[vang]

Can someone who plays/played 'Keri over 1NT' summarize this convention and make some comments about strong and weak points? Thanks in advance.

[inquiry]

Three disadavantages..

1) complicated with lots of memorization
2) hard to find someone who knows it
3) Have to use transfer and play in your ffive card major when weak with 5-4, can't use staymen like responses for chance to find 4-4 major fit.

Advantagnes, does help you bid a lot better, especially on good hands.

Ben

[EricK]

inquiry, on Jul 27 2004, 03:34 PM, said:

Three disadavantages..

1) complicated with lots of memorization
2) hard to find someone who knows it
3) Have to use transfer and play in your ffive card major when weak with 5-4, can't use staymen like responses for chance to find 4-4 major fit.

Advantagnes, does help you bid a lot better, especially on good hands.

Ben

Ben,

Is it really more complicated than any other full structure over 1NT? I found it pretty easy to memorize.

Eric

[luke warm]

what a coincidence... i was just reading up on it last nite, at the suggestion of pclayton... and my first impression pretty much follows ben's post, it looks awful complicated (lots of memory work)...

it does seem to have some good points tho... whether it's better than what i already like to play, i don't know... probably so

[the hog]

Advantages
Easy to memorise - not as complicated as many schemes - hehe, sorry Ben. Learned it in 3 hours.

Very effective and accurate

Enables you to stop low on invit hands.

Kerri principles can be translated and used in other auctions - eg in 2 way checkback auctions, thus cutting down on rote memorisation and using similar ideas across the system.

Disadvantages

Need a serious partnership to play it with - (this could be an adv) - as it needs discussion with partner.

"Have to use transfer and play in your five card major when weak with 5-4, can't use stayman like responses for chance to find 4-4 major fit. " - certainly true, but for those of us who play that Stayman always shows values, like I do, this is not a problem. (Incidentally I believe that this treatment is FAR better than so called "garbage" Stayman).

Ron

[whereagles]

Took me 3 days to learn it, eheh. But it's not that hard to memorize stuff once you grasp the main ideas. The book also has some bidding ideas that can be applied in other bidding situations.

I'm currently working on trying to adapt Keri to stuff like

1m 1M
1NT

and

1m 1M
2NT

where 1m is natural or preparatory with a balanced hand, and the NT rebid may contain 4 cards in the other major. A Keri-ish 2/3C here can work better than checkback and NMF, which I now consider "bidding instruments of the jurassic era"

[twcho]

Scoring: IMP

---

Last night watched the Euro Youth Champion England vs Norway. On the vu graph, EW bid to the almost hopeless 4S (everything wrong side).

By using Keri 1NT, 3NT should be easily arrived (far superior contract than 4♠)
W E
1NT
2♣(1) 2♦(2)
2NT(3) 3♦(3)
3NT(5)
(1) Puppet to 2♦
(2) Forced
(3) GF relay
(4) any 4333 hand
(5) 5332 vs any 4333, 3NT rated to be a better contract

Please note that West can start with 2♥ (transfer to 2♠) first. But in the book, the writer has specifically mentioned that 2♦/♥ then 3NT, though also representing 5332 hand but the suit is weak (not better than QTxxx) so to differentiate from the suggested sequence which guarantee a better suit.

BTW, who can tell me how to align the auction and how to include quote from others?

[1eyedjack]

Hi twcho

To align the bids use a non-proportional font and use full-stops to separate the bids (as adjacent spaces get cropped), ie

W.....E
.......1N
2C...2D
2N...3D
3N

Use Preview Post to fine tune the number of full stops, especially if using a non-proportional font.

PS to others reading: I tried changing font to Courier in front of the auction but when previewing the post it just showed "[FONT=Courier]" without actually changing the font. Any solution?

As to the distinction between using this Keri sequence with a good suit 5332 and using transfer then 3N with a poor suit 5332 I am unconvinced by this example. Responder has made a unilateral decision to play in 3NT in the knowledge that opener is 4333, possibly with 4 Spades, possibly with minimal guard in Hearts. It MAY be statistically the right move, but if that is the case then I would expect opener to come to the same conclusion if responder transferred then 3NT to show 5332.

[luke warm]

i agree with jack... 3nt may have been better *this* time, but i'm not sure it's a superior contract... playing my methods:

1c : 1s
1nt : 2d
2h : 2s

2d was gf checkback, 2s showed 5 of them... so what does opener do? bid 3s and let responder decide? that seems best to me

[Gerardo]

1eyedjack, on Aug 4 2004, 03:16 AM, said:

I tried changing font to Courier in front of the auction but when previewing the post it just showed "" without actually changing the font. Any solution?

Yes, the FONT tag needs to be closed.

[font="Courier"]Test
[FONT=Courier]Test

[FONT=Courier]Test[/FONT]
[FONT=Courier]Test

[MickyB]

What is the suggested logic behind having different sequences for good and bad 5 card majors? How is opener meant to treat them differently?

[EricK]

MickyB, on Aug 4 2004, 05:11 PM, said:

What is the suggested logic behind having different sequences for good and bad 5 card majors? How is opener meant to treat them differently?

I think the difference is that a weak suit makes more tricks when it is trumps, but a strong suit will take tricks in NT as well. And often, when two balanced hands face each other there are as many tricks in the suit as in NT. This is especially true when your main source of high card tricks is the prospective trump suit.

Opener is meant to try to work out which of 4M and 3NT is more likely to make

Eric

[1eyedjack]

EricK, on Aug 4 2004, 12:20 PM, said:

I think the difference is that a weak suit makes more tricks when it is trumps, but a strong suit will take tricks in NT as well.

Digressing slightly, when I get into arguments about the merits of opening 1NT with a 5 card major, I tend to find that some of those who generally prefer not to do so will grudgingly concede some merit to opening 1NT if the 5 card suit is poor. I don't tend to come across objectors who will (grudgingly) open 1NT if the 5 card suit is good (rather than poor). This attitude seems to fly in the face of the theory that a good suit will run in NT when a poor suit is of value only when it is trumps. Not sure if there is any point to that ... just an observation.

[EricK]

The difference may be that when you open you don't know the level you are going to play at or if you have a fit or even if it is your hand. So you try to give partner as much useful information as you can. With a weak suit you might not want to suggest it as trumps, especially if you have no easy way to show the balanced nature of your hand and also if partner may lead it if we defend or compete too high if things get that way.. With a strong suit these worries are lessened.

In the case of the response to 1NT with a GF hand, we are only concerned with finding the best contract.

Eric

[1eyedjack]

Something like that.

I think it is probably that when you open 1NT it is possible that you may not require the major as a source of tricks, whilst it will certainly be a source of losers if they are trumps esp. breaking badly. When both hands are known to be balanced you know that your major is the only possible source of long tricks, whether fast or slow.

[mikestar]

In general, when choosing between 3N and 4M with balanced hands and a 5-3 fit, 3N is most likely to be superior if the major suit is either weak or strong. 4M tends to be best with average quality suits. So both xxxxx and AKQxx suggest 3N but KJTxx suggests 4M.