[MickyB]

I'm trying to work out the best responses to an opening bid showing -

10-15 points, 4+♥, denies 4♠; unbalanced (potentially canapé) unless 5♥332

A few of the older MOSCITO variants used a similar 1♥ opening, except it often could be a balanced hand, any ideas what they used? I've found two structures so far -

Magic Diamond - 1♠ natural, 1N/2♣/2♦ transfers
Terrorist Moscito - 1♠ relay, 1N nat, 2♣ good raise, 2♦ unbal, constructive, no fit

Any advances?

Thanks

This post has been edited by MickyB: 2007-January-18, 22:08

[Echognome]

The answer to this depends highly on whether you are going to play a relay (GF or INV+) or not. If you are going to play a relay, then you will need either 1♠ or 1NT as the relay. (My personal opinion is that 2♣ will devalue the benefits of the relay as you will be resolving shapes too high, in particular because your 1♥ can be 4 and also canape.) As another aside, why not play transfer openings?

Anyway, if you are going to use a relay, you will still want some bid to show spades, just not 4 of them. You can think alternatively that if you want a bid like 1NT to show 5+ clubs, why wouldn't you want a bid that shows 5+ spades? I personally prefer 1♠ is natural (5+) and 1NT is the GF relay. The reasons for that are that you have plenty of room over 1NT to show all of the shapes you need (I believe you can show 89 shapes if 1N is the relay and since your 1♥ denies 4♠ you won't have to worry about a short or long 2-suiter with spades). This eases the bidding after 1♠ which I would play as 5+ with <GF values. You will then want a bid to show an invitational hand without 5♠ and without support, which 2♣ could fit (I have a scheme if you're interested) and 2♦ to be invitational with support (I prefer 4 card support, but some like 3). Then you can use 2♥ as a simple raise and higher bids to your preference (such as mini-splinters, fit jumps, bergen, weak, whatever).

An alternative relay route is to simply play 1♠ and 1NT (either way to your choosing as relay or showing spades) and your 2/1s as NF. I just found that those hands didn't come up often enough and you will often play in 2m instead of 1NT, which makes your system less useful at MPs.

Alternatively, you can go the non relay route, in which case responder will want to show suits and the transfer scheme can work well.

Note that you can play something different in competition than you do uncontested. (e.g. after 1M - (Dbl) - ? I play transfers starting with 1NT and that has proven to be very useful)

So I guess it's all down to a matter of taste to your design. If you have relays elsewhere in your system, it makes sense to play relays. If you are generally bidding naturally, then bid naturally. If you are using a lot of transfers, then play transfers. Just don't mix it up too much or you will have a difficult time with memory.

[MickyB]

Thanks Matt.

Quote

As another aside, why not play transfer openings?

I considered a 1♦ opening showing hearts, but I think my current 1♦ opening (any hand in range with precisely 4 spades) needs the space more, mainly because of the need to be able to find 4-4 heart fits at a low level. From a competitive point of view, it's advantageous to have those hands in the the opening showing spades rather than the opening showing hearts, e.g. a responding hand with 1♠4♥ will often be happy to preempt to 4♥ with the current definition.

Quote

Note that you can play something different in competition than you do uncontested. (e.g. after 1M - (Dbl) - ? I play transfers starting with 1NT and that has proven to be very useful)

Good point.

Quote

So I guess it's all down to a matter of taste to your design. If you have relays elsewhere in your system, it makes sense to play relays. If you are generally bidding naturally, then bid naturally. If you are using a lot of transfers, then play transfers. Just don't mix it up too much or you will have a difficult time with memory.

Meh...half the fun is playing something unnecessarily complicated

[awm]

It seems like the main problem is:

(1) You'd like either 1♠ or 1NT as a game forcing relay.
(2) You'd like either 1♠ or 1NT to show 5+♠.
(3) You'd like either 1♠ or 1NT as a weakish "forcing notrump" type bid.

With three meanings and two bids, you basically need to merge a pair of them. There are various ways to do this:

(1) Let 1♠ be the relay, but not always GF. Opener's rebids need to be somewhat natural in spirit, so responder can pass them with a forcing NT type hand. I think this is what some members of OZ-1 do currently.

