BBO Discussion Forums: Keri - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 4 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Keri Responses to 1NT

#21 User is offline   NickRW 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,951
  • Joined: 2008-April-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sussex, England

Posted 2010-September-28, 10:08

straube, on Sep 28 2010, 02:03 PM, said:

Keri loses sequences.

You can see some evidence in things it loses here and there.  For instance, it can't splinter all hands.  I complimented the immediate splinters, but one can't splinter
4-1-5-3 or 1-4-6-2 or 5-4-3-1.  It can't splinter 4-3-5-1 or 3-4-5-1. Etc.

Geez. Yes it is different and inevitably with *any* change you will tend to lose some sequences that you used to be able to express easily - and you gain others. The acid test is whether your new method is better overall. With Keri versus more "normal" methods it is perhaps too close to call for the casual player - and the frequency of being able to play "normal" methods is almost certainly the deciding factor.

On the splinters thing, in the version I'm playing, I can splinter (if I choose):
33(07)
33(16)
(34)(15)
44(14)
(04)(45)
(14)44
(13)(45)
(03)55
(03)(46)
plus anything slammy with a 6 carder in both majors or minors assuming opener is at all interested, plus on some other sequences opener can find shortage principally a 4cM with longer clubs. That isn't everything it is true - but how many can most people do with "normal" methods?!
"Pass is your friend" - my brother in law - who likes to bid a lot.
0

#22 User is offline   hanp 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,987
  • Joined: 2009-February-15

Posted 2010-September-28, 10:19

What do you mean with "normal" methods? If pair one plays an entire book of Keri stuff, and the other pair just got together and agreed to play Stayman and Jacoby transfers, well duh, of course the full Keri complex would be better.

If on the other hand we would compare the Keri pair with Meckwell, who as far as I know play Stayman but probably have detailed descriptions of more auctions than most of us., then I wouldn't bet against the Meckwell system.

To get a fair comparison you would need to compare Keri with a Stayman based approach of similar complexity.
and the result can be plotted on a graph.
0

#23 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,227
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2010-September-28, 10:19

Heh. Now the pro side comes out. :)

I found a description of Heeman. Looks much like Keri at first glance. I'll look closer later.

Thanks all, and especially to Mike Gill for the pros and cons lists.

I'll look into 5 card major stayman as well.
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
0

#24 User is offline   NickRW 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,951
  • Joined: 2008-April-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sussex, England

Posted 2010-September-28, 10:35

hanp, on Sep 28 2010, 04:19 PM, said:

What do you mean with "normal" methods? If pair one plays an entire book of Keri stuff, and the other pair just got together and agreed to play Stayman and Jacoby transfers, well duh, of course the full Keri complex would be better.

If on the other hand we would compare the Keri pair with Meckwell, who as far as I know play Stayman but probably have detailed descriptions of more auctions than most of us., then I wouldn't bet against the Meckwell system.

To get a fair comparison you would need to compare Keri with a Stayman based approach of similar complexity.

Perhaps I am unaware, but I don't know of a book published about Meckwell over 1NT, so I don't suppose I can comment on their specific methods.

I am not beating some big drum for Keri - I was trying to give a more balanced picture than that - but straube seemed a bit prejudiced against it.

Nick
"Pass is your friend" - my brother in law - who likes to bid a lot.
0

#25 User is offline   hanp 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,987
  • Joined: 2009-February-15

Posted 2010-September-28, 10:42

You can pick any top level pair whose methods you like and read their names instead of meckwell. The point was that if you are comparing your elaborate methods with the methods of "most people", then surely you are going to win by a landslide. Most people can write their notrump methods on the back of a... how do you call one of those round cardboard things that you put your glass on? Usually with a beer brand logo on it.

By the way, did you think the Klinger fans posting here gave a balanced picture?
and the result can be plotted on a graph.
0

#26 User is offline   straube 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,970
  • Joined: 2009-January-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver WA USA

Posted 2010-September-28, 10:47

hanp, on Sep 28 2010, 11:19 AM, said:

What do you mean with "normal" methods? If pair one plays an entire book of Keri stuff, and the other pair just got together and agreed to play Stayman and Jacoby transfers, well duh, of course the full Keri complex would be better.

If on the other hand we would compare the Keri pair with Meckwell, who as far as I know play Stayman but probably have detailed descriptions of more auctions than most of us., then I wouldn't bet against the Meckwell system.

