I like this. Inviting criticism and better ideas..
1C-1D=0-7
1H-S, S/H, S/C, S/D, 3
.....1N-S/H/3
..........2D-3, short minor
..........2H-reverser
.....2C-S/C
.....2D-S
.....2H-S/D reverser
1S-bal w/ 4 hearts, D/C, D, 3
.....2C-D/C
.....2D-bal with 4 hearts
.....2H-3, short M
.....2S-D, higher
1N-H, H/C
2C-H/D
2D-C
2H-bal w/ 4 spades, not hearts
.....opener can relay with either 2S or 2N
2S-bal w/ minors
2N-3334
3C-3343
Why don't I need the 3-level bids? Did I leave something out?
Page 1 of 1
positive structure
#2
Posted 2010-February-26, 23:58
straube, on Feb 26 2010, 10:44 PM, said:
Why don't I need the 3-level bids? Did I leave something out?
It has to do with how you resolve the balanced hands.
Basically you have "unrolled" some of the balanced treatments into 2♥, 2N, 3♣ and compressed the shapely treatments. The balanced hands always resolved pretty low in symmetric relay.
Adam W. Meyerson
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#3
Posted 2010-February-27, 00:42
Hm. Not seeing it. What have I lost steps on? I think it has something to do with the 5332s. Do I need to include them in the balanced hands? Then at 2D I've shown a 6-card suit?
#4
Posted 2010-February-27, 08:43
If you look at standard symmetric relay, you have:
1♥ = hearts
.... 1N = both majors (next 2♦ = 3-suited)
.... 2♣ = hearts + clubs
.... 2♦, 2♥ = reds
.... 2♠+ = hearts only, includes 5332
1♠ = spades, not four hearts
.... 2♣ = spades + clubs
.... 2♦, 2♥ = spades + diamonds
.... 2♠+ = spades only, includes 5332
1N = balanced
2♣ = clubs or 3-suited short major (next 2♥ = 3-suited)
2♦ = diamonds
2♥+ = both minors
You can easily re-arrange things by "unrolling" the balanced hands and compressing the hands with diamonds or both minors such that:
1♥ = hearts
1♠ = spades, not four hearts
1N = diamonds or both minors
2♣ = clubs or 3-suited short major
2♦+ = balanced
However, the balanced hands resolve relatively cheaply, with many of them getting out at 2NT or 3♣, so you won't need all the direct three-level bids here. Arguably this is good because you need more space to locate honors opposite a balanced hand (four suits to worry about rather than three, basically).
You've performed some further rearranges, presumably to try to transfer declarership.
1♥ = hearts
.... 1N = both majors (next 2♦ = 3-suited)
.... 2♣ = hearts + clubs
.... 2♦, 2♥ = reds
.... 2♠+ = hearts only, includes 5332
1♠ = spades, not four hearts
.... 2♣ = spades + clubs
.... 2♦, 2♥ = spades + diamonds
.... 2♠+ = spades only, includes 5332
1N = balanced
2♣ = clubs or 3-suited short major (next 2♥ = 3-suited)
2♦ = diamonds
2♥+ = both minors
You can easily re-arrange things by "unrolling" the balanced hands and compressing the hands with diamonds or both minors such that:
1♥ = hearts
1♠ = spades, not four hearts
1N = diamonds or both minors
2♣ = clubs or 3-suited short major
2♦+ = balanced
However, the balanced hands resolve relatively cheaply, with many of them getting out at 2NT or 3♣, so you won't need all the direct three-level bids here. Arguably this is good because you need more space to locate honors opposite a balanced hand (four suits to worry about rather than three, basically).
You've performed some further rearranges, presumably to try to transfer declarership.
Adam W. Meyerson
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#5
Posted 2010-February-27, 09:04
Thanks. I see it now. I haven't lost anything and I guess my 3-level bids are used to zoom QPs for the 3343.
#6
Posted 2010-March-04, 01:14
So...can I use the 3-level to better effect?
For instance I could use 1C-3C to show an unspecified 7-cd suit with AKQ like Moscito does. How does that work exactly and are there any better ideas?
For instance I could use 1C-3C to show an unspecified 7-cd suit with AKQ like Moscito does. How does that work exactly and are there any better ideas?
Page 1 of 1

Help
