[Vampyr]

aguahombre, on 2013-July-25, 14:26, said:

Yeh, well with a weak NT you have the same prepared opening issue. Opening 1C, then rebidding 2C, would still be off our chart; and the prepared 1NT opening seems better than the sort-of prepared 1D opening which would force a 2C rebid even if Pard responded 1H (because we don't have the strength to rebid 1NT).

Perhaps.

[Fluffy]

a forcing bid followed by suit rebid, its a very strong bid, otherwise bid 3♠ previous round.

[aguahombre]

ArtK78, on 2013-July-25, 14:41, said:

That is the point. It is the weaker sequence.

But A-A-B cannot be game invitational like you assumed, because you won't get farther than A-A. Part will be passing regardless of whether she would have accepted an invite.

1X-1A
2X-2A is a drop dead sequence.

[ArtK78]

aguahombre, on 2013-July-25, 16:14, said:

But A-A-B cannot be game invitational like you assumed, because you won't get farther than A-A. Part will be passing regardless of whether she would have accepted an invite.

1X-1A
2X-2A is a drop dead sequence.

No it is not. It is not forward going, but it is not a demand that you pass.

[mike777]

whatever but:


Qxxxxx..AKQx..Qx..X

is much more a problem than the OP hand.

Op just needs to come to some sort of agreement over the common auction of:

1c=whatever
2c=?

[Vampyr]

A lot of people have suggested using 2m+1 as an artificial GF. Is this normally followed by relays?

[Free]

Vampyr, on 2013-July-25, 12:30, said:

Right, well, it is clear that our methods need refinement.

LOL, that's coming from someone who can't open a weak NT when he has one, and instead has to bid his suit twice on a balanced hand with only a poor 5 card suit headed by a K.

[MrAce]

Vampyr, on 2013-July-25, 23:55, said:

A lot of people have suggested using 2m+1 as an artificial GF. Is this normally followed by relays?

No, pretty natural actually, opener responds just like he/she would respond a classic nmf/checkback/4thsf

ArtK78, on 2013-July-25, 13:25, said:

When bidding 6-4 hands, with the 6 card suit being the higher ranking suit, there are two orders in which you can bid the suits to convey that you are 6-4:

A - B - A
A - A - B

It is my understanding that bidding the suits A - B - A is stronger than bidding the suits A - A - B. The reason would be that you cannot give a preference to B without increasing the level of the auction.

Assuming that A - A - B is at least game invitational, that would imply that A - B - A would be game forcing. Therefore, the 3♠ bid in the sequence that you set out would be forcing.

Art i am not sure (correct me if i am wrong) but you seem to be influenced from the post i made long time ago about how to describe 6-4 hands with AAB and ABA method. But what i wrote was totally for opener, not responder. If i am wrong disregard this.

It is very hard to formulate the responder's 6-4 hands like that. Aguaman made an example. But i will go further. Imagine opener already denied the B suit when he rebid his minor, then B means a higher ranking suit than A, and if responder bids B it becomes an artificial force, not even a suit

1♣--1♥
2♣--2♠
2nt/3m--3♥

This bid doesn;t neccesarilly show a 6-4 hand, this is simply GF with hearts for example. (assuming 2♦ was not 2m+1 artificial treatment. treatment) 2♦ instead of 2♠ would do the same job even in std methods, and people call it 3rd suit forcing (spared to auctions where one opens 1m and rebids his minor usually at 2 level) Basically B suit is often not even a natural suit by responder.

@Vampyr : The one that i play as artificial GF is not 2m+1. I play cheapest other minor =artificial and GF. This allows me to play 2♥ regardless of opener;s minor is clubs or diamonds. Responder can easily bid his natural hearts, not only with 5-4 6-4 hands but also 5-5 hands. Assume responder holds 5-5 majors and holding about 8-9 hcp, he can bid hearts w/o worrying about creating a GF and he may even end up playing game if his hand improves when opener raises hearts when others play a 5-1 6-1 fit in 2m.

But just like everything this comes with a prize. 3rd suit GF players can choose either 2♦ or 2♥ over 2♣ to imply some sort of values. The way i play i can not do that and it may cause some minor problems if our final contract is likely to be 3NT and both of us are lacking control in unbid suit. Also when opener's minor is diamonds, i have to bid 3♣ in order to create a GF auction, which sometimes waste the space.

[Cyberyeti]

Vampyr, on 2013-July-25, 23:55, said:

A lot of people have suggested using 2m+1 as an artificial GF. Is this normally followed by relays?

Doesn't even need to be GF, inv+, meaning 1♣-1♠-2♣-2♥ is weak and the auction is unlikely to go beyond 3♣ unless opener has a big heart fit.

