[helene_t]

I only discussed system to that level of details with one p and with him a play a crazzy system (Borring Club) that doesn't have a natural 1NT opening.

With pick-up pds, I'd prefer something that reduces the risk of misunderstandings. I dislike transfers because there are all kinds of contested auctions where they may or may not apply. Playing Strong Club, it's worse because I suppose that after
1♣-1♦
1NT
system is on, while after
1♣-1NT
Stayman is on but transfers are not, yet I'm not 100% confident that all partners see it that way. 2-way Stayman plus the agreement that Stayman is replaced by the cuebid whenever a cuebid is availble, seems to me to be the most secure agreement if one hasn't got time to discuss many specific auctions.

If I were to put a lot of effort into a NT structure to play with a regular p, I'd emphazise concealing declarer's hand. It's an annoying fact that Symmetric Relays does not achieve this unless responder is sure that 3NT is not going to be the end contract, in which case a lot can be infered about responder's hand from the fact that he knew that 3NT wouldnt be the end contract Heeman looks good but I admit I didn't look at any other non-mainstream structures, if you tell me that Scandian or Kerri (or whatever) is better, I believe you.

[Echognome]

helene_t, on Jul 4 2007, 12:46 AM, said:

Playing Strong Club, it's worse because I suppose that after
1♣-1♦
1NT
system is on, while after
1♣-1NT
Stayman is on but transfers are not, yet I'm not 100% confident that all partners see it that way. 2-way Stayman plus the agreement that Stayman is replaced by the cuebid whenever a cuebid is availble, seems to me to be the most secure agreement if one hasn't got time to discuss many specific auctions.

If I were to put a lot of effort into a NT structure to play with a regular p, I'd emphazise concealing declarer's hand. It's an annoying fact that Symmetric Relays does not achieve this unless responder is sure that 3NT is not going to be the end contract, in which case a lot can be infered about responder's hand from the fact that he knew that 3NT wouldnt be the end contract Heeman looks good but I admit I didn't look at any other non-mainstream structures, if you tell me that Scandian or Kerri (or whatever) is better, I believe you.

Funnily enough, this is an area where Jason and I decided to play systems on over either of these sequences, but there are a couple of differences (obviously!) since the latter start is game forcing. However, we liked the fact that opener could either ask responder his shape by starting with a staymanic 2♣ or could describe his shape by transferring (or making some other systemic call to show various hand types and a minimum strong club opening). After the 2♣ bid, opener could then either fully relay out responder's hand (as obviously garbage stayman, nor various invites were no longer needed) or bid something else (agreeing the suit and making a strong slam try) or raise (showing a minimum strong club opening while agreeing the suit). This gave us all the various options we needed and I found it worked very well. What I liked in particular was the ability to ask or tell and to take control or check with responder. Of course, I wouldn't agree to play such a system unless it was with a regular partner.

[Gerben42]

Quote

Interesting. I'm not sure I buy the basic premise that we want the weak NT hand to come down as Dummy? What's the logic behind that idea?

Normal bridge logic says that the strong hand should be declarer for various reasons (lead comes towards this hand, harder for opponents to see what suits to attack, etc.). Playing a weak NT, inv+ sequences mean that opener's strength is smaller or at most slightly larger than responder's. This would only prove that it doesn't matter who is declarer.

In addition responder's hand has many more possible distributions and HCP ranges than the opening hand.

We often have sequences like:

1N - 2♦ (asks 2-card major) - 2♥ (doubleton) - 4♠ - P

Now nothing is known about declarer's hand other than 5♠ (usually exactly 5). Could be 5332, but could be 5521. Strength? Could be as light as 10 HCP with shape, or as much as 17. The corresponding sequence playing transfers would be:

1NT - 2♥ - 2♠ - 3something - 4♠.

Now declarer's strength is well-known and the shape roughly known. Much easier for the defense to set goals (play to reduce overtricks, or try to beat it?) and to find the best line.