[whereagles]

Hi all,

For those who play Ron Klinger's "Keri over 1NT" structure, I'd like to ask the following. With an invitational 44 or 54 or 45 in the majors, it is recommended you bid like this

44 or 54: transfer to hearts, then bid 2S (non-forcing, of course)
45: bid 2C relay, then invite in 2H (again non-forcing)

However, in the book, Klinger shows two examples where he bids the invitational 44 as

1NT 2C
2D 2H

hoping pard will correct to 2/3S with 4 spades min/max.

Now, that's all nice and well, BUT... what if opener has 4 spades and 3 hearts? If you bid the 44 via 2C, opener is not supposed to bid spades unless he has doubleton heart, so this might lead to missing a 44 spade fit.

The recommended structure of bidding 44s via transfer + 2S works all the time, so wonder if Klinger's two examples (both from live play) weren't played while Keri was still under development, and he was unsure what the best way to handle 44s was.

All in all, what I want to ask is this: how do people that play Keri over 1NT bid their invitational 44s?

[twcho]

I play the recommended sequence: 1NT-2D-2H-2S

[the hog]

From Ron's notes dated March 2004:

1. 1NT opening, overcall and rebid

1NT = 15-17 points, may have a 5 card major
1NT overcall = 15-18 and same structure as for 1NT opening (transfer into
their suit = 3 suited, short their suit

1NT : 2C = puppet to 2D
2D = transfer to Hs
2H = transfer to Ss
2S = range probe
2NT = transfer to clubs
3C - 3S = FG, shows 0-1 in next suit along
4C/4D = transfers to 4H/4S (then 4NT RKCB);

1NT : 2C forces 2D
1NT : 2C
2D : 2H/2S = 4-5 suit, invitational. If responder has both majors, the 2H rebid
shows 5Hs and 4Ss – never 4/4. The 2S rebid denies Hs

Opener may:
Pass with minimum and 3-4 in suit
Raise to 3 with maximum and 3 in suit and no 5 card other major
Raise to 4 with maximum and 4 in suit
Bid 2S over 2H with minimum and 4Ss, 2Hs
Bid 3S over 2H with maximum and 4Ss, 2Hs
Bid 2NT over 2H with minimum and 3-2 in majors
Bid 3NT over 2H with maximum and 3-2 in majors
Bid 2NT over 2S with minimum and 2 spades only
Bid 3C = minimum-medium 1NT with 4-support and 4-4-3-2,
Bid 3D = maximum, 5 card other major, 2/3 of responder’s major. Responder
to bid 3NT with a 4-2, his major with a 5-2 and bid 4D with 3+ of
opener’s major

1NT : 2D
2H : 2S = 4S-4H, 5S-4H or 5S-5H, invitational only
2NT = 5+ Hs + 4-minor, FG
3C / 3D = 5-5 patterns New suit = cue for minor; 3H stronger than 4H.
3H = 6Hs, Inv.
3S = 4Ss, 5+ Hs, FG
3NT = choice of contracts – poor 5 card suit
4C/4D = void splinter, Hs set - then step 1 = bad fit.


1NT : 2D
2H : 2S = Invitational, both majors 4-4, 5-5 or 5Ss-4Hs, then:
Pass = minimum, 3+ Ss
2NT = minimum, no fit for either major
3S = maximum, with 3+ Ss and 4S = maximum, 4-5 Ss
3H = minimum, with 4Hs and 4H = maximum, 4-5 Hs
3C = medium fit with 4 hearts
3D = medium, fit with 4 spades
3NT = max, no fit

Incidentally for those who don't know.
Kerri imho, is the best and most advanced structure over 1NT to have been developed ever - despite Ben's claims to the contrary. I would not be surprised if in a few years time Kerri is the norm for expert systems over 1NT. It is so far superior over Stayman it is not funny.

[whereagles]

I see. So apparently Klinger is playing 44 majors via transfer + 2S. Probably the examples he shows were indeed from an early version of the scheme.

