Help
Frederick, look at the revised Keri structure. Its excellent!
Stronger Hand v. less described hand Which should be declarer
#21
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,728
- Joined: 2003-March-07
- Gender:Male
- Location:Laos
- Interests:Wagner and Bridge
Posted 2004-November-07, 06:46
"The King of Hearts a broadsword bears, the Queen of Hearts a rose." W. H. Auden.
#22
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 184
- Joined: 2003-June-13
- Location:France, near Paris
- Interests:<br>
Posted 2004-November-10, 22:26
In my opinion, the less described is more important, especially in a partial, or when the distributions are not wild.
It is certainly possible to conceal declarer's strength if you accept to lose the major-suit partials, provided it is always the balanced hand which asks about pattern when slam is out of the question.
It would be a kind of Polish Club wherein all balanced hands are opened 1♣ and vice versa. Something like:
1♣ balanced, 12+, may have a five-card major or a six-card minor or a bare K (or Q ? (or A?)))
1♦ unbalanced with five diamonds, four diamonds and five clubs (even 15+), or three-suiter with diamonds (one-round force if need be, since you can always answer 2♦ with any 0-4)
1♥ unbalanced with five hearts
1♠ unbalanced with five spades
1N 15-21 with clubs or a 4=4=1=4 (pass with 0-3, answer 2♣ with 4-6)
2♣ 11-14 with clubs (including the hands with five clubs and a four-card major, and either the 4=4=1=4s or the hands with six clubs and no four-card major, but presumably not both)
(or
1N 11-17 with clubs (pass 0-7, 2♣ 7-10, 2♦ 10+)
2♣ 17-21)
2♦ and above would cover the preempts, the unbalanced game forces (at least outside diamonds), and a few problem hands.
Over 1♣
1♦ 0-6 or 13+, forces 1♥
1♥ 7-8 without a five-card major (1♠ and 1N 12-17, 2♣ 18+)
1♠ 9-10 without a five-card major (1N 12-15, 2♣ 16+)
1N 7-10 with a five-card major (2♣ 12-15 or 18+, 2♦ 16-17)
2♣ 11-12 without a five-card major (2♦ 14+, others 12-13)
2♦ 11-12 with five hearts (2♥ 12-13)
2♥ 11-12 with five spades (2♠ 12-13)
2♠ 9-11 with six clubs
2N 9-11 with five clubs and five diamonds
2♠ 9-11 with six diamonds
(11-12 means : I intend to play game, unless opener has 12-13)
After 1♣ 1♦ 1♥,
1♠ 0-6 without a five-card major (1N 12-19, 2♣ 20+)
1N 13+ balanced or 19+ unbalanced, asks for range, then for shape, then for high honors
2♣ 13-16 unbalanced without a five-card major (2♦? 2♥ 13-14, others 15-16)
2♦ 0-6 or 13+ with five hearts (2♥ 12-19, 2♠ 20+ both ask for range)
2♥ 0-6 or 13+ with five spades (2♠ 12-19, 2N 20+ both ask for range)
2♠ 17-18 unbalanced without a five-card major
2N 13-16 with six clubs or ten minor cards
3♣ 13-16 with six diamonds
3♦ 13-16 with six diamonds and a four-card major
3♥ 13-16 with six clubs and four hearts
3♠ 13-16 with six clubs and four spades
I don't think this answer scheme risks much from preempts (although there surely are more efficient ones), since both players have already given useful information, but opener may not enjoy a direct overcall at the two-level when he has a strong NT with which he can't double for takeout (or should double simply show 16+?).
It is certainly possible to conceal declarer's strength if you accept to lose the major-suit partials, provided it is always the balanced hand which asks about pattern when slam is out of the question.
It would be a kind of Polish Club wherein all balanced hands are opened 1♣ and vice versa. Something like:
1♣ balanced, 12+, may have a five-card major or a six-card minor or a bare K (or Q ? (or A?)))
1♦ unbalanced with five diamonds, four diamonds and five clubs (even 15+), or three-suiter with diamonds (one-round force if need be, since you can always answer 2♦ with any 0-4)
1♥ unbalanced with five hearts
1♠ unbalanced with five spades
1N 15-21 with clubs or a 4=4=1=4 (pass with 0-3, answer 2♣ with 4-6)
2♣ 11-14 with clubs (including the hands with five clubs and a four-card major, and either the 4=4=1=4s or the hands with six clubs and no four-card major, but presumably not both)
(or
1N 11-17 with clubs (pass 0-7, 2♣ 7-10, 2♦ 10+)
2♣ 17-21)
2♦ and above would cover the preempts, the unbalanced game forces (at least outside diamonds), and a few problem hands.
Over 1♣
1♦ 0-6 or 13+, forces 1♥
1♥ 7-8 without a five-card major (1♠ and 1N 12-17, 2♣ 18+)
1♠ 9-10 without a five-card major (1N 12-15, 2♣ 16+)
1N 7-10 with a five-card major (2♣ 12-15 or 18+, 2♦ 16-17)
2♣ 11-12 without a five-card major (2♦ 14+, others 12-13)
2♦ 11-12 with five hearts (2♥ 12-13)
2♥ 11-12 with five spades (2♠ 12-13)
2♠ 9-11 with six clubs
2N 9-11 with five clubs and five diamonds
2♠ 9-11 with six diamonds
(11-12 means : I intend to play game, unless opener has 12-13)
After 1♣ 1♦ 1♥,
1♠ 0-6 without a five-card major (1N 12-19, 2♣ 20+)
1N 13+ balanced or 19+ unbalanced, asks for range, then for shape, then for high honors
2♣ 13-16 unbalanced without a five-card major (2♦? 2♥ 13-14, others 15-16)
2♦ 0-6 or 13+ with five hearts (2♥ 12-19, 2♠ 20+ both ask for range)
2♥ 0-6 or 13+ with five spades (2♠ 12-19, 2N 20+ both ask for range)
2♠ 17-18 unbalanced without a five-card major
2N 13-16 with six clubs or ten minor cards
3♣ 13-16 with six diamonds
3♦ 13-16 with six diamonds and a four-card major
3♥ 13-16 with six clubs and four hearts
3♠ 13-16 with six clubs and four spades
I don't think this answer scheme risks much from preempts (although there surely are more efficient ones), since both players have already given useful information, but opener may not enjoy a direct overcall at the two-level when he has a strong NT with which he can't double for takeout (or should double simply show 16+?).