[mike777]

Assume top 100 pairs, USA
I would guess that 90-99% do not play some type of legal full relay system, WHY?
I assume most of the decent relay systems that are WBF legal are legal in USA top tourneys.

Comments?

[Gerben47]

If you look at the top 10 teams in the European Championships you will notice that most of them also do not play a relay system. And there I can assure you no regulations are in the way.

[1stpanda]

Full relay systems are not the be-all and end-all of bidding. They can be very bad for contested auctions and partial/game decisions, for example. Plus, there is the "whoops!" factor, where a small misunderstanding in a relay auction can lead to slam in a 3-1 fit, negating most of the gains posted elsewhere.

Besides, full relay systems are specifically forbidden by the ACBL General Convention Chart, although they are allowed on the mid-chart.

[Free]

Mike, do "illegal full relay systems" exist? I mean, are some relaysystems allowed and others not?

Anyway, as far as I know, regulations in USA don't allow pairs to actually play full relaysystems a lot. So why play something that you can't play on a regular evening?
In Europe it's a completely different story: regulations are a lot more flexible (as they should be). However, for some reason also not many people play relay systems (except me )...

Why people don't play relaysystems? Imo it scares them, simple as that. It 'looks' confusing and very complex, but it actually isn't. It's probably the 'unknown' factor which plays a part in this.

About (dis)advantages:
- The 'woops-factor' mentioned by panda is imo negligible. When you have good agreements, you won't make the big mistakes (however small ones might occur). Just doublecheck every bid before you make it. A few months ago I had a relay auction, and my partner forgot to tell me his ♣s were longer than his ♠s. He eventually showed me a 5-1-3-4 where he had a 4-1-3-5. It was a nice surprise, since we were in 6♣ and suddenly it was a 5-4 fit instead of a 4-4
- Contested auctions are a problem, that's why most relays are off when opps intervene. This also means you need decent continuations in such situation. It depends a lot on the openings where you'll get, because most intervention happens in the first round (before relays are established), not during relay auctions.
- Accuracy is great, but sometimes we have too much accuracy and don't bid a slam where the field actually bids it because they don't know it's on a finesse. On the other hand, we bid and make more (grand) slams than most other pairs, so we gain there imo.

[mr1303]

Another reason is that they get tired of having to go through the explaining every single bid to opponents who have no intention of bidding. Especially to those who are older than most, who's hearing is on it's way out....

[hrothgar]

Here are my thoughts:

Strong club openings are not good things in and of themselves. Strong club openings are a necessary evil that we accept because we want to use light/limited openings. Relay systems can be considered in much the same way. While relay systems have a lot of nice features to them, when considered in isolation its unclear whether the benefits outweigh the costs. (As Free and The Hog will testify, I'm happiest when we have an outting where the card gods smile and we don't get any hands suitable for a strong club opening or a relay auction)

With this said and done, I think that relay structures clearly have a valuable place in system design. Relay structures are a tool that system designers can use to to permit them to play a natural/non-forcing response structure over their limited openings.

Consider the response structure over MOSCITO;s 1♦ opening (1♦ promises 4+ Hearts and ~ 9-14 HCP. Opener could hold a longer minor)

1♥ = Relay (Game forcing or game invitational with no fit)
1♠ = 4+ Spades, 1 round forcing
1N = Natural and non-forcing
2♣ = Natural and non-forcing
2♦ = natural and non-forcing
2♥ = Value raise, 3 card heart support
2♠ = Game invitate with 4+ Hearts
2N = 5+ Clubs and 5+ Diamonds
3♣ = 6 CLubs and 3 Hearts, non-frocing
3♦ = 6 Diamonds and 3 Hearts, non- forcing
3♥ = Value raise, 4+ card heart support
3♠ = Splinter
3N = To play
4m = Splinters

I'm more than willing to take a hit on game invitational/game foricng hands without heart support because the benefits from the rest of the structure more than compensate for the occasional losses caused by the relay structure.

Jumping back to the original question: Very few players in the US and Europe play light opening structures. As a result, there is little requirement for them to adopt relay methods.

[TimG]

mike777, on Feb 2 2005, 11:56 PM, said:

Assume top 100 pairs, USA
I would guess that 90-99% do not play some type of legal full relay system, WHY?
I assume most of the decent relay systems that are WBF legal are legal in USA top tourneys.

Comments?

Relay system are not allowed under the ACBL's GCC. They are allowed under the mid-chart, with the provision that relays must promise game forcing values.

But, I don't think the over-regulation is what keeps the very top players from playing relay systems.

Ekeblad and Rubin play a relay system (I think). My experience against top pairs is limited, but from my play and reading, this is the only top pair I can think of that plays a full blown relay system (in ACBL).

[mike777]

Ty for comments

1) Yes many relay systems are not WBF legal or legal in top tourneys, example forcing pass and others.
2) My question was only for top tourney and top pairs, not local ones, example Spingold, Vanderbilt, Blue Ribbon and Q for World championship so regulation does not stop the top pairs playing with each other.
3) Thanks for your light opener comment but wonder why 99% of top pairs choose not to play that style and therefore no relay style.
4)Ekeblad used to always play a more strong club, canape style rather than full relay, perhaps he has changed.
5) ty very much for Europe comment, I did not know that top teams there also do not play full relay but again wonder what their reasoning is.
6) thanks for comment on competitive auction but there seems to be some disagreement there.

[hrothgar]

mike777, on Feb 3 2005, 07:56 PM, said:

2) My question was only for top tourney and top pairs, not local ones, example Spingold, Vanderbilt, Blue Ribbon and Q for World championship so regulation does not stop the top pairs playing with each other.

The number of events in North America in which players can use a full blown relay system is somewhere between slim and none. I doubt that the system gains are sufficient to copensate for the annoyance of learning two completely different set of methods...

[TimG]

Quote

2) My question was only for top tourney and top pairs, not local ones, example Spingold, Vanderbilt, Blue Ribbon and Q for World championship so regulation does not stop the top pairs playing with each other.

I don't think Super Chart methods are allowed in the Blue Ribbon Pairs. Spingold, Vanderbilt and Team Trials, yes. But, I wonder whether the riskof using unfamiliar methods in those events doesn't outweigh the possible advantage. If the advantage is only slight, it takes a long time to overcome a few mistakes.

4)Ekeblad used to always play a more strong club, canape style rather than full relay, perhaps he has changed.

I think he has played relay within the strong club structure, maybe while playing with Rubin. But, I could be wrong. And, it could be that he onlyplays some relays, rather than a full relay system.

Tim