[whereagles]

Hi all,

I was thinking of adopting the following little scheme, invented by a friend of mine and inspired in "Capp/1MX" (cappelletti over 1-major doubled). The idea is to be able to split trash raises from good raises on situations that occur very frequently. Capp/1mx is

1H (x) ...?
xx = pen
1S = nat F1 (forcing for 1 round)
1NT = 5+ clubs, 7+ points
2C = 5+ diams, 7+
2D = good 3-card raise, 7+
2H = trash 3-card raise, 0-6
2NT = good 4-card raise, 7+ (or 8- losers), invitational or better
3H = trash 4-card raise 0-6
2S/3C/3D = fit-bids

With a similar scheme if opening is 1S. (2D now shows hearts, etc...) The extended scheme is valid if the overcall on 1M is up to 1H (2C) or 1S (2D). If it's higher than this, you get back to normal Robson/Segal-style bidding. So here's the scheme:

1H (1S) ...?
x = balanced, unlimited
1NT = clubs, 7+
2C = diams, 7+
2D = good 3-card raise
2H = trash 3-card raise
2S = mixed 4-card raise (6-9 points, some defensive strenght)
2NT = good 4-card raise
3m = fit-bids
3H = trash 4-card raise

1H (2C) ...?
x = balanced (can have 4 spades) OR diamonds
2D = good 3 raise
2H = trash raise
2S = nat F1
2NT = good 4 raise
3C = mixed raise
3D = fit-bid
3H = trash raise

1S (2C) ...?
x = balanced (can have 4 hearts) OR diamonds
2D = hearts
2H = good 3 raise
2S = trash 3 raise
2NT = good 4 raise
3C = mixed raise
3D/3H = fit-bids
3S = trash 4 raise

1S (2D) ...?
x = balanced OR hearts
2H = good 3 raise
2S = trash 3 raise
2NT = good 4 raise
3C = nat F1
3D = mixed raise
3H = fit-bid
3S = trash 4 raise

Advantages:
1. Distinguishing good from trash 3-card raises. Especially important if 1M is not limited.
2. Splitting 4-card raises in 3 important types: pure pree, mixed and strongish.
3. Allows bidding some hands naturally, which in other methods might have to have used a negative double.
4. The transfer scheme allows to bid hands on both negative free bid range and forcing. Best of both worlds, lol.
5. It happens all the time, contrary to some conventions which are as memory-demanding as this one, but never seem to come out.

Problems:
1. May cause problems finding some 4-4 fits when responder is balanced.
2. Requires further study, which might lead to uncommon competitive rules.
3. Needs careful discussion of follow-ups. (Which I didn't think much on yet, lol.)

[joker_gib]

1♥/♠ (X) ?

What do you do with 7-9 HCP (assuming you RDL with more) no ♥ fit which is the natural bid of 1NT ????

[whereagles]

You'll have to pass that hand and bid 1NT or 2M later (showing Hx support).

[hrothgar]

Is your friends name Robson?
Or perhaps Segal?

[inquiry]

You are on the right track... I play it somewhat differently but thinking along these lines is good for your bridge. I will say however, you need to spend sometime on the competitive auctions and follow ups, because they will be lot of those. I will give you a hint to consider... if you have fit jumps availabe, what is the kind of hand where you will transfer to another suit (how broad ranging).

[whereagles]

hrothgar: neither. My friend is not a known player.

Ben: yes, I do need to think about follow-ups. I suspect it will be mostly negative doubles, though. As for auctions such as

1H (1S) 2C (p)
2D (p) 2H

I'd play responder for a good diamond suit with very mild heart support. Something like

xxx xxx AKxxx xx
xxx Qx KQJxx xxx

The fit-bid should look more like

xxx Qxx AKxxx xx

(Obviously a minimum!)

[hrothgar]

whereagles, on Oct 13 2004, 02:39 PM, said:

hrothgar: neither. My friend is not a known player.

The reason that I asked is that this advance structure is quite well known and was documented in print years ago by R+S...

Not sure whether your friend should be claiming that he invented this scheme...

[whereagles]

Oh, I didn't know it was around already. Still, my friend doesn't claim anything. In fact, the scheme was originally meant for use in a strong club with 4-card majors system, where distinguishing 3 from 4 card raises meant the difference between fit and misfit

[inquiry]

Well, let me address some issues here in a little more detail (I will keep short for Kenneth)...

