[nigel_k]

 MickyB, on 2012-November-21, 10:26, said:

I too thought they would be at first, but realised I was basically using responder's 2NT rebids twice. Eg

1H:1S!
2D - now 2S = GF relay, 2N = natural invite

1S:1N,
2H - now 2N is needed as both a GF relay and a natural invite

Obviously we don't actually play 1H:1S, 2D as natural but this shows the problem in a nutshell

Isn't it easier to just GF relay with the 2♣ response and keep 1NT for other hands? Especially if you don't even save a step by using 1NT because responder has to skip one step later on.

[straube]

 nigel_k, on 2012-November-22, 00:21, said:

Isn't it easier to just GF relay with the 2♣ response and keep 1NT for other hands? Especially if you don't even save a step by using 1NT because responder has to skip one step later on.

Yeah. That's what we do. We have in effect a strong relay (2C) and a weak relay (1N) and both let opener describe more of his pattern. Why reverse course and have responder interrupt that by describing his own hand? Now both partners are in the dark.

[Zelandakh]

So I managed to think about this on the train home last night and think I have the basis for a solution by treating the 1NT response as a Lebensohl-like marionette:-

1♠ - 1NT
======
2♣ = any non-GF not qualifying for 2♦♥♠ (2D = relay, see below)
2♦ = 5+ diamonds, non-GF (3♥ = range ask)
2♥ = 5+ clubs, min
2♠ = 6+ spades, 4 diamonds, min
2NT = 18+ bal
3X = nat GF

After 1♠ - 1NT; 2♣, 2♦ is a relay showing either a weak hand with spade shortage or a GF hand), responses
2♥ = 4+ hearts (2♠ = GF relay)
2♠ = 6+ spades, one-suited (2NT = GF relay)
2NT = weak NT (3♣ = GF relay)
3♣ = 4+ clubs (3♦ = GF relay)
3♦ = 4 diamonds (3♥ = GF relay)

It is not full shape relays but it does seem to get the job done. That said, I see a number of issues, notably that the opps can almost double blind after 1♠ - 1NT; 2♣ - 2♦; 2NT - P knowing that we are weak and in a misfit.


If you want total relays then my solution is to play 1NT as INV+ without 4 spades and then
2♣ = min without 4 hearts (now 2♦ is GF relay and continue as per 2♥+ steps below; others are nat and INV)
2♦ = 4+ hearts (now 2♠ is GF relay; others are nat and INV)
2♥ = 4+ clubs, GF
2♠ = one-suited, GF
2NT = 5+ spades, 5+ diamonds, GF
3♣ = 5 spades, 4 diamonds, GF
3♦= 6042 or 6143, GF
3♥ = 6241, GF
3♠ = 6340, GF
3NT = 7141, GF
4♣ = 7+ spades, 4 diamonds, heart void, GF
4♦+ = 7+ spades, 4 diamonds, club void, GF

Of course I do not have 5332 hands included which helps a lot. This is what I was meaning by things being somewhat tight. 2♣ as a GF relay response will have the same issue. You can naturally include these in the one suiters but then you cannot get complete shape resolution. But you can use the relay breaks over 2♠ to show natural suits so that the unbalanced hand is describing, albeit at the 3 level. I personally use the relay breaks as stopper asks though.

Anyway, hopefully at least some part of these musings is helpful although it does look like you might already have moved past this.

[MickyB]

 nigel_k, on 2012-November-22, 00:21, said:

Isn't it easier to just GF relay with the 2♣ response and keep 1NT for other hands? Especially if you don't even save a step by using 1NT because responder has to skip one step later on.

I want responder to get the NT in first, and I want 1S:2C free to show a suit. When I set out I thought that suit would be diamonds, but I guess I'll have to make do with it being clubs

[MickyB]

Cheers Zel. One question - why are so many hands bidding 1S:1N, 2C? I'd have been inclined to start with something like

2D = 5S4D 11-18
2H = 5S4C 11-13
2S = 5S4C 14-17

Or similar

[Zelandakh]

 MickyB, on 2012-November-22, 06:18, said:

Cheers Zel. One question - why are so many hands bidding 1S:1N, 2C?

Because over 2♣ we can afford to use 2♦ as the relay (our only diamond hand is invitational so bumping that to 3♦ is not a problem). But over 2♦♥♠ we need all the low level bids naturally so including more than 1 or 2 hand types prevents us from unwinding them. Add to that the advantage that Responder can pass 2♣ with a very weak hand and long clubs and it seems clear that this is the right basic approach (although we can argue about which hands to remove). I actually started by putting ALL non-GF hands into 2♣, saw how that went and then removed the most troublesome into 2♦♥♠ to make the partial relays resolve under 3NT (except for 6♠4m with extras where it is unnecessary). If you were able to take one more hand type out of 1NT then we can really get serious with relays by having a low level forcing call in every sequence.