We play: (bidding the lowest appropriate in a weak no trump context)

1♣-1♠
2♣-2♦ (1♣-1♠-2♣-2N shows diamonds inv NF, hands that want to bid a natural 2N invite go through 2♦, which can mean you play 3N/3♣ when you wanted to be in 2N but this is very rare and I don't recall it happening in the 10-15 years I've been playing this)

2♥=4♥ F1
2♠=3♠ min NF
2N=4♦ min NF
3♣= min 6+ clubs NF
3♦ = good with ♦ (GF as are all higher bids)
3♥ = 4-6 decent
3♠ = good 3♠/6♣ (you would have a different rebid/opener with 5 spades and 3 clubs)
3N max, 6+ clubs only

[ArtK78]

As MrAce said, the bid of the other minor after 1m-1M- 2m can be played as artificial and forcing (not necessarily game forcing, but certainly forcing). I have discussed this method many times. It was written up in The Bridge World as Extended PLOB. It is commonly known as Extended New Minor Forcing. Al Moyse would refer to new minor forcing as "that petty little odious bid." This was embraced by NMF advocates who used the acronym PLOB for petty little odious bid. So, Extended New Minor Forcing became Extended PLOB.

The follow ups to Extended PLOB are essentially the same as the follow ups to PLOB. Whether Extended PLOB is game forcing or not is a matter of partnership agreement.

[aguahombre]

I stand corrected on my earlier contention that:

1C-1S
2C-2S= a drop dead sequence.

There are exceptions.

1)The partnership is using a Strong Club and/or artifical response structure.
2)Opener has 8+ clubs and chose a 1C opening for some reason.
3)Opener has misbid somewhere along the line and is trying to recover.
4)There was UI available to Opener from the table action accompanying the 2S rebid.

[gwnn]

5) weak jump shifts?

[aguahombre]

gwnn, on 2013-July-26, 09:10, said:

5) weak jump shifts?

Only if you define them as up to 9 points. IMO, 2S showing 10+ is highly unexpected enough to require an alert.

[ArtK78]

aguahombre, on 2013-July-26, 09:01, said:

I stand corrected on my earlier contention that:

1C-1S
2C-2S= a drop dead sequence.

There are exceptions.

1)The partnership is using a Strong Club and/or artifical response structure.
2)Opener has 8+ clubs and chose a 1C opening for some reason.
3)Opener has misbid somewhere along the line and is trying to recover.
4)There was UI available to Opener from the table action accompanying the 2S rebid.

Now you are just being silly.

There are many hands in standard bidding on which opener will rebid his minor suit minimally with the top of his range - say, 15-16 HCP and a good but not great suit. And responder, with a good but not great major suit of 6 cards, may rebid minimally also with the top of his range - say, 9-10 HCP. If opener has a mild fit for responder - Hx, for example - he can raise responder's rebid to invite. Or opener might try an invite in NT.

There may be players who believe that responder's rebid of a major is a drop dead bid - you seem to be one, and there may be others. But I don't believe that is standard.

[helene_t]

Fluffy, on 2013-July-25, 15:48, said:

a forcing bid followed by suit rebid, its a very strong bid, otherwise bid 3♠ previous round.

its not ideal to bid 3sp with 6-4 majors. with an invitational hand you can also bid 2h and pass 2nt.

[Cyberyeti]

aguahombre, on 2013-July-26, 09:01, said:

I stand corrected on my earlier contention that:

1C-1S
2C-2S= a drop dead sequence.

There are exceptions.

1)The partnership is using a Strong Club and/or artifical response structure.
2)Opener has 8+ clubs and chose a 1C opening for some reason.
3)Opener has misbid somewhere along the line and is trying to recover.
4)There was UI available to Opener from the table action accompanying the 2S rebid.

Speak for yourself, we don't play WJS and played 2♠ as rarely passed encouraging but NF 9-11 ish by an unpassed hand before we started playing the 2♦ relay and still do over 1♥-1♠-2♥. The number of hands (particularly at teams where we tailor our bidding system) where we actually wanted to bid a drop dead 2♠ was very low.

[helene_t]

with shogi I play 2s as mildly encouraging. opener probably passes some 2/3 of the time. I thought that is a normal treatment

[Zelandakh]

Ignoring all the stuff about artificial rebid methods, can we not just use 3♦ as a game force here? I mean Opener has already denied 3 spades so finding a 6-2 fit is hardly going to be difficult if Responder does have a GF 6-4 hand.

[Cyberyeti]

aguahombre, on 2013-July-25, 14:11, said:

The problem there is that A-A-B is not quaranteed to get us past a Pass of the 2nd "A"

I doubt many people agree that:

1C-1S
2C-2S is forcing rather than the end of the auction 99 percent of the time.

Until we agreed that 2♦ was an artificial ask, we played that this was encouraging and ended the auction about 10% of the time, and no we don't play WJS, we still play 1♥-1♠-2♥-2♠ as highly invitational.