[keylime]

As a gift to those who have wondered, I have posted the system that Larry and I will be using in our attempts to help our team win the 0-5000 Mini-Spingold in Nashville.

The link is resting on my blog at Click Here for a Really Good Time...

I hope you enjoy the contents, and be gentle with your thoughts.

[jillybean]

Limey, thats mind boggling

And I guess thats what you hoped for

[skjaeran]

At a cursory glance it seems like an interesting system.

I see that you say "highly unusual methods", which to me is a little strange. That's a class of systems in the WBF system policy (and in many NBO's) that means that the system would be disallowed in most tournaments (probably above even super-chart in ACBL). And very few would raise an eyebrow if you sat down playing this system here in Norway. And you could play it everywhere.

[glen]

1NT is 11-13/14-16V
1♣ if balanced is 17+
1♦, 1♥, and 1♠ all show 4 or longer in suit opened

So what does a 5-3-3-2 with 5♣s open if outside the 1NT range and less than 17? This is not covered on page 51, the NT Ladder, nor on page 40 for the 1♦ opener (which starts off as describing the bid as 10-15 HCP & 4+♦), but the overview on page 5 says, for 1♦:
"4+♦ CANAPE IF 5+-4 DISTRIBUTION; MAYBE 3♦ (NT), RARELY 2♦ (3325)."

So it appears that the 1♦ bid is:
a ) 10-15 HCP & 4+♦; OR
b ) balanced without a four card major, less than 17, outside the range of 1NT

Since b with 2-3♦s is not rare, I suggest not indicating that 1♦ is 4+♦s

--- ---

Question: say one opens 1♠ NV with 14-16 balanced and 4♠s. Responder bids 1NT with no ♠ fit and less than a GF (which would bid 2♣) and not a hand that would respond 2♦ or 2♥ (five card or longer suit, about 10 points). What does opener do next with 14-16 balanced over the 1NT response?

Additional question: if NV 1♦, 1♥, and 1♠ handles 14-16 balanced, should not the notes (especially the overview) describe these bids as 10-16 or 10-15(16)?

Bonus question: 1♦-3♦ is LR 5+♦s without a 3M. Does LR with a 3M respond 1NT or was the intent to respond 1M, so 1♦-1M, which "TEND TO BE 5-CARDS" can be 3 sometimes?

--- ---

As you fix disclosure problems as noted above, it will be easier to spot system gaps. For example in the notes 1♠-2♥ is “about 10 pts and 5+♥” – so is the range here 10-11, 9-11, 8-11, good 8 to poor 12, good 9 to poor 12, good 8 to poor 11 etc.? If opener NV has 14-16 balanced and it goes 1♠-2♥, if just 2♥s do they jump to 3NT, or just jump to 3NT if 15-16, and bid 2NT “to play” if 14? Knowing the range for 2♥ helps work these out.

[hrothgar]

Hi Dwayne: Few quick comments

First, I'd like to echo Harald's comments about using the expression "Highly Unusual Methods". Life would be a lot easier if folks restricted their use of the expression HUM to systems that actual conform to the WBF definition. It's useful to have precise nomenclature available for when you need it. Eroding the "purity" of different definitions should be avoided if possible.

Second: As long as you are playing in Midchart level events, I'd invert your 2NT and 3♣ opening bids. Use a 3♣ to show a weak hand with both minors. Use a 2NT to show a bad 3 level opening in either minor

Last: Symmetric Relay should be your friend

The relay structure strikes me as unnecessarily complex. I think that you'd do a lot better removing some of the gimmicks and simplifying the relay structure.

Regardless, good luck

[keylime]

There is a valid view about the potential misused syntax of "highly unusual method"; we inadvertantly used the phrasing to describe the different approach we use versus the normal North American perspective; this has gained a handwritten clarification to avoid any ruffling of feathers. Thanks for the counsel there.

With regards to the 5332 club hand outside of range, in 3rd/4th seat that hand is opened 2C normally; that is something tho we should tag a disclaimer about. Thanks for the advice there.

The NV 14-16 handtypes should have I think its own paragraph to help aid in disclosure; that was an oversight on our part and has a handwritten addition with regards to that. I'll check to see if for the 1D opening as well now that I think about it if we kept the 5332 club handtype listed in our summary sheet.

The relays we've implemented is because we both are not yet keen on adaptation of Symmetric Relay. We've strived to acheive as high of parallelism with the bidding methodology to help memory concerns and provide a sense of repeatibility. I hope this has borne out.

We have not tho thought about the 2NT/3C inversion; will discuss that with Larry.

Thanks for the constructive comments to this point.

[akhare]

keylime, on Jul 22 2007, 03:48 PM, said:

The relays we've implemented is because we both are not yet keen on adaptation of Symmetric Relay. We've strived to acheive as high of parallelism with the bidding methodology to help memory concerns and provide a sense of repeatibility. I hope this has borne out.

IMO, nothing comes close to Symmetric relays in terms of mnenomic ease but to each, his own poison .

Anyway, looks like a very interesting system -- do keep on tipped on how it's faring...

[Robert]

Hi keylime

Nice outline of your methods.

I did note that you sometimes showed controls in a long number of steps. In my CONFIT(control/fit) bidding I learned that you can put the maximum number of controls into the lowest step because partner will know what you have or in some very rare case, your added bidding will show the maximum number of controls. It saves a step and gives you a chance to use the bid for some other meaning.

hrothgar and akhare also expressed my feelings about relay methods being symmetric. I like the Power System relays because they are the same bids over either major opening. Less memory strain and fewer 'opps.'

Regards,
Robert

[keylime]

Update: To date, the competitive bidding methods haven't been used by a total of three times: one two suiter, one 1NT takeout, and one power double. There has been tho a high frequency of forcing club openings.

We have learned that we need to address Suction and regular CRASH items in the notes - definitely on unsteady ground.