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

#41 User is offline   zenko 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 166
  • Joined: 2006-April-26

Posted 2010-September-29, 12:14

I play it in wk NT structure, and it works fine, probably better than it would with strong NT, but you do need to memorize quite a bit. I am not sure did anybody mentioned it so far, IMO one of the main advantages of KERI is 2NT F rebid by responder after any transfer acceptance that lets bid effectively with both 5M-4m and 5M-5m hands, among other things.

I am aware that similar feature can be incorporated in regular NT structure ( I think Brogeland have something like that in the system he plays), but you need to fiddle quite a bit to make it fit.
0

#42 User is offline   blackshoe 

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

Posted 2010-September-29, 12:18

2Macchiato, on Sep 29 2010, 01:59 PM, said:

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

Apparently it does do something for you, then. :P
--------------------
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

#43 User is offline   2Macchiato 

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

Posted 2010-September-29, 12:22

So, partner opens 1N - everything for me revolves around the use of the (semi-vacant) 2 response.

Once you determine what you are comfortable with:

one (or more) from: Raise to 2N / Baron / Clubs (weak or strong with 2N/3C options) / either minor weak or strong..

Then you know what the rest of your system requirements will be and can accommodate for example 4 Maj 6 Minor (weak or otherwise) into your agreed responses.

I see no particular reason to abandon relatively standard Stayman (promissory or otherwise) and (at least 2 Suit) Transfers and continuations simply to cater for those 1 in 2000 hands Bridge is hard enough at times without resource to complex memory checks!

And good point Blackshoe :P
0

#44 User is offline   zenko 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 166
  • Joined: 2006-April-26

Posted 2010-September-29, 12:43

You have point as long as you play the same NT range as the most of the field, so when you end up in the wrong contract using normal methods you will probably have a lot of company. But if you play ranges that are anti-field you need methods that will offset that, otherwise you might be the only one ending up in say 3N with xx opposite Jx in a suit, etc.
0

#45 User is offline   mikegill 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 296
  • Joined: 2006-May-26

Posted 2010-September-29, 12:55

Not that I think anyone cares at this point, but I'm an idiot and you definitely can show (x4)(x6) hands GF.
0

#46 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-29, 12:57

And how do these two pieces of information relate to each other? :P
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#47 User is offline   2Macchiato 

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

Posted 2010-September-29, 13:11

mikegill, on Sep 29 2010, 01:55 PM, said:

Not that I think anyone cares at this point, but I'm an idiot and you definitely can show (x4)(x6) hands GF.

I'm sure 4-6 GF isn't a problem. If someone can enlighten me as to the extra value to a system Keri offers (or Gladiator for that matter) then I'm willing to listen and suggest it can or should already there for any established partnership in any given situation - whether it be some form of Lebensohl (or similar) in competition - or various Stayman sequences with continuations (to give but 2 examples).

Bridge is not (an exact) science - you show what you have and partner can react accordingly.
0

#48 User is offline   zenko 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 166
  • Joined: 2006-April-26

Posted 2010-September-29, 13:44

2Macchiato, on Sep 29 2010, 02:11 PM, said:

mikegill, on Sep 29 2010, 01:55 PM, said:

Not that I think anyone cares at this point, but I'm an idiot and you definitely can show (x4)(x6) hands GF.

I'm sure 4-6 GF isn't a problem. If someone can enlighten me as to the extra value to a system Keri offers (or Gladiator for that matter) then I'm willing to listen and suggest it can or should already there for any established partnership in any given situation - whether it be some form of Lebensohl (or similar) in competition - or various Stayman sequences with continuations (to give but 2 examples).

Bridge is not (an exact) science - you show what you have and partner can react accordingly.

Like Yogi Berra said "You can see a lot just by observing"

If you care to read what many of us wrote here you will find a lot of features of KERI that do not exist elsewhere (or do exist but are underdeveloped), those features clearly add value, the only issue is is that value worth the trouble of learning it and how much it annoys you to get occasional anti-field bad result because of KERI.