1) These "transfers" are not like transfers after 1NT... since opener's hand can be vary wildly (even if you are palying a forcing club, and even more so if not). You need to work out what opener's rebid options are and what they show. One thing, the bid is forcing, but it doesn't force opener to bid the "transfer suit"

2) They don't have to be used exclusively over a double. They can be used after an overcall.. and low-and-behold, they can be used after your partner overcalled and the next hand makes a bid as well. This is the essences of mishovnbg's equality method (many post here), that when I talk about it, I spell differently (I spell it equality, misho's spelling is probably better.. maybe I will go edit all my old post)...

3) They don't have to be used only after a major opening, they can be used very effectively after a minor opening, as well. Here save 2NT for either TRUE game force with support, or an EXTREMELY PREEMPTIVE minor suit raise.

4) joker_gib was dead on with his comment about 1NT.. I would recommend you modify your method right away so that 1NT is always natural.

If you are interested, Misho and my post on equility can be found all over this forum... for instance, here is one where just one auction is discussed and where whereagels participated in the discussion

first reply followed by

Second reply

[whereagles]

Why do I need to make 1NT always natural? What's the problem of passing and bidding 2M later? (Or double.)

As for the rest, yeah, I gotta have a look at it all lol.

[pclayton]

A 'small' improvement, stolen from Grabel / Wittes that I play:

EVERYTHING is a transfer through 2 of our suit, including a redouble. Therefore, 1x - dbl - 1S = the pesky balanced 7-9 hand.

Higher than 2 of our suit is wjs or fit showing. 2N = mixed + with 4 trump.

Pass is alertable and shows a hand that would pass initially or redouble initially. Redouble tends to slow the opps down anyway, where the pass doesnt.

Raises by opener are sort of T-walsh: 1C - dbl - 1H - Pass: 1S = 3 spades, 2S = 4 spades, minimum.

[inquiry]

Misho and I also harness 1S bids on 1y-DBL-1S to show "balanced hands", well sort of. This 1S show either a balanced hand unsuited for a natural 1NT bid (maybe no fair stopper, more often, too much values), or a TRANSFER to clubs (and if "1y" was 1C, then this 1S shows diamonds. Our redouble, like yours, is a transfer (if the bid was 1S, then our Rdbl is balanced unsuited for 1NT for one reason or the other or transfer to clubs).

We find the need to separate the "good raise" to 2C from teh bad raise to 2C is a waste of a bid, and harnessing 1NT (natural) and 1S (balanced, too good or too ackward for 1NT) as a better use. Sometimes our "minor suit raise" actually shows a major... instead of support. WE divide preemptive minor raises into two types.. normal preemptive (jump to 3 of the minor) and despirately preemptive (really yucky), jump to 2NT.. But 2NT can also be game force with support as well (either or, but support in both cases).

[pclayton]

inquiry, on Oct 13 2004, 09:34 AM, said:

Misho and I also harness 1S bids on 1y-DBL-1S to show "balanced hands", well sort of. This 1S show either a balanced hand unsuited for a natural 1NT bid (maybe no fair stopper, more often, too much values), or a TRANSFER to clubs (and if "1y" was 1C, then this 1S shows diamonds. Our redouble, like yours, is a transfer (if the bid was 1S, then our Rdbl is balanced unsuited for 1NT for one reason or the other or transfer to clubs).

We find the need to separate the "good raise" to 2C from teh bad raise to 2C is a waste of a bid, and harnessing 1NT (natural) and 1S (balanced, too good or too ackward for 1NT) as a better use. Sometimes our "minor suit raise" actually shows a major... instead of support. WE divide preemptive minor raises into two types.. normal preemptive (jump to 3 of the minor) and despirately preemptive (really yucky), jump to 2NT.. But 2NT can also be game force with support as well (either or, but support in both cases).

I dont like to make the calls too '2-way', because if opener's partner takes a call, Opener is sometimes guessing on what hand type pard has. Our only 2-way call is the initial pass, which also makes life very tough for the opponents.

[inquiry]

pclayton, on Oct 13 2004, 05:31 PM, said:

I dont like to make the calls too '2-way', because if opener's partner takes a call, Opener is sometimes guessing on what hand type pard has. Our only 2-way call is the initial pass, which also makes life very tough for the opponents.

Well, too 2-way is not a big problem here, not really. At the one level, you either have a balanced hand unsuited for 1NT (think invitational balanced) or a hand with fair values in the unbid minor and NO FIT for partner. They really do jerk around with you at their own risk, and your partner 90% of the time can figure out which one you have if next hand raises...for instance if he is lookng at three in their suit, he knows you have the minor or they are really being risky. However, I understand the reason for not liking the two way bids.

And when used at the two level in particular (showing values for natural 2NT or 3 in cheapest unbid minor and no fit), you can use garazzo 2/3 doubles by opener to pinpoint some nice penalties if they raise.

Ben