[mike777]

Assume Walsh and xyz or 2 way checkback

What the heck is the best use of:
1c=1d
1nt=2c or 2d?

Assume 1D is either game force or weaker without a 4 card major. Responder denies an invite hand with a 4 card major.
Assume 1c=3+ but will be 4 often.
Assume 1nt rebid=11-13. Remember opener may still have a 4 card major. But will not be unbalanced with 5 clubs and 4 card major.
Assume 2h or 2s by responder would be 100% natural and game force
Assume 2nt by responder would be natural and good invite.

Thanks in advance.

[mikeh]

I see absolutely no reason why 2♣ should not be a puppet to 2♦, either to play or preparing to make an invitational bid, nor why 2♦ ought not to be an artificial game force.

In other words, treat it the same as if the bidding had gone 1minor 1major 1N or 1♥ 1♠ 1N.

While my 1N is either 11-14 or 14-16 or 13-16 depending on who I am playing with and the vulnerability/seat, the range of the 1N rebid is irrelevant.

The beauty of 2♦ as gf remains: you get to begin exploring alternate levels and denominations at a low level, while exempting from 2♦ some specific hands.

Thus a jump to 3♦ can be used either as invitational or as forcing: your choice. If forcing, then it shows a different hand than 2♦ followed by 3♦: I use the immediate jump to show a good suit while the delayed rebid shows a broken suit, and thus (for a hand of equivalent value) more outside. If 3!D is invitational, then 2♣ followed by 3♦ shows a 'different' hand: usually focusing on suit quality.

A jump to 3♣ would show a picture 5-5 or better minors, while 2♦ followed by 3♣ shows more wide-spread values etc.

I have special meanings for the 2N puppet to 3♣, which meanings are as valid in your sequence as after a major response.

I was overbidding when I said I saw NO reason to change Obviously one gives up on playing precisely 2♣. Unless you are playing against Trappist monks, whose vow of silence extends to bidding boxes, the chances that you are both able and right to play 2♣ is remote. You can have the rights to my 2♣ contracts in these sequences for the price of a used subway token.

[mikeh]

No: I apologze for omitting these 2M would be a natural, gf reverse. I admit that I have no current use for 1♣ 1♦ 1N 2♣ 2♦ 2♥/♠

It is of course possible to use the 2♣ puppet to 2♦ followed by a major as invitational. I choose not to probably more out of laziness than any other reason. Not laziness in this sequence but because it would require me rethinking and probably changing other auctions including my 1♣ 1♦ 2♣ and 1♣ 1♦ 2N auctions, which are currently designed around the notion that responder will bypass ♦ with a less than gf hand: the adjustments might not need to be significant, but, like I say, I am lazy

[awm]

Here's a suggestion; this is not what I generally play in part because I don't use Walsh style:

1♣-1♦-1NT...

2♣/♦ = natural signoff; probably useful to be able to get to 2♣ here at times.
2♥ = game force; either natural with hearts or a strong minor-oriented slam try
2♠ = game force; natural
2NT = normal invite
3♣/♦ = invitational
3♥/♠ = major suit splinter bid, something like 3154/3145 distribution

After 1♣-1♦-1NT-2♥; opener bids 2♠ relay and then:

2NT = 5+♦ and 4♥
3♣ = slam try in clubs; cancels the heart bid
3♦ = slam try in diamonds; cancels the heart bid
3♥ = 5♥ and 6+♦

[Fluffy]

I see 2 ways to play it:

1♣-1♦
1NT-2♣
2♦-2♥ as GF relay asking for exact distribution using next bid as next relay, then maybe eve ask for aces and kings and queens....

1♣-1♦
1NT-2♣
2♦-2♥ as 4♥+5♦ limit hand

[pclayton]

Here's how we play it. We've wrestled with a lot of the same issues playing a Walsh-type structure, but since we play 12-14 NT's we don't bypass longer diamonds unless the hand is really bad.

After 1♣ - 1♦ - 1N (15-17):

2♣ - ♦'s or an invite (8-9 ish)
2♦ - game forcing; but some doubt about strain
2♥ / 2♠ - fragment and same values as 2♣
2N - puppet to 3♣. A pull shows values for 3N but doubt about a major (this is new).
3x - Game forcing. If its a delayed raise or rebid of resonder's suit; it SETS the SUIT.

[mike777]

Wow! Thanks for a lot of great ideas. I am leaning toward playing the style listed below but based on the great ideas from above will rethink this. Again thanks.

Any feedback about below is always welcomed.
Btw in this style I do not play inverted minors or WJS or SJS. Most jumpshifts are raises of some kind or another.


1C 1D
1NT ??

