[han]

I've been working on my structure for inverted minors, see below. Comments are very much appreciated.

1C-2C- (we open 1C on balanced hands 11-13 or 17-19, not containing a 5-card major, 2C shows 5+ clubs):

2D: balanced hand, 3+ clubs.
2H: minimum unbalanced hand (but see 3C).
2S: unbalanced, extras.
2NT: minimum balanced, exactly 2 clubs.
3C: minimum 6322 or 7222.
3D, 3H, 3S: natural, very pure, 5-6 or better.
3NT: 17-19 balanced, exactly 2 clubs.
higher: keycards, either normal or exclusion.

Over 2H or 2S we can ask for more information with the cheapest step. Haven't thought about advances over 2D yet.

1D-2D- (1D shows an unbalanced hand, can be 4-5 in the minors, 2D shows 4+ diamonds)

2H: minimum hand (but see 3D)
2S: extras.
2NT: extras, (42)52, top honor in both short suits.
3C, 3H, 3S: natural, very pure 5-6 or better (3C can be 5-5).
3D: minimum 6322 or 7222.
3NT: undefined (suggestions?)
higher: keycards, either normal or exclusion.

I'm glad that I managed to make them somewhat similar even though the 1D and 1C openings are quite different. They also resemble the 1H/S-2NT structures in flavor.

I'd be interested in seeing other people's (non-natural) inverted minors structures.

[pbleighton]

See

http://forums.bridge...?showtopic=2779

Peter

[hotShot]

Where do you want to go?

First we go for 3NT, if possible . So we show stopper, that are good enough for 3NT.
If it's clear 3NT is no good choice, we turn to the minor, showing stopper helps to decide if 4,5 or 6 is the limit.

1♣-2♣ (10+HCP, 5+♣)
2[NT] = stopper in ♦, ♥ and♠ (usually very bad ♣ not strong enough for 3NT opposite of minimum)
2♦ = stopper ♦ no length required, stopper in a major is missing (Partner will bid his ♥ prior to ♠, 3♣ shows the inabillity to play NT, 2/3NT shows everything needed is there)
2♥ = no stopper in♦, but ♥ stopper (no length required)
2♠ = ♠ stopper, not stopper in ♦ or ♥

3♦, 3♥, 3♠ (Mini)Splinter can be minimum HCP in openers hand


1♦ - 2♦ (10+HCP (4)5+♦
2[NT] = stopper in ♥ and♠
2♥ = no stopper in♦, but ♥ stopper (no length required)
2♠ = ♠ stopper, not stopper in ♦ or ♥
3♣ = ♣ stopper, no length required

3♥, 3♠ (Mini)Splinter can be minimum HCP in openers hand

[inquiry]

How forcing is your inverted minor? Yes, I know you must bid, but is it forcing to 4♣? Can your auction die in 2NT or 3♣? I play criss-cross so the "Weaker" 1m-2m bids found in many partnerships is not possible so that a structure similar ot yours or Misho's (see peter's link above makes sense). If 1C-2C can be on 10 hcp, however, I go back to the show stoppers up the line concept.

Ben

[han]

Thanks for the good link Peter. What structure did you end up using?

Right now we play 1m-2m as 10+, but perhaps we could use criss-cross, our jump shift in the other minor isn't used up for anything important yet.

If you play criss-cross (so that 2m shows a gameforce), does it make sense to allow a 4-card major for the 1m-2m start when having a longer minor? Of course, your response structure should allow you to find a 4-4 major suit fit later.

I also thought that it would make more sense for the 1D opener to show shortness instead of stoppers, since it is always an unbalanced hand.

[Walddk]

Hannie, on Feb 13 2005, 07:50 PM, said:

I've been working on my structure for inverted minors, see below. Comments are very much appreciated.

I hope I don't sound too negative when I say that you should give up inverted minors if 1♣ can be 2 or 3 cards. The frequency of responder holding 5+ clubs is too low, and even if he has 5 he can't be certain of a fit if opener can have 2.

I don't claim that there is no complicated structure that allows you to cater for opener having 2 or 3 clubs, but there will be too much to remember, or forget rather!

The few times you have 5+ clubs and no 4-card major you can improvise with 1♦. Alternatively, bid NT at the appropriate level. That should always promise a club fit since you bypassed all unbid suits.

In my opinion, inverted minors are best suited for Acol or any other system where 1♣ shows 4+ cards.

Roland

[han]

Walddk, on Feb 14 2005, 12:24 PM, said:

Hannie, on Feb 13 2005, 07:50 PM, said:

I've been working on my structure for inverted minors, see below. Comments are very much appreciated.

I hope I don't sound too negative when I say that you should give up inverted minors if 1♣ can be 2 or 3 cards. The frequency of responder holding 5+ clubs is too low, and even if he has 5 he can't be certain of a fit if opener can have 2.

I don't claim that there is no complicated structure that allows you to cater for opener having 2 or 3 clubs, but there will be too much to remember, or forget rather!

The few times you have 5+ clubs and no 4-card major you can improvise with 1♦. Alternatively, bid NT at the appropriate level. That should always promise a club fit since you bypassed all unbid suits.

In my opinion, inverted minors are best suited for Acol or any other system where 1♣ shows 4+ cards.

Roland

Thanks for your comment Roland, what do you suggest for the use of responder's 2C and 3C?

Perhaps I should play that 1C-2C shows only 4+ clubs, forcing (with or without criss-cross). Then responder's first bid would still be "natural". The short 1C opener hurts for finding minor suit fits, but with a good 1C-2C structure this might be overcome (at least when responder is gameforcing).

