[jtfanclub]

In my Precision variant, I once tried a raise of 1!S-2!S (and 1!H-2!H) as absolute signoff. We had it that opener couldn't bid without a two-suiter, but I'd like to discuss the case here where opener must pass with any hand, even (or should I say, especially) when the next player doubles or overcalls. I've since stopped playing it, partly because the Alert was causing too many problems, and partly because too many opponents weren't LAW-abiders so it wasn't needed.

How many points does my partner have? Why should I care? I have a little green card that's coming out on my round anyways. When my partner makes his next call, I'll know what my partner has, and explain it to the opponents. If my partner doesn't have a next call, well, I'll know after the opening lead.

There's lots of inferences here. For one example, either partner wants to play in 2!S or he's willing to risk playing in 2!S in hopes of getting a juicy X of a balancing bid. But that's just bridge logic. We play 2/1 as non-forcing (1!S-2!C is 8-11 or so with a club suit), so there's a negative inference there. And then there's the fact that partner had eight gazillion ways to invite, and didn't pick any of them, but that's both bridge logic and a negative inference. Most likely, partner has exactly two support tricks: with three he'd invite, with one 2!S isn't safe. But he's free to break that rule any time he'd like, since he knows what I'm going to do next.

So, how do you explain it?

[Winstonm]

Alert.

Explain please.

Partner's bid says he believes our combined hands will never produce more than 9 tricks. He has no minimum but could hold as much as 10-11 HCP. I am barred from bidding again.

[P_Marlowe]

jtfanclub, on Jul 22 2006, 12:41 PM, said:

<snip>
But that's just bridge logic. We play 2/1 as non-forcing (1!S-2!C is 8-11 or so with a club suit), so there's a negative inference there. And then there's the fact that partner had eight gazillion ways to invite, and didn't pick any of them, but that's both bridge logic and a negative inference.
<snip>

Just bridge logic? But there is negative interference?
Are those two statements not contradicting each other?

Alert and explain.

With kind regrads
Marlowe

[willow23]

I do not bother alert 1m-2m...but if opps do ask...I just put 6-9 hcp, 3♥/♠ whatever the case may be..or if after overcall..9-10 hcp, 3♥/♠

Small matters

[Flame]

I dont see the probem here just tell them: "0-9 hcp, signoff" also tell them how many spades it shows (does it implay exactly 3 cards ?)

[mycroft]

The problem is that it's not "signoff" - it's "signoff, I am not allowed to bid even with a monster, can't double, can't redouble". If you are not allowed to raise with AKQxxxxx and out, or a just-under-1C 6-5 hand, "signoff" doesn't cut it.

Note that this agreement may be regulated in certain places as a potential psychic control (especially if you *do* ever "psych" it - playing 5cM it probably isn't a problem but playing 4cM, if you raise to 2S with 0455 2-count, and partner doesn't - isn't allowed to - hit 4S when they get there, ...).

Michael.

[pclayton]

Don't call it a signoff. Just alert and say 'wide range' (and explain what the range is) when asked.

[jtfanclub]

[quote name='mycroft' date='Jul 24 2006, 03:23 PM'] The problem is that it's not "signoff" - it's "signoff, I am not allowed to bid even with a monster, can't double, can't redouble". If you are not allowed to raise with AKQxxxxx and out, or a just-under-1C 6-5 hand, "signoff" doesn't cut it.

Note that this agreement may be regulated in certain places as a potential psychic control (especially if you *do* ever "psych" it - playing 5cM it probably isn't a problem but playing 4cM, if you raise to 2S with 0455 2-count, and partner doesn't - isn't allowed to - hit 4S when they get there, ...).

Michael. [/quote]
I'm afraid you've hit it on the head, there.

The problem is, if 1S shows 11-15 hcp with 5+ spades, and 2S shows 3+ spades and 6-9 hcp, the LAW says it's never right for your opponents to pass it out. So the only point of using 2S to show that is to let them exchange information.

But then, I thought...well, if the opponents are always going to bid over 2S, shouldn't we put the hands that want to penalty double whatever they bid in there as well? You have a 10 count with a spade void and no 6 card suit, a penalty double of them at the 3 level is probably profitable. And then there's hands between those two that become nice as well, like balanced 8 counts with two card spade support. In an MP game, it's unlikely that you'll regret not being able to make a game try. Or 4 spades, a singleton, and no points. Who knows, maybe if you haven't shown a fit you'll get to steal it.

So it ends up being 0-9 hcp and 0-5 spades, but obviously 0-7 hcp and 0 spades, or 5-9 hcp and 5 spades, aren't going to be included. My last idea was "signoff, usually 6-9 hcp and 2-3 card support but could be a wide range of hands", but that just breeds more confusion.

[quoteJust bridge logic? But there is negative interference?
Are those two statements not contradicting each other? [/quote]

The negative inference is that responder didn't invite, so he must not have an invitational hand. The bridge logic is that every system must have an invitational bid over 1S, therefore responder must have been able to invite and didn't. Or, maybe that's not a good way to put it.

[awm]

I'd just say:

"He wants to play 2♠ regardless of my hand. I am not allowed to bid further under any circumstances."

I don't think this is much harder to describe than the "normal" 4♠ raise playing precision, where bidder might have a pure preempt, or a balanced thirteen-count with three card support, or a wide range of hands in between those extremes.

Of course, I also don't think this is a particularly good method. I've played precision with 9-15 hcp major openings a lot with various partners and found the auction 1♠-2♠-4♠ to be surprisingly common (playing normal raises). For example I would never consider opening the following hand with a strong club but four spades makes easily opposite many single raises:

KQJxxxx
AQxx
xx
-

[jtfanclub]

awm, on Jul 24 2006, 09:16 PM, said:

For example I would never consider opening the following hand with a strong club but four spades makes easily opposite many single raises:

KQJxxxx
AQxx
xx
-

Switch the hearts and diamonds and it's a clear 4S opener in our system. We actually have a bid for the hand you've shown, but if not, well, the few times it comes up open it 4S and if it turns out hearts were better buy your partner a beer. A six pack will last you a lifetime.

I don't like the "He wants to play 2S regardless of my hand" because opps will get very upset if he's trapping for a penalty X when they balance.