-March-22

Posted 2005-August-25, 22:36

Richard's point is interesting about what constitutes a relay versus some other bid. In the EBU's proposed next version of the Orange Book is written:

Quote

Allowed at Levels 3 and 4

11 D 8 Continuation

All responses and continuations are allowed with or without intervention.


I should add that this is only the proposal and will not be official until it is approved by the Laws and Ethics Committee. However, it will be a big change in policy as the EBU will only be regulating opening bids. For those of you not familiar with the different levels, almost all clubs play at level 3 and most tournaments are level 4. (So think approximately GCC and midchart.)
"Half the people you know are below average." - Steven Wright
0

#13 User is offline   Chamaco 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,902
  • Joined: 2003-December-02
  • Location:Rimini-Bologna (Italy)
  • Interests:Chess, Bridge, Jazz, European Cinema, Motorbiking, Tango dancing

Posted 2005-August-26, 04:48

In the Nightmare system, Buratti Lanzarotti use:

1:1(Kaplan Inv)

and they furter reverse 1NT and 2, so now

1NT = Gazzilli (Strong hand or minimum with 3+ , as responding to 1NT forcing)
2 = 4 spades, "normal" hand
"Bridge is like dance: technique's important but what really matters is not to step on partner's feet !"
1

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • 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