(2) Let 1♠ be either 5+♠ or a GF relay, and 1NT as the "forcing notrump" type bid. You need to make sure any hands which involve a fairly high-level rebid directly after the relay are hands with 3♠. In principle something like: 1NT = 4+♦ as 2nd suit, 2♣ = 4+♣ and short spades or 2-2 residue, 2♦ = 4+♦, three-suited short spades, 2♥ = 6+♥ one suited and short (0-2) spades, 2♠ = 6+♥ or ♥+♣ and 3♠.

(3) Let 1NT be the GF relay, and 1♠ is a "weak relay" which could contain long spades. Then after 1♥-1♠ opener would rebid in a fairly natural manner with a priority on showing spade length (say 1NT rebid shows 3♠ and other rebids are natural and deny 3♠).

[Kaapo]

Ok, so Matt challenged me to develop a relay structure starting at 2♣.

Here goes:

1[he] = 10-15, 4+[he], 0-3[sp], unbal or 5332, may have 5+m
 [space]- 2[cl] = GF relay
 [space] [space]- 2[di] = 54+ [he]+[cl] or 5332
 [space] [space] [space]- 2[he] = rel
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 2[sp] = 54+ [he]+[cl], 0-1[sp]
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 2N = 5332 or 5422
 [space] [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[cl] = rel
 [space] [space] [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[di] = 5422, 3[he] relays
 [space] [space] [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[he] = 2-5-3-3
 [space] [space] [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[sp] = 3-5-2-3
 [space] [space] [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3N = 3-5-3-2
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[cl] = 4[he] 5+[cl], 0-1[di]
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[di] = 5+[he] 5+[cl], 0-1[di]
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[he] = 3-5-1-4
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[sp] = 2-6-1-4
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3N = 3-6-0-4
 [space] [space]- 2[he] = 6+[he], 1-suiter
 [space] [space]- 2[sp] = 54+ [he]+[di], 0-1[sp]
 [space] [space]- 2N = 2-(54)-2 or 3-suiter short in [sp]s
 [space] [space] [space]- 3[cl] = rel
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[di] = 5422, 3[he] relays
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[he] = 0-4-(54)
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[sp] = 0-5-4-4
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3N = 1-4-4-4
 [space] [space]- 3[cl] = 4[he] 5+[di], 0-1[cl]
 [space] [space]- 3[di] = 5+[he] 5+[di], 0-1[cl]
 [space] [space]- 3[he] = 3-5-4-1
 [space] [space]- 3[sp] = 2-6-4-1
 [space] [space]- 3N = 3-6-4-0.

It resolves most shapes below the 4-level. Maybe a tad high for an intelligent slam exploration to work though...


Here's the rest of the structure, too (with lots of typing/thing errors I'm sure):

