[MickyB]

lexlogan, on Jul 16 2008, 03:48 PM, said:

MickeyB, in terms of what you're trying to accomplish, please explain what's wrong with:

1C = 17+ balanced, 16+ unbalanced
1NT = 14-16
1D includes any 11-13 balanced.

1C opener passes over interference with 17-18 balanced. Opener strives to bid or double with 19+ balanced.

I'd rather 1C was 17+ so opener didn't have to strive to act with a balanced 19. However, a 2C opening showing 11-16 would be a bit of a stretch.

1D does include any 11-13 balanced, but having this as the Meckwell-style catch-all fares quite poorly. I'm advocating removing hands from the 1D opening to make it much easier to respond to, especially in competition.

[awm]

Most of the time when opener in fact has 11-13 balanced we are going to have the same auction. I think transfer advances in competition are better than negative free bids, but obviously one can adapt this so we play the same style.

The time I think my structure wins with 11-13 balanced is competitive sequences at a high level. For example, suppose you hold:

♠KQxxx ♥xxx ♦Kxxxx ♣-

The auction begins 1♦-(3♥). Presumably this is a problem hand for almost any method, since you are not really strong enough to force game but your shape is quite promising opposite even a balanced 11-13 with doubleton heart. Partner is unlikely to have many hearts on the auction (3 is rare, 4 is conceivable but highly unlikely). Obviously the "natural diamond" bidders are in good shape because if partner has fewer than four spades you have a huge diamond fit. But we're both playing a 1♦ that doesn't promise any diamonds. Who's in better shape?

In my style, partner can't really be 2-2 in the pointed suits (the only possible shape is 2-4-2-5 and this requires the highly unlikely four hearts). If partner has a three suiter short in hearts we could be on for slam; if partner has a stiff spade he pretty much has to be 1-3-4-5 and we at least have a nine-card diamond fit. If partner has two hearts then we have either a nine-card fit or two eight-card fits. In MickyB's style, opener could easily have a pattern like 2227 or 2326 or even the awful 1327. With an unfortunate stiff spade 1336 is an obvious possibility. Admittedly these patterns should have an extra queen or so, but the awful misfit is likely to doom your attempt to play a 23 hcp game. These patterns seem unlikely, but given our pattern and the auction they are not really so much odds-against. The point is that my style virtually guarantees a fit when responder holds 5-5 in two suits whereas MickyB's 1♦ could conceal a misfitting one-suiter.

The more frequent time when there is a difference in styles is when one of us opens 1♦ without holding 11-13 balanced. My bet would be that:

(1) With a 6+ card minor, I think opening 2m is much more effective. It often preempts the opposition out of the auction (unless they make "one level" overcalls over 2m which means they often go for a number).

(2) With a three-suiter and 14-16, MickyB is ahead because he can open 1♦ and then pull a negative free bid (or transfer) in competition and it guarantees extras. Nonetheless, this action is more nebulous about shape in some sequences. For example 1♦-(2♣)-2♥ NFB- (P) - 2♠ presumably shows four spades, short hearts, and extras... but it could be 4162 or 4063 (i.e. a pointed two suiter) as well as 4144/4153/4135 (a three-suiter) whereas in my style the 2♠ call would be unambiguously the three-suited option.

(3) With a three-suiter and 10-13, both styles have their issues. My feeling is that opening these hands 1♦ will leave me better placed than opening them 1M on a 4-card suit, but neither is going to solve all possible issues.

(4) With both minors (at least 5-4) and 14-15, my style can unambiguously show that both minors are held even in competition. MickyB's style is likely to run into a lot of trouble because minor suit rebids really only show 5+ in the one minor rather than showing nine cards.

(5) With both minors and a weaker hand (say 11-13) it's a tossup -- MickyB will win some by opening at the two-level and obstructing opponents, but will also lose some when he plays in the wrong minor suit fit or misses a 5-3 major fit with his (31)(54) pattern.

(6) The main win for MickyB's style is the 9-10 point hands with one or both minors (but not suitable to open 3m) where you get to open 2m instead of having to pass. But I'm not sure this counteracts the rest of the methods, and because of doing this he is behind on the 11-13 hands with a 6+ minor because his range is just as wide as mine but my 2m opening promises six and his promises only five.

[awm]

Another interesting point is what may be the biggest win for Sam and my 1♦ methods. This is auctions like:

1♦ - P - 1♥ - P

Presumably for MickyB's methods:

1♠ = 4♠, dunno if he wants this to guarantee unbalanced
1N = balanced 11-13
2♣/2♦ = 5+ in the bid suit with extras, not a heart fit, not 4♠
2♥ = raise

For Sam and me:

1♠ = 4♠
1N = balanced 11-13
2♣ = both minors, at least 5/4 (either longer)
2♦ = raise to 2♥!!! this bid is not needed as natural
2♥ = weaker raise to 2♥

The ability to distinguish "good" and "bad" 2♥ bids has won us many boards.

[MickyB]

Ok, so you gain on constructive 5-5s after a high level preempt. I still maintain that the majority of hands are better placed opposite a 1D opening with Polish influences - for example, a single-suiter on the same auction.

Quote

(4) With both minors (at least 5-4) and 14-15, my style can unambiguously show that both minors are held even in competition. MickyB's style is likely to run into a lot of trouble because minor suit rebids really only show 5+ in the one minor rather than showing nine cards.

There are no-trump bids available to show this hand-type.

With regard to 2m openings - TriBal is opening them more frequently and on weaker hands, whereas 4M6m 14-16 are opening 1D, making it much easier to find a 4-4 major fit. Surely this is advantageous from both a constructive and desctructive point of view?

With regard to 1D:1H, 2D as a good raise, we are quite happy to raise to 2H on 11-13 bal and 3H on 14-16 unbalanced.

[Rossoneri]

Sorry to break the flow of the discussion but just a thought that occured to me: How do you plan to treat 4M5m22s? Do you treat them as balanced if they have both doubleton honours?

[MickyB]

Rossoneri, on Jul 18 2008, 05:59 AM, said:

Sorry to break the flow of the discussion but just a thought that occured to me: How do you plan to treat 4M5m22s? Do you treat them as balanced if they have both doubleton honours?

I'd probably treat them as balanced more often than not, depending upon quality of the major, and, in the case of spades, right-siding.