[helene_t]

When having problems falling in sleep I sometimes get tired of counting sheep and start thinking about bidding gadgets instead. Last night this came up:

1♣-1NT
2♣ invitational,
while
1♣-1NT
3♣ to play

The idea is that the 1NT response suggests some club support so weak hands with 6 clubs are not that common - opps must have a major suit fit and would probably have interfered. Otherwise they might still do so after a weak 2♣ rebid.

On the other hand, (134)5 and 4414 hands with 15-16 points are awkward in normal methods. We would like to make a constructive move while still being able to play in 2♣ if responder has a minimum and the hands don't fit that well.

Downside: It means that the weak (134)5 hands would have to pass 1NT. I suppose you could allow for a 2♣ rebid with those hands, with the agreement that responder's "accept" is to bid a 3-card major suit or a 4-card diamonds, which you could the pass (or correct to 3♣ or suggesting 2♠) if you didn't have an invitational hand. Not sure if I like this, would be some work to sort out what is a notrump probe and what is a suggestion to play, and also you don't want to give opps too much information.

Of course also the 3♣ rebid might take us overboard. At least opps know that we will be in game if they venture a double (and the other opp passes it).

[inquiry]

I am not sure, but I have been playing around with

1♦ - 1 any
3♣

as being weakish two suiter, and

1♦ - 1 any
2♣

As being artificial and strong. So far I have had one disaster but many many good results. Might be best played at matchpoints where it is only one board if things turn rotten.

[suokko]

Ambra has 1♣-1NT;2♦ as inv+ relay (responder can have 3-3-5-2 shape too) so this kind of biding is quite playable. I had agreed to play this for quite sometime but it never came ATT so I can't comment on how well it works. Maybe it is too rare to be worth agreeing unless you are perfectionist.

I have also been playing Ben's example for 2 years without any disasters. It gains a lot when holding strong hands (both minors, single suited, 1-4-4-4 15-17 or 4 card support)

[TylerE]

Seems kindof ok. Might get awkward on some hands. Another idea would be to use 2♥ and 2♠ as "impossible", and descriptive, showing what ever strongish hands you have difficulty showing, or perhaps as self-splinters with good clubs. Then the 3♣ rebid is always balanced.

[whereagles]

I really doubt you'll get the chance of using

1m 1NT
3m

or

1♦ 1NT
3♣

as weak, distributional. That is because in that case opps have like 20+ and majors and surely would have overcalled before opener had the chance to make his rebid.

I say make a simulation on how likely it is to have those bids still open with opener/responder limited. If the likelyhood is reasonable, you can think about it. Otherwise just forget the idea.

[Jlall]

I believe Frances once posted that she plays this because they always balance or something. Still seems weird/slightly crazy to me.

[awm]

In the auctions 1♣-1NT where opener has 5+♣ and 1♦-1NT where opener has 5-4 or better in the minors, you're guaranteed at least an eight card minor suit fit (often nine).

It seems easy to play these sequences as showing a fairly wide range, with the understanding that responder will raise when holding a maximum 1NT response (along with the guaranteed fit) and only pass with a true minimum. This means:

(1) On the hands where opener is invitational, you get the same result as Helene's suggestion.
(2) When opener has a weak hand, you occasionally get to play 2m.
(3) Opener can rebid clubs in the first auction with (13)45 and minimum.

[jdeegan]

Brilliant
Still, what do you do with 5♣ and a stiff in one of the majors and a minimum hand?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

inverting the meaning of openers 2m and 3m rebid was suggested by
Pavlicek (*), i.e. his suggestion would also aplies over a response different
to 1NT.
I think this is a playable method, as long as 2m is forcing, e.g. you also
have a solution for the BWS dead hand.

With kind regards
Marlowe

(*) Dont ask me for a source.

[P_Marlowe]

jdeegan, on Dec 10 2009, 12:46 AM, said:

Brilliant
Still, what do you do with 5♣ and a stiff in one of the majors and a minimum hand?

Pass.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Phil]

There was a player from Sacramento, and then Montana named Tony Morris that played something called "Morris Jumps". I forget the rules, but certain jump shifts by opener showed minimum hands with 6-5's. I know 1♣ - 1 red - 2♠ showed AQxxx, x, x, KQxxxx, but I do not remember if 1♠ - 1N - 3♣ showed AQxxxx, x, x, KQxxx.

I do not remember if these were effective. I do remember that I HAD to play these