Charlie Parker used to talk bad about alto sax all the time until he really tried to play it, after that he did not want to play any other, maybe you would feel the same about KERI if you give it a try.
0

#49 User is offline   NickRW 

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

Posted 2010-September-29, 16:48

2Macchiato, on Sep 29 2010, 07:11 PM, said:

If someone can enlighten me as to the extra value to a system Keri offers (or Gladiator for that matter) then I'm willing to listen

When I was teaching my kids to respond to a weak NT, I taught them:

2 = weak t/o in / or , or inv no major interest, or inv some 6 carder
... opener normally relays with 2 and responder passes or makes the obv call
2 = stayman, inv or better
2/ = inv 5 cards - not forcing.
2NT = xfer to clubs
3x = forcing

It is simple.

It works well as well as anything for beginners.

Being able to stop in 2 is a winner sometimes - but you don't have garbage stayman which can be a loser. As has elsewhere been pointed out it is about a push.

Being able to stop in 2M with an inv hand can be a plus when it comes up as the people playing transfers will be in 2NT or 3M - it doesn't happen as often as one might think though. It does allow you to invite with some moderately shapely hands that are a tad light for playing 2NT opposite a non fitting min.

Having responder play the weak major take outs when opposite a weak NT is overall a slight plus I think. Weak take outs opposite a weak NT cover a wide range of hands and more is known about the opener than the responder - so it is (sometimes) better to keep the unknown hand hidden.

It has quite a lot of ways of inviting, less ways of forcing - which is certainly good opposite a weak NT from 3rd or 4th hand - and is arguably not a bad idea at MP opposite 1st or 2nd seat as invite hands are common opposite a weak NT (and ones you want to force with not so common) - and frequency of gain is an impportant MP consideration.

I won't say it is the best thing since sliced bread - but it works fine enough.

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

#50 User is offline   straube 

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

Posted 2010-September-29, 18:31

NickRW, on Sep 29 2010, 05:48 PM, said:

2Macchiato, on Sep 29 2010, 07:11 PM, said:

If someone can enlighten me as to the extra value to a system Keri offers (or Gladiator for that matter) then I'm willing to listen

When I was teaching my kids to respond to a weak NT, I taught them:

2 = weak t/o in / or , or inv no major interest, or inv some 6 carder
... opener normally relays with 2 and responder passes or makes the obv call
2 = stayman, inv or better
2/ = inv 5 cards - not forcing.
2NT = xfer to clubs
3x = forcing

It is simple.

It works well as well as anything for beginners.

Being able to stop in 2 is a winner sometimes - but you don't have garbage stayman which can be a loser. As has elsewhere been pointed out it is about a push.

Being able to stop in 2M with an inv hand can be a plus when it comes up as the people playing transfers will be in 2NT or 3M - it doesn't happen as often as one might think though. It does allow you to invite with some moderately shapely hands that are a tad light for playing 2NT opposite a non fitting min.

Having responder play the weak major take outs when opposite a weak NT is overall a slight plus I think. Weak take outs opposite a weak NT cover a wide range of hands and more is known about the opener than the responder - so it is (sometimes) better to keep the unknown hand hidden.

It has quite a lot of ways of inviting, less ways of forcing - which is certainly good opposite a weak NT from 3rd or 4th hand - and is arguably not a bad idea at MP opposite 1st or 2nd seat as invite hands are common opposite a weak NT (and ones you want to force with not so common) - and frequency of gain is an impportant MP consideration.

I won't say it is the best thing since sliced bread - but it works fine enough.

Nick

That seems really pretty good for a NT structure opposite a passed hand. I suppose after...

1N-2D, 2H would show a minimum with 4 hearts so one could play there. If responder had 4 spades (and not hearts) he would just rebid 2S.

I guess the downside is that it wrongsides contracts quite a lot.
0

#51 User is offline   Zelandakh 

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

Posted 2010-September-30, 01:00

[quote name='straube' date='Sep 29 2010, 01:24 AM'] I'm not sure how that 3D (either minor) splinter would work.

Here's how mine works.

[QUOTE=NickRW]
2[cl] = weak t/o in [di]/[he] or [sp], or inv no major interest, or inv some 6 carder
... opener normally relays with 2[di] and responder passes or makes the obv call
2[di] = stayman, inv or better
2[he]/[sp] = inv 5 cards - not forcing.
2NT = xfer to clubs
3x = forcing [/quote]
@straube
It seems that when you say 'splinter' you are also incorporating 5431 hands rather than only 4441 and 5440. When i was referring to splinter bids I was using the more restricted definition. The 5431 hands usually get bid via a different route. The way it works is thus

1NT - 3D = 4441 or 5440 with short minor
3H asks (others are natural and pessimistic)
3S = short clubs (diamonds), not good enough to go beyond 3NT
3N = short diamonds (clubs), not good enough to go beyond 3NT
4m = short (other) minor, slammy

The parentheses are to indicate that you can play these bids either way as desired.