2C....Game forcing Checkback...(used for forcing hand when responder has no 4 card major and isn't certain about 3NT)
Opener should rebid 3C with 5 clubs, and rebid 3D with 4 diamonds. With both majors well stopped, opener rebids NT,
When he can't make any of those bids, he should bid the major where he has the most strength....Remember, the 2C
bid i! s NOT looking for a 4-4 major fit.

2D.......to play
2H.......4 Hearts, game forcing.....
2S.......4 Spades, game forcing...
2NT.....invitational
3C......invitational
3D......invitational

You can't sign off in clubs....if you had 5 card club support, no 4 card major, and a weak hand, you should have bid 3C the first time...

[Winstonm]

While there is some merit to separating strength with checkback when the auction begins 1C-1D-1H or 1C-1H-1S, when opener limits his hand with a 1N rebid what is the point?

1C-1D
1N.

In walsh, I can bid 2H and 2S as natural game forces - what I have trouble with is a stong club or diamond hand. Hence, 2C is only needed to show powerful club raise or a powerful diamond hand. No need for 2 way.

1C-1H/1S
1N.

Again, opener is limited. Why do I need to separate 3 hands? One of the benefits of Walsh style bidding is that it is natural. Here, 2D is natural and weak - 3D natural and invitational with 6 diamonds. In these sequences when opener has limited his strength, responder only needs to divide invites from game forcing - and the same bid works for both. Seems to me in this auction all you may really be interesed in is game in NT, games/slams in the major, games/slams in either minor, and all can be shown with a single forcing bid as long as diamonds can be bid naturally.

It doesn't compute in my brain: 2-way checkback is like playing 2-way Stayman over weak NTs when responder cannot hold a major - what's the point?

When the auction begins: 1C-1D-1S, though, neither hand is stictly limited - but here you have 2H as 4th suit semi-natural, so again it seems that only 1 bid is needed to invite/force.

I believe a better way is this: use 2C as the only force. Opener, with any hand that would not accept an invitation, bids 2D, supports with 3 of a major and a maximum, and bids 2 of either major with other maximums. Responder may then follow with a lebensohl-like 2N relay to 3C for futher clarification or bid directly at the 3 level.

This structure allows 2D/3D to be used naturally, allows a sign off in 3C, and separates with 2N the game force from game interest minor hands.

Winston

[mike777]

Thanks for your thoughts. I must admit I am one of those that play 2 way stayman over weak nt without a 4 card major promised. The reason is that it makes for an easy slam probe structure.

This is assuming I am not playing Luke's fancy relay system. .

[luke warm]

hey, it ain't that fancy (btw, i think it's actually truscott who developed the 2D gf stayman)

as for the walsh/ckback thing, i play kind of like phil regardless of my 1nt range.. i like his treatment of 2M in this auction showing an invitational fragment, with 4M, bid 2C first... with a 4pcM i'd have responded in it first, unless strong enough to first mention d's

Winstonm said:

1C-1H/1S
1N

if you're responder here, how do you bid a 3532 six count? how about 3532 11 count?

Quote

1C-1D
1N.

In walsh, I can bid 2H and 2S as natural game forces - what I have trouble with is a stong club or diamond hand.

why? assuming you mean a gf club or diamond hand
1c : 1d
1nt : 2d
2any : 3c or 3d
should do it...

[Winstonm]

luke warm, on Dec 9 2005, 07:34 PM, said:

hey, it ain't that fancy   (btw, i think it's actually truscott who developed the 2D gf stayman)

as for the walsh/ckback thing, i play kind of like phil regardless of my 1nt range.. i like his treatment of 2M in this auction showing an invitational fragment, with 4M, bid 2C first... with a 4pcM i'd have responded in it first, unless strong enough to first mention d's

Winstonm said:

1C-1H/1S
1N

if you're responder here, how do you bid a 3532 six count? how about 3532 11 count?

Quote

1C-1D
1N.

In walsh, I can bid 2H and 2S as natural game forces - what I have trouble with is a stong club or diamond hand.

why? assuming you mean a gf club or diamond hand
1c : 1d
1nt : 2d
2any : 3c or 3d
should do it...

With 2533 6 count I pass.

With 11 count I bid 2C, invitational or better. Pard bids 2D, I bid 2H, and he knows what I've got - 5 hearts and an invite. He can pass or sign off in 2N. With 6 hearts and an invite we bid direct 3H. If he bids the other major to show a max, I bid 3H. He can bid 3N or 4 hearts. This has worked well so far. If I need to create a force, I bid 3H over 2D as this does not promise 6 unless trying for a slam. With game force 6 we get to bid 4H as we do not bid 1N on singletons.

With game forcing minors as responder, I can bid 2C then over either 2D or a major bid 3C or 3D as forcing since I have direct 3C and direct 3D as invitational and 2D as natural and weak and 2N relay to play 3C with a weak hand.