[EricK]

whereagles, on Jul 27 2004, 01:32 PM, said:

I see. So apparently Klinger is playing 44 majors via transfer + 2S. Probably the examples he shows were indeed from an early version of the scheme.

That is what I assumed when I read the book.

Eric

[hrothgar]

Hi Ron

I've looked over Keri and like a number of features. However, I've never really been happy with the structure from 2♠+

I've often wondered whether it would be possible to graft portions of the Scanian structure onto Keri, in which case

2S = Range ask or
Weak with both minors or
Weak with Diamonds

2N = Asks for weak doubleton

3C = Weak

3D+ = GF Splinters

I THINK that this would be workable, and also potentially improve on the structure...

[the hog]

hrothgar, on Jul 28 2004, 04:30 AM, said:

Hi Ron

I've looked over Keri and like a number of features. However, I've never really been happy with the structure from 2♠+

I've often wondered whether it would be possible to graft portions of the Scanian structure onto Keri, in which case

2S = Range ask or
Weak with both minors or
Weak with Diamonds

2N = Asks for weak doubleton

3C = Weak

3D+ = GF Splinters

I THINK that this would be workable, and also potentially improve on the structure...

jus a couple of comments on this Richard. How are you going to deal with strong hands?
In Kerri 1N 2S 2N 3H sets H for example

The quest for a xx may have some great successes - I saw one in the European Champs some years ago, but to be honest I think it is too rare to worry about

Your minor suited hands - the strong ones, are included in the splinters. There is no need for a bid to show weak with D only, as ypu puppet with 2C and pass 2D. I used to do this bith both ms weak as well, and it worked fine. (5D/4C or similar).
If very weak with 4-4 ms, you can always puppet anyway and hope.

Also if you take 1 splinter away, D in your case by using the 3C bid for something else, how will you deal with hands with short Ds?

Ron

[whereagles]

Hum.. I saw once a study on whether after 1NT one should worry of holdings like

xx opposite xxx
xx opposite xx
xx opposite x
xxx opposite x

The conclusion was with xx/xx or xx/xxx you should stick to 3NT anyway, if you have the 25+ points. Sure, they may cash out 5 tricks, but...

1. Holdings that match like this, especially xx/xx, are very rare, and you can't diagnose them easily. Even if you do have a gadget for it (like that 2NT bid), pard's weak doubleton will mismatch yours in almost all cases. Besides, how are you going to look for a fit AND still be able to diagnose weak matching doubletons?

2. What are the alternatives to 3NT? A 5m contract with two top losers (and opps will cash them if they're half-alert) rates to fail unless you have an overload of hcps. Not usual. To play 4M on a 4-3 requires solid or semi-solid suits. That's hard to diagnose as well, and is vulnerable to bad breaks.

3. LHO may have a natural lead somewhere else. Why play in a super-scientific 4/5m or 4H, making exactly, when everybody else is racking up 3NT +1? In addition, the suit might be blocked, or the defense can mess up.

All these lead us to think with xx/xx, it's still better to play 3NT. Unless you have the means to make sure there is a viable alternative, just play 3NT. Even more with xx/xxx.

Now, for the case xx/x or xxx/x, it's VERY different. 5m is a much more playable contract now, and it's less likely opps will mess up. With a singleton responder should try to investigate whether 3NT is viable or not, and if not, steer towards 4M or 5m.

[mikestar]

whereagles, on Jul 28 2004, 09:44 AM, said:

Hum.. I saw once a study on whether after 1NT one should worry of holdings like

xx opposite xxx
xx opposite xx
xx opposite x
xxx opposite x

The conclusion was with xx/xx or xx/xxx you should stick to 3NT anyway, if you have the 25+ points. Sure, they may cash out 5 tricks, but...

Right on the money. I would also add that when they have all the honors and do lead the suit, they may block it.

I think a better use for science is avoiding the major suit contract with 4333 or 5332 opposite 4333--3NT will often play better.

[twcho]

That's really where Keri 1NT shines