@NickRW
Would it not make sense to make an immediate 2M as a weak take-out and to move the 5 card major invites within 2C? This has the effect of continuing the preempt started by 1NT when it is their hand. Also, is it strictly necessary to use 3M after 2C as an invite? Surely with a 6 card major invite it would be possible to show a 5 card invite and then bid 3M next round if partner takes it out. Then you could use these bids for a GF 1-suiter and use 3D/H/S as something else such as splinters. Or is that adding too much complexity for your kids?
(-: Zel :-)

Happy New Year everyone!
0

#52 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-30, 01:16

I never played KERI, I've never encountered someone playing it, I know something about it (but limited) and I've read the entire discussion. But I still wonder why it's so much better than a well established partnership's 1NT structure based on Stayman. I mean, showing shortness isn't difficult in std, playing 2 with an INV 5 is possible,... There's also some contradiction about some of the stuff like the invites with 4-5M.
"It may be rude to leave to go to the bathroom, but it's downright stupid to sit there and piss yourself" - blackshoe
0

#53 User is offline   wclass___ 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 431
  • Joined: 2008-November-02

Posted 2010-September-30, 05:30

Free, on Sep 30 2010, 02:16 AM, said:

But I still wonder why it's so much better than a well established partnership's 1NT structure based on Stayman..

It is not better. Stayman>>Keri.
Seeking input from anyone who doesn't frequently "wtp", "Lol" or post to merely "Agree with ..." --sathyab
0

#54 User is offline   NickRW 

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

Posted 2010-September-30, 07:04

Zelandakh, on Sep 30 2010, 07:00 AM, said:

@NickRW
Would it not make sense to...


There are all sorts of ways you can tweak it.


Quote

Or is that adding too much complexity for your kids?


For my sons, lately, yes. They got up to the point of being average or maybe slightly better club players and then decided they were more interested in beer and girls instead of spending their evening with "a bunch of olds". They still play, sometimes at home, sometimes at the club - but they are not improving and not putting in the effort to do so. My daughter is a different kettle of fish - she will work at the game (if I prod her a bit!) and we're trying out a modified version of Keri at the moment.

@wclass ("Stayman>>Keri") - you have your head somewhere smelly. You can argue that there are differences and that one is maybe slightly better than the other - but to argue that one is hugely better than the other is ridiculous.

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

#55 User is offline   hanp 

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

Posted 2010-September-30, 07:28

Bid better, much better.

Quote

but to argue that one is hugely better than the other is ridiculous.

and the result can be plotted on a graph.
0

#56 User is offline   NickRW 

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

Posted 2010-September-30, 07:52

hanp, on Sep 30 2010, 01:28 PM, said:

Bid better, much better.

Well, I never bought Klinger's book title from the off. There is enough in the book to be very interesting - and there certainly are quite a few good hands for it - but when I started taking a more critical look when facing the "do I really want to learn all this for real" question, I felt that there were holes - which is why I play a modified version.
"Pass is your friend" - my brother in law - who likes to bid a lot.
0

#57 User is offline   Apollo81 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,162
  • Joined: 2006-July-10
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maryland

Posted 2010-September-30, 08:02

awm, on Sep 27 2010, 06:34 PM, said:

(3) Keri leads you to play a lot of 4-3 major suit fits in 2M instead of 2NT. This is made out to be a win in Ron Klinger's writeup, but I haven't found it to be so at the table. One issue is that the "three" hand is always balanced; 4-3 fits where the 3 hand is 4333 are almost always worse than 2NT for example. Of course, it's possible that I'm not playing these 4-3 major fits as well as I'm supposed to.

My experience has been that there are a number of hands where 2M in the 4(5)-3 fit makes and 2NT does not, or (less often) 2M makes 3 and 2NT makes 2. I would say this roughly offsets the losses, but in my experience people seem to defend worse against 2M than against 2NT, making this a slight win. I think you're probably right about 4333 hands; maybe opener should bid 2NT with 4333 instead of passing.