To get a fair comparison you would need to compare Keri with a Stayman based approach of similar complexity.

First, apologies because I missed that you were being facetious earlier.

Second, I think what you say is exactly right. If you had two system of similar complexity, the one with Stayman would win out.

Saying so doesn't mean I'm prejudiced against Keri. I happen to have met Klinger, loved many of the ideas of his book and incorporated them into my own NT structure. I still feel that 2C puppet is unsound.
0

#27 User is offline   NickRW 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,951
  • Joined: 2008-April-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sussex, England

Posted 2010-September-28, 10:55

hanp, on Sep 28 2010, 04:42 PM, said:

You can pick any top level pair whose methods you like and read their names instead of meckwell. The point was that if you are comparing your elaborate methods with the methods of "most people", then surely you are going to win by a landslide. Most people can write their notrump methods on the back of a... how do you call one of those round cardboard things that you put your glass on? Usually with a beer brand logo on it.

By the way, did you think the Klinger fans posting here gave a balanced picture?

I think that the thread overall presents a balanced enough picture for an interested reader to be able to pick up Klinger's book and read it with an interested but sceptical eye.

You perhaps have to understand that I already came to Keri over strong NT from a start where I was already playing 2 puppets 2 over a weak NT - but definitely not Keri - so it doesn't seem as foreign to me as it probably does to others. I already had a jaundiced view of standard methods over weak NT - so much of what you read about standard methods is geared to strong NT where "GF" still has some meaning for a passed hand and "slammy" comes up often enough to be relevant. Over a weak NT, you have to mainly think about running away from it and inviting - which gets too little air time in the literature if you're talking about a weak NT - so perhaps I was a little prejudiced against "standard" over strong NT to begin with.

Nick
"Pass is your friend" - my brother in law - who likes to bid a lot.
0

#28 User is offline   straube 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,970
  • Joined: 2009-January-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver WA USA

Posted 2010-September-28, 11:16

NickRW, on Sep 28 2010, 11:55 AM, said:

hanp, on Sep 28 2010, 04:42 PM, said:

You can pick any top level pair whose methods you like and read their names instead of meckwell. The point was that if you are comparing your elaborate methods with the methods of "most people", then surely you are going to win by a landslide. Most people can write their notrump methods on the back of a... how do you call one of those round cardboard things that you put your glass on? Usually with a beer brand logo on it.

By the way, did you think the Klinger fans posting here gave a balanced picture?

I think that the thread overall presents a balanced enough picture for an interested reader to be able to pick up Klinger's book and read it with an interested but sceptical eye.

You perhaps have to understand that I already came to Keri over strong NT from a start where I was already playing 2 puppets 2 over a weak NT - but definitely not Keri - so it doesn't seem as foreign to me as it probably does to others. I already had a jaundiced view of standard methods over weak NT - so much of what you read about standard methods is geared to strong NT where "GF" still has some meaning for a passed hand and "slammy" comes up often enough to be relevant. Over a weak NT, you have to mainly think about running away from it and inviting - which gets too little air time in the literature if you're talking about a weak NT - so perhaps I was a little prejudiced against "standard" over strong NT to begin with.

Nick

I think Keri would certainly do better for weak NT than for strong NT and it would do better for PH than it would for UPH.

With fewer combined points between the hands, loss of sequences will matter less.
0

#29 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,010
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:bye

Posted 2010-September-28, 11:17

blackshoe, on Sep 28 2010, 04:19 PM, said:

I found a description of Heeman. Looks much like Keri at first glance. I'll look closer later.

not really, in Heeman you can describe all 5M4m and 4M5m below 3N, be it invitational or GF, or at least this is to my understanding.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#30 User is offline   Phil 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,091
  • Joined: 2008-December-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Texas, USA
  • Interests:Mountain Biking

Posted 2010-September-28, 12:49

My take (I played it for close to 10 years and recently dropped it - since we dropped a 12-14 NT):

- The 3 level splinters are very useful. As a matter of fact, even if you play 1N - 3M as shortness and a 54 in the minors, I think you can benefit by adding 31(63) to the mix.

- I didn't mind 1N - 2 - 2 - 2M as an invite. I think you are gaining a lot against strong NT pairs that get overboard at the 3 level.