1[he] = 10-15, 4+[he], 0-3[sp], unbal or 5332, may have 5+m
 [space]- 1[sp] = 5+[sp], F1
 [space] [space]- 1N = 4[he] or 2-5-3-3, no 3[sp]
 [space] [space] [space]- 2[cl] = GF relay
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 2[di] = 10-13, no 6m
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 2[he] = 10-13, 6+m
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 2[sp] = 14-15, 1-4-4-4/0-4-(54)
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 2N = 14-15, 4[he] 5[cl] 1-2[sp] 2-3[di]
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[cl] = 14-15, 2-5-3-3
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[di] = 14-15, 2-4-5-2
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[he] = 14-15, 1-4-5-3
 [space] [space] [space]- 2[di] = 9-11, weak invite, 5[sp]4m or 5[sp]3[he]
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 2[he] = 14-15
 [space] [space] [space] [space] [space]- 2[sp] = 9-10, 5[sp]4m
 [space] [space] [space] [space] [space]- 2N = 9-10, 5[sp]3[he]
 [space] [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3m = 10-11, 5[sp]4m
 [space] [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[he] = 10-11, 5[sp]3[he]
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 2[sp] = 10-13, 2[sp]
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 2N = 10-13, 1-4-4-4/1-4-(53)/0-4-(54)
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3m = 10-13, 6+m
 [space] [space] [space]- 2[he] = 6-9, 5+[sp] 3[he]
 [space] [space] [space]- 2[sp] = 8-11, 6+[sp]
 [space] [space] [space]- 2N = 12-13, invite
 [space] [space] [space]- 3m = 12-13, invite
 [space] [space] [space]- 3[he] = 12-13, 6+[sp] 3[he]
 [space] [space] [space]- 3[sp] = 12-13, 6+[sp] 0-2[he]
 [space] [space]- 2[cl] = 5+[he] 4+[cl]
 [space] [space]- 2[di] = 5+[he] 4+[di]
 [space] [space]- 2[he] = 6+[he]
 [space] [space]- 2[sp] = 3[sp]
 [space] [space]- 2N = 14-15, 3[sp] and a shortness
 [space] [space]- 3m = 14-15, 4[he] 6+m
 [space] [space]- 3[he] = 14-15, good 6+[he], 0-2[sp]
 [space] [space]- 3[sp] = 14-15, good 6+[he], 3[sp]
 [space]- 1N = 6-11, 0-4[sp], 0-2[he]
 [space] [space]pass = 10-13 5332 or 5422
 [space] [space]- 2[cl] = a) 10-13 4[he]3[sp](51) b) 14-15
 [space] [space] [space]- 2[di] = 10-11
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 2[he] = 14-15, 5[he]
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 2[sp] = 10-13, 3-4-(51)
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 2N = 14-15, 0-1[sp] 4[he] 44+ minors
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3m = 14-15, 4[he] 6m
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[he] = 14-15, 6+[he]
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3[sp] = 14-15, 3-4-1-5
 [space] [space] [space] [space]- 3N = 14-15, 3-4-5-1
 [space] [space] [space]- 2[he] = 6-9, 2[he]
 [space] [space] [space]- 2[sp] = 6-9, 4[sp]
 [space] [space] [space]- 2N = 6-9, 54+ minors, 0-1[he], 0-3[sp]
 [space] [space] [space]- 3m = 6-9, 6m
 [space] [space]- 2[di] = 10-13, 5[he]4+m
 [space] [space] [space]- pass = 5+[di]
 [space] [space] [space]- 2[he] = 2[he]
 [space] [space] [space]- 2[sp] = 4[sp] 0-1[he]
 [space] [space] [space]- 2N = 44+ minors
 [space] [space] [space]- 3[cl] = 6+[cl]
 [space] [space]- 2[he] = 10-13, 6+[he]
 [space] [space]- 2[sp] = 10-13, 1-4-4-4/1-4-3-5/0-4-4-5 (responder has a 4+m)
 [space] [space]- 2N = 10-13, 1-4-5-3/0-4-5-4 (responder has a 4+m)
 [space] [space]- 3m = 10-13, 4[he]6+m
 [space]- 2[cl] = GF relay
 [space]- 2[di] = 11-13, any invite without 4[he] or 5[sp]
 [space] [space]- 2[he] = 10-11, 5+[he]
 [space] [space] [space]- 2[sp] = both minors
 [space] [space] [space]- 2N = bal
 [space] [space] [space]- 3m = 6+m
 [space] [space] [space]- 3[he] = 3[he]
 [space] [space]- 2[sp] = 12+, GF relay
 [space] [space]- 2N = 10-11, 1-4-4-4 or 1-4-(53) or 0-4-(54)
 [space] [space]- 3m = 10-11, 6+m
 [space] [space]- 3[he] = 10-11, 6+[he]
 [space]- 2[he] = 7-10, 3-4[he]
 [space]- 2[sp] = weak
 [space]- 2N = 11+, 4+[he]
 [space]- 3m = weak (or mini-splinter or whatever).

[Echognome]

It looks like a good try at it Kari.

However, I don't see any 5♥, 5m hands with 2-3 in the other minor (e.g. 1=5=2=5, 0=5=5=3, 0=5=2=6, etc).

I also don't see any 7-4 hands.

I count that as an additional 14 shapes.

[Kaapo]

Echognome said:

However, I don't see any 5♥, 5m hands with 2-3 in the other minor (e.g. 1=5=2=5, 0=5=5=3, 0=5=2=6, etc).

Look closer.

A direct 3♦ over the relay shows the red suits of at least 5-5 with short ♣. There's some room to inquire further at the 3-level, but 5-6-hands would go past 3NT.