Also I bet your invites are more sound than ours. That's consistent with the difference in our results.
0

#58 User is offline   straube 

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

Posted 2010-September-30, 13:51

Free, on Sep 30 2010, 02:16 AM, said:

I never played KERI, I've never encountered someone playing it, I know something about it (but limited) and I've read the entire discussion. But I still wonder why it's so much better than a well established partnership's 1NT structure based on Stayman. I mean, showing shortness isn't difficult in std, playing 2 with an INV 5 is possible,... There's also some contradiction about some of the stuff like the invites with 4-5M.

Unless you Stayman and partner happens to bid a fitting major, it is difficult to show shortness. Lets say opener has both majors and you have 4-1-4-4 or 4-1-5-3. He rebids 2H and you're kind of stuck as far as showing your pattern is concerned....unless you have other bids to handle that.

Keri has the immediate shortness showing bids at the 3-level, so Keri would be fine showing the 4-1-4-4 pattern. Keri can't show the 4-1-5-3 pattern. With that hand, the bidding proceeds 1N-2C, 2D-3S which shows 4S/5+D and furnishes no information about the residues.

Totally separate issue now, but a minor point I don't like about Keri is that
1N-2C, 2D-2S, 2N can displace the partnership from a 5-2 or even 6-2 spade fit.
0

#59 User is offline   Zelandakh 

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

Posted 2010-September-30, 14:06

straube, on Sep 30 2010, 07:51 PM, said:

Unless you Stayman and partner happens to bid a fitting major, it is difficult to show shortness.

This rather depends on your Staymanic methods. For example, it is possible to play
1NT - 2C - 2H
3D = good raise in hearts (optionally can also ask for 3433 shape)
3H = INV
3S/4m = splinter

and
1NT - 2C - 2S
3H = good raise in spades (optionally can also ask for 4333 shape)
3S = INV
4m/H = splinter

An alternative tweak that I have seen recommended is to use a bid of 3oM as an ambiguous splinter. With a little re-structuring there are plenty of bids in the Stayman structure to handle shortages in addition to the immediate splinter bids we previously discussed. It is trickier using Puppet Stayman when you have a 4-4 heart fit though (in compensation it is easier with a 5-3 fit and break-even with 4-4 spade fit).
(-: Zel :-)

Happy New Year everyone!
0

#60 User is offline   straube 

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

Posted 2010-September-30, 14:35

Zelandakh, on Sep 30 2010, 03:06 PM, said:

straube, on Sep 30 2010, 07:51 PM, said:

Unless you Stayman and partner happens to bid a fitting major, it is difficult to show shortness.

This rather depends on your Staymanic methods. For example, it is possible to play
1NT - 2C - 2H
3D = good raise in hearts (optionally can also ask for 3433 shape)
3H = INV
3S/4m = splinter

and
1NT - 2C - 2S
3H = good raise in spades (optionally can also ask for 4333 shape)
3S = INV
4m/H = splinter

An alternative tweak that I have seen recommended is to use a bid of 3oM as an ambiguous splinter. With a little re-structuring there are plenty of bids in the Stayman structure to handle shortages in addition to the immediate splinter bids we previously discussed. It is trickier using Puppet Stayman when you have a 4-4 heart fit though (in compensation it is easier with a 5-3 fit and break-even with 4-4 spade fit).

Yes, I've seen that sort of thing.

I use 1N-2C, 2M-3D as a size ask with a fit. I see 1N-2C, 2M-3M as GI being mostly redundant. I guess a raise avoids lead directing doubles.

I've experimented with 1N-2C, 2M-3D, 3L-4m as various things.

Here's one scheme and there's obviously room for more complication...

1N-2C, 2H-
.....3C-forces 3D
..........3D
...............3H-4-1-3-5
...............3S-4-3-1-5
...............3N-4-2-2-5 slam invite (traditional meaning uses other route)
...............4C-spade splinter
...............4D-4-2-2-5 stronger slam invite
.....3D-fit, size ask
..........3H-min
..........3S-max
..........3N-max 3433
...............4m-cue?
.....3H-4-1-5-3
.....3S-4-3-5-1
.....3N-4-2-5-2 slam invite
.....4C-splinter
.....4D-splinter
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