- The sequences I absolutely hated were the 1N - 2 - 2 - 2N auctions. Why not just tell the defenders exactly how to defend when responder has a simple game force? While this is useful for slam bidding to go through these histrionics to find a simple 4-4 fit is nonsense.

Losing garbage stayman is not a big deal at all. Most of the time you are getting doubled, and you are running with these hands.
Hi y'all!

Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
0

#31 User is offline   jdonn 

  • - - T98765432 AQT8
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,085
  • Joined: 2005-June-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV

Posted 2010-September-28, 14:20

Sheesh it's a coaster han.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
0

#32 User is offline   junyi_zhu 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 536
  • Joined: 2003-May-28
  • Location:Saltlake City

Posted 2010-September-28, 16:07

mikegill, on Sep 28 2010, 03:37 PM, said:

As someone who still plays the system that was linked to (with a few small changes) and has played it for 5+ years now, I have some observations:

1) I am relatively certain that overall this has not been a huge win or a huge loss. I did not keep detailed notes about its success, so I will not try to guess based on my scattered memories whether or not it has been a small win or a small loss in that time.

2) Honestly if I were going to stop playing it, the primary reason would probably be that it sometimes sides contracts differently than they would be in standard and I would like to create fewer random swings.

3) Here are what I see are the primary advantages:
- I think the many splinters and exact shape-showing sequences are a win vs. standard NT systems. As has been mentioned, much of this can be incorporated into a stayman structure if you're willing to futz with it, but I think it fits cleaner into this system.
- Being able to sign off in 2 is nice, and I can remember wins from this.
- The convoluted stayman sequence does let you avoid 4M with 4333 opposite 4333
- Being able to handle light invitational hands with (4x)(6x) and (5x)(5x) is usually a win when it comes up.
- There are other sequences that seem like they should be good but they never seem to come up.

4) Here are the disadvantages:
- You give them a chance to double clubs and diamonds on normal GF stayman hands.
- You don't have garbage stayman (this probably about cancels the benefits of being able to play 2 imo).
- 2 is artificial (I would rather play 2NT nat inv all other things being equal)
- There is no way to show (4x)(6x) with a min GF (to invite slam you have to be willing to play 4N).
- Lack of smolen both sometimes wrongsides and makes it awkward to bid 4-5+ and 5+-4+ major suit hands. I can't remember this ever mattering but it's definitely not a pretty part of the system.
- Keri is more vulnerable to opponent bids than is stayman. It's generally obvious what to do when they bid over stayman, I don't find it so over Keri.

I see the 2 - 2 - 2M sequences as approximately break-even. I don't really ever remember +110 when the entire field is -100 in 3, but I also don't remember +110 losing to a long string of +120s. I wouldn't advertise this sequence as the reason to play this system, though.

Good post. I actually never feel garbage stayman is very useful. Suppose you open 1NT with 2-2 in the majors, you just don't have a good place to play after garbage stayman. Therefore, a sign off gadget to 2D certainly looks better than garbage stayman IMO because it most likely may improve the contract.
0

#33 User is offline   straube 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,970
  • Joined: 2009-January-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver WA USA

Posted 2010-September-28, 16:21

I borrowed quite a bit from Klinger, but I did switch things around, too.

Klinger uses a "Game Probe" of 1N-2C, 2D-2N which asks opener for 4 and 5 cd majors. I use the identical structure for my GF (but usually not slam interest) hands except that I bid 2N immediately.

1N-2N is puppet stayman. It quickly places us in a GF before the competition can try to confuse the issue by overcalling or doubling. Meckwell uses 2N as puppet stayman, too.

The other thing I switched was the splinters. Klinger uses 1 under splinters. For instance 1N-3C would show shortness in diamonds. If opener bids the splinter suit, he shows that he has little wastage in that suit.

Two problems I think. The first is that fit-finding should come first and slam investigation should be second. Klinger uses bidding room at the 3 level for a task that ought to take place at the 4-level (after a fit has been found).

The other problem is that 1N-3C gets too much room and 1N-3S gets too little room.

I play...

1N-3D=diamond splinter
1N-3H=heart splinter
1N-3S=spade splinter
1N-2S, (2N/3C)-3D=club splinter

This gives the same amount of space for both minor suit splinters.
0

#34 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,663
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2010-September-28, 16:55

straube, on Sep 28 2010, 10:21 PM, said:

I play...