The 2♠ response to the relay shows the red suits with a ♠ shortage. This can be 5-4 either way or 5-5 or 6-4. It's not untill after the 2NT relay when the lengths are clarified. Now 3♣ shows long diamonds, 3♦ 5-5 or better, and higher bids long ♥s with just 4♦s.

So 1♥ - 2♣; 2♠ - 2NT; 3♦ = 1-5-5-2 or 0-5-5-3 or 6-5 in the reds and short ♠.

With 5♥5♣ opener rebids 2♦ and then either 2♠ = 54+ short ♠, or 3♦ = 55+ short ♦.

It is totally unintentional that the opener rebids her short suit there!

Echognome said:

I also don't see any 7-4 hands.

True. Sadly there's not room for those below the 4-level.

[MickyB]

Kaapo, on Jan 19 2007, 10:21 PM, said:

Ok, so Matt challenged me to develop a relay structure starting at 2♣. 

Yup, my calculations suggested that it should be possible to have a reasonable structure after a 2♣ relay - 7-4s, 6-5s etc would rarely want to play in 3NT so they could cope with resolving with 4♣. There are, of course, other losses from starting that high. I'll have a look at your structure in more detail shortly.

[Echognome]

Kaapo, on Jan 19 2007, 03:11 PM, said:

Look closer.

Ah right. I see it now. Shrug. It's a little too high for my taste, but I'm sure it's playable.

[hrothgar]

MickyB, on Jan 20 2007, 02:19 AM, said:

Kaapo, on Jan 19 2007, 10:21 PM, said:

Ok, so Matt challenged me to develop a relay structure starting at 2♣. 

Yup, my calculations suggested that it should be possible to have a reasonable structure after a 2♣ relay - 7-4s, 6-5s etc would rarely want to play in 3NT so they could cope with resolving with 4♣. There are, of course, other losses from starting that high. I'll have a look at your structure in more detail shortly.

I'd be interested in seeing these calculations...

The symmetric relay structure is pretty good. Its possible to squeeze out a bit of extra efficiency, however, you aren't going to get all that big of an improvement. Almost by definition, you're going to be sitting a couple steps higher that a normal symmetric structure (you're relaying with 2♣, after all)

You'll save a bit of space by excluding the two suited patterns with both majors. A bit more, by getting rid of the balanced patterns, but even so you're gonna be uncomfortably high with a lot of shapes

Here's the core of a structure that I'd recommend after a 2♣ GF relay.

2♦ = 2 suited (Hearts and Clubs) or (3 suited with short Spades)
2♥ = Single suited with Hearts (including 5332 patterns)
2♠ = 4 Hearts and 5+ Diamonds
2N = 5/5 in Hearts and Diamonds
3♣ = 5+ Hearts and 4 Diamonds, High Shortage
3♦ = 2-5-4-2 shape
3♥ = 3-5-4-1 shape
3♠ = 2-6-4-1 shape
...

Continuations should be self explanatory to anyone experienced with relay

The problem should be pretty apparant: You're resolving 6-4-2-1 patterns at 3♠. With Clubs and Hearts you'll be elevated by one step so your 5-4-3-1s are resolved at 3♠. This is a BIG problem.

[MickyB]

awm, on Jan 19 2007, 09:57 PM, said:

It seems like the main problem is:

(1) You'd like either 1♠ or 1NT as a game forcing relay.
(2) You'd like either 1♠ or 1NT to show 5+♠.
(3) You'd like either 1♠ or 1NT as a weakish "forcing notrump" type bid.

With three meanings and two bids, you basically need to merge a pair of them. There are various ways to do this:

(1) Let 1♠ be the relay, but not always GF. Opener's rebids need to be somewhat natural in spirit, so responder can pass them with a forcing NT type hand. I think this is what some members of OZ-1 do currently.

(2) Let 1♠ be either 5+♠ or a GF relay, and 1NT as the "forcing notrump" type bid. You need to make sure any hands which involve a fairly high-level rebid directly after the relay are hands with 3♠. In principle something like: 1NT = 4+♦ as 2nd suit, 2♣ = 4+♣ and short spades or 2-2 residue, 2♦ = 4+♦, three-suited short spades, 2♥ = 6+♥ one suited and short (0-2) spades, 2♠ = 6+♥  or ♥+♣ and 3♠.