Due to our game try structure, our system does not allow us as opener to raise a major with only 3-card support so all 12-14 balanced hands must rebid 1N. We know this is somewhat flawed and accept that flaw for more game bidding accuracy; hence, with a 5-card major and reason to believe that NT is not a reasonable contract, we simply rebid the 5-card major. We do not rebid 1N with a singleton.

Our focus is on imp play and our philosophy is when sacrifice to system is necessary partscore accuracy is the first to go. Our system would be totally different if we played mostly matchpointed events.

I still don't understand the need for 2-way checkback or xyc or abc or whatever - invitational hands have so far not been difficult to bid using Walsh once we figured out how to use 2C as a multiple method.

Winston

[luke warm]

i'd have bid 2H on the first hand, which is why i asked, but ok... playing 2 way ckback, the only bid you lose is a natural 2c... the same can be said of many conventions/treatments, stayman being the most obvious

[Winstonm]

luke warm, on Dec 9 2005, 11:21 PM, said:

i'd have bid 2H on the first hand, which is why i asked, but ok... playing 2 way ckback, the only bid you lose is a natural 2c... the same can be said of many conventions/treatments, stayman being the most obvious

Well, the option is there to bid 2H, sure. I just sometimes feel like I'm all alone on a desert island with everyone subscribing to xyz or 2-way checkback and I just don't get it....makes me feel dumb.

I haven't been able to grasp the logic or the need for using two artificial bids in these sequences and I keep wondering if I'm missing something - seems to me that the more artificiality you introduce into Walsh the less reason to play it - my judgement of Walsh and the reason I like it is there are so few reasons to have non-natural sequences and that horror of horrors - fourth suit forcing - is almost non-existent (at least tethered and chained down in the dungeon where it belongs and brought out only late at night when the children are in bed asleep.)

So if I came across wrong, accept my apology; it's not you but me feeling dumb; is there really some reason to use 2 different bids instead of one when it seems that only one is needed? Inquiring (and slightly addled) minds (mine) want to know.

Winston

[Robert]

Hi everyone

xyz convention is like a license to print money.

It is of somewhat less use in a walsh auction, however, I play a Big Club system and the advantages are tremendous.

1D-1H-1S-2C and 2D here give me many additional ways to bid my hands.

Use 1C-1D-1NT and 2C as a puppet to 2Ds either to pass or inv.

Use 1C-1D-1NT-2D=GF

I use the 2C-2D step to 'narrow' the range of my 2NT inv. bids.

Direct 1NT-2NT show minimum interest and 2C-2D-2NT show max. interest.

You can also show a multiple number of minor raises/rebids and shape showing bids by using the same bidding space twice. First after 1C-1D-1NT and another time after 1C-1D-1NT-2C-2D

You get yet another chance to use up all of that lovely bidding space in a GF auction after 1C-1D-1NT-2D

If you have good NT bidding mehtods, you have replace all(many?) of the bids higher than 2Cs in this auction with your superior NT methods.

I use 1NT-2C and use many follow up bids to show shortness, long minors. exact 1345 or 1246 patterns, Confit(balanced slam trys), BABY CONFIT for minor suit balanced slam trys etc. etc.

You can also sign off in 2Ds using the 2C-2D puppet.

As has been already posted, the ability to bid and play 2Cs is a seldom worthwhile auction.

Regards,
Robert

[luke warm]

Winstonm, on Dec 10 2005, 12:11 AM, said:

Well, the option is there to bid 2H, sure. I just sometimes feel like I'm all alone on a desert island with everyone subscribing to xyz or 2-way checkback and I just don't get it....makes me feel dumb.
I haven't been able to grasp the logic or the need for using two artificial bids in these sequences and I keep wondering if I'm missing something - seems to me that the more artificiality you introduce into Walsh the less reason to play it - my judgement of Walsh and the reason I like it is there are so few reasons to have non-natural sequences and that horror of horrors - fourth suit forcing - is almost non-existent (at least tethered and chained down in the dungeon where it belongs and brought out only late at night when the children are in bed asleep.)

i'm not a big fan of 4sf either... as for the logic of having the 2 bids, there's something comforting (to me) in knowing immediately whether or not we're in a gf or forcing pass auction.. i'm sure you can concoct auctions where interference after responder's 2c bid can leave opener unsure

another thing, and this is more on style i guess, but i was taught that responder's reverse in walsh isn't necessarily a game force.. for example, this bidding can show an 11 point hand playing "straight" walsh:

1c (p) 1d (p) 1nt (p) 2h

now it's true you can deem that a game force, but unless i'm mistaken it wasn't always so (playing walsh it was called a "responsive reverse")... it just seems so much easier to have a bid that guarantees a hand is invitational, one that does the same for gf hands, etc

anyway, whatever you're comforable with