1N-3D=diamond splinter
1N-3H=heart splinter
1N-3S=spade splinter
1N-2S, (2N/3C)-3D=club splinter

A suggestion from Marc Smith is to use 3D as a splinter in either minor. Then 3H resolves which suit and whether the hand is good enough to move beyond 3NT. That frees the sequence via 2S for something else if you need it at the cost of having less space for these splinter auctions. You can partially solve the bidd space problem of 3S by having that show a heart shortage. That means that you have 4H available as a good raise of spades. The downside is wrong-siding 4M, assuming a strong NT.

I am aware that several top pairs use a 2NT or 3C response as a form of Puppet Stayman but I find it difficult to believe that it is as efficient as regular Puppet Stayman if you often open 5M332 hands 1NT. I personally use 2C as Puppet Stayman and 1NT - 2C - 2D - 3C as a modified form of GF Stayman. Thus Responder gradually filters down Opener's hand shape until they get the information they need. This seem very natural to me.
(-: Zel :-)

Happy New Year everyone!
0

#35 User is offline   straube 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,970
  • Joined: 2009-January-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver WA USA

Posted 2010-September-28, 19:24

I'm not sure how that 3D (either minor) splinter would work.

Here's how mine works.

1N-3D (14-16. showing diamond shortness)
3H-3S (showing 4 and not 5 hearts, showing 4 spades and not 4 hearts)
4C-4D (says opener knows a fit and likes his hand, 4D asks for the fit)
5C-6C (says the fit is clubs, accepts the slam invitation)

1N-2S (14-16, size ask)
2N-3D (minimum, club shortness)
4H (promises 5 hearts but opener doesn't like his hand)

1N-3H (14-16, heart shortness)
3S-3N (showing 4 and not 5 spades, COG)
4S (opener prefers to play a 4-3 fit)

1N-3D (14-16, diamond shortness)
3H-4C (showing 4 and not 5 hearts, responder likes his hand and knows of a fit)
4D-4H (asks for the fit, hearts are the fit)

1N-3D (14-16, diamond shortness)
3S-3N (shows 4 and not 5 spades and denies 4 hearts, COG)
4D-5C (shows opener is worried about diamonds, responder chooses clubs)

1N-3D (14-16, diamond shortness)
3S-4D (shows 4 and not 5 spades and denies 4 hearts, responder wants help
.............finding a fit and has slam values)
6C (opener accepts slam and has a club fit)
0

#36 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2010-September-28, 21:05

who TF is Keri?
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#37 User is offline   MickyB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,290
  • Joined: 2004-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, England

Posted 2010-September-28, 21:33

I believe Keri was the name of Klinger's daughter, who died very young.
0

#38 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,227
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2010-September-28, 22:18

IIRC, she was 20. http://www.montefiorehome.com.au/ArticleDo...202007.pdf.aspx
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
0

#39 User is offline   Free 

  • mmm Duvel
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,728
  • Joined: 2003-July-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgium
  • Interests:Duvel, Whisky

Posted 2010-September-29, 00:26

gwnn, on Sep 28 2010, 06:17 PM, said:

blackshoe, on Sep 28 2010, 04:19 PM, said:

I found a description of Heeman. Looks much like Keri at first glance. I'll look closer later.

not really, in Heeman you can describe all 5M4m and 4M5m below 3N, be it invitational or GF, or at least this is to my understanding.

Indeed. Plus you have various methods for both minors, weak, invite, GF or SI. And you have a method to investigate slams with balanced vs balanced hands and stay below 3NT if you don't have enough controls.

That being said, the biggest drawback is that you consume too much space showing a GF 2-suiter (you end in 3 or 3 showing a 5-4, both suits are known). If you have an extreme 2-suiter however you're pretty much screwed. I once held a 6-5 distribution, needless to say we got to a crappy slam which happened to make because of good honour location and a giant double fit... I no longer play Heeman because of the disadvantage of extreme hands.
"It may be rude to leave to go to the bathroom, but it's downright stupid to sit there and piss yourself" - blackshoe
0

#40 User is offline   2Macchiato 

  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 2010-September-29

Posted 2010-September-29, 11:59

Sorry, Keri does nothing for me. Amuses me why people think it's so good!
0

Share this topic:


  • 4 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users