(3) Let 1NT be the GF relay, and 1♠ is a "weak relay" which could contain long spades. Then after 1♥-1♠ opener would rebid in a fairly natural manner with a priority on showing spade length (say 1NT rebid shows 3♠ and other rebids are natural and deny 3♠).

Yup, that puts it nicely. Alternatively, any of the three types is a candidate for responding 2♣ instead, although it seems a little high for any of them.

Of your suggestions, I think option three is my favourite, because the first and second both encourage relay responder to be declarer, as well as seeming rather vulnerable to interference.

Another idea I've had -
1♠ = nat, *four*+cards
1NT = GF relay
2♣ = constructive, NF, <3♥, <5♠. Basically intends to play in two of opener's minor (or 2♥ opposite a single-suiter) unless he is max.
2♦ = 3-4♥, constructive

[MickyB]

hrothgar, on Jan 19 2007, 11:34 PM, said:

MickyB, on Jan 20 2007, 02:19 AM, said:

Kaapo, on Jan 19 2007, 10:21 PM, said:

Ok, so Matt challenged me to develop a relay structure starting at 2♣. 

Yup, my calculations suggested that it should be possible to have a reasonable structure after a 2♣ relay - 7-4s, 6-5s etc would rarely want to play in 3NT so they could cope with resolving with 4♣. There are, of course, other losses from starting that high. I'll have a look at your structure in more detail shortly.

I'd be interested in seeing these calculations...

After a 2♣ relay, you can show 55 patterns below 3NT.

The ones that clearly need showing below 3NT are -

3 suiters - 4
Balanced - 3
Single suited - 7 (3*6322, 3*6331, 7222)
Short-legged - 12 (8*5431, 4*5422)
Long-legged - 8 (4*5521, 4*5530)

That's 34. Throw in sixteen 6-4 shapes and three 7(32)1s below 3NT and you are now only missing 6-5s, 7-4s and 7330s.

[hrothgar]

>>I'd be interested in seeing these calculations...

>After a 2♣ relay, you can show 55 patterns below 3NT.
>
>The ones that clearly need showing below 3NT are -
>
>3 suiters - 4
>Balanced - 3
>Single suited - 7 (3*6322, 3*6331, 7222)
>Short-legged - 12 (8*5431, 4*5422)
>Long-legged - 8 (4*5521, 4*5530)
>
>That's 34. Throw in sixteen 6-4 shapes and three 7(32)1s below 3NT and you are now >only missing 6-5s, 7-4s and 7330s. [/QUOTE]

Here's the thing: I don't think that 3NT is your danger level...

I think that you need to be resolving your 5-4-3-1s and 6-4-2-1s at or below 3♥.
If not, your first control ask is going to be 4♣, which is ugly

[MickyB]

Yup, fair enough. Oh, and opener can't zoom to show controls because that would be showing one of the extreme hands, hmm.

[Kaapo]

SMart has a 1♥ opening of this kind. It's a little weaker though: 8-14. SMart is the system played by the Danish juniors Søren Christiansen and Martin Schaltz.

Over 1♥ they have the following structure:
1♠ = 6-15, 0-4♠ 0-2♥
1NT = 9-15, 5+♠
2♣ = Artificial GF
2♦ = Invite, 3♥
2♥ = 0-9, 3♥
2♠ = weak
2NT = GF, 4+♥
3♣ = 12-15, 4+♥
3♦ = 8-11, 4+♥
3♥ = 0-7, 4+♥

They don't describe their relays after 2♣ very thoroughly. Just that 2♦ shows either 4+♣ or balanced (although the opening was supposedly unbal), 2♥ 6+♥, 2♠ 4+♦ and 2NT both minors.

[MickyB]

I've just checked out Auken-Von Arnim's convention card, seems that they use a 1♠/1NT nat and 2♣ relay, and they've got a *lot* more hands in their 1♥ opening - obviously they aren't expecting to fully resolve shape. I was wondering about that before - in my experience, you don't really need to know whether opener is 1444, 1435 or 1453 to choose between 3NT and a suit contract, but I'd expect it to put you very much on the back foot for slam investigation.