Also, as I am going to play 1D-2D as inverted, then it seems to me that it is simpler to play 1C-2C as inverted too. What do you think?

[Walddk]

Hannie, on Feb 14 2005, 01:27 PM, said:

Perhaps I should play that 1C-2C shows only 4+ clubs, forcing (with or without criss-cross). Then responder's first bid would still be "natural". The short 1C opener hurts for finding minor suit fits, but with a good 1C-2C structure this might be overcome (at least when responder is gameforcing).

Also, as I am going to play 1D-2D as inverted, then it seems to me that it is simpler to play 1C-2C as inverted too. What do you think?

If you want to keep your inverted minors, I suggest that you play 1mi-2mi as game forcing with 4+ support. That will at least give the partnership plenty of room to explore without risking a pass.

The chance of no fit after 1♦-2♦ is very low and something like this could be used (assuming that you deny a major):

2♥/♠: Singleton, unlimited.

2NT: Balanced 18-19.

3♣: Singleton, unlimited.

3♦: Semi-balanced, unlimited.

3♥/♠: Void, unlimited.

3NT: 12-14 balanced.

You don't need to change much after 1♣-2♣. The only problem is that there is a big risk of no fit:

2♦: Semi-balanced, unlimited.

3♣: Singleton *DIAMOND*

If subsequently opener retreats to NT, he has 2-3 clubs, possibly 4 with no slam interest. I think the above is playable; at least I play it with some success in a couple of partnerships, but to be fair: as I play it 1 of a minor always promises 4+. I am reluctant to use inverted raises if I play 5-card majors.

Roland

[NickToll]

Walddk, on Feb 14 2005, 12:24 PM, said:

I hope I don't sound too negative when I say that you should give up inverted minors if 1♣ can be 2 or 3 cards. The frequency of responder holding 5+ clubs is too low, and even if he has 5 he can't be certain of a fit if opener can have 2.

I don't claim that there is no complicated structure that allows you to cater for opener having 2 or 3 clubs, but there will be too much to remember, or forget rather!

The few times you have 5+ clubs and no 4-card major you can improvise with 1♦. Alternatively, bid NT at the appropriate level. That should always promise a club fit since you bypassed all unbid suits.

In my opinion, inverted minors are best suited for Acol or any other system where 1♣ shows 4+ cards.

Roland

You've raised a good point.

A possible solution, as bad as any other, is the following: go on opening 1♣ with balanced hands; raise to 2♣ assuming that opener's clubs are real; then, rebid 2♦ with unreal clubs (hence, balanced); otherwise, rebid 2♥ or more with real clubs, as descriptively as possible, proceeding along the normal development of inverted minors. This is not perfect (you are not able to find out about a diamond stopper under 3♣), but it's simple enough and should be fine most of the times.

The real problem with this kind of 1♣ bid is about preemptive raises. In "real clubs" systems you are able to raise to 3♣ with five clubs only, if your hand calls for it: you can't be that confident if partner is entitled to open 1♣ with an 11-count 4-4-3-2 with a club doubleton...

[pbleighton]

"The real problem with this kind of 1♣ bid is about preemptive raises. In "real clubs" systems you are able to raise to 3♣ with five clubs only, if your hand calls for it: you can't be that confident if partner is entitled to open 1♣ with an 11-count 4-4-3-2 with a club doubleton... "

In "Precision Today", which advocates 1D as 2+ D, Berkowitz and Stanley say to assume pd has at least 3 in competetive auctions. You will rarely be wrong, and your life will be simpler.

Another point about inverted minors with 5 card majors:

They work better if you play weak NT. That way you either have 4+ (usually 5+), or enough to drive to 3NT.

Peter

[luke warm]

since roland is reading this thread, let me ask a question on bergen's minor suit structure (or what *used* to be that structure, this was long ago in 'better bidding' vol 1)... i want to know whether or not theory dislikes this

he suggests 1m/2m as being pretty much the same as 1M/2M, just a raise (4+).. the reason is, there are 4 ranges to show (preemptive, constructive, invitational, forcing)... so
1c/2c=6-9, 4+
1c/3c=0-5/6, 5+
1c/2nt=9-11/12, 4+
1c/3d=12/13+, 4+

1d/3c=9-11, 4+
1d/3h=12+, 4+

iow, under j/s is invitational and over j/s is forcing... all deny a 4 card M (usually).. he thought at the time that 1c/2nt was worth sacrificing (normal at the time as 10-12, flattish)

the best thing about it is, all hand types are shown... the worst (i guess) is the amount of room the forcing/invitational bids take up

whatcha think 20+ years later?

[Walddk]

luke warm, on Feb 14 2005, 06:01 PM, said:

since roland is reading this thread, let me ask a question on bergen's minor suit structure (or what *used* to be that structure, this was long ago in 'better bidding' vol 1)... i want to know whether or not theory dislikes this

whatcha think 20+ years later?

I like 1mi-3mi to be pre-emptive and 1mi-2mi to be game forcing. What about invitational hands then?

1. Bid 2NT with a balanced hand.

2. Bid 2♦ over 1♣ and 2♥ over 1♦ as ambiguous. Either unbalanced limit with support for opener's suit or very strong with own suit.

Opener MUST bid 2♥ and 2♠ respectively to ask for clarification. Anything but 3 of the minor opened is now the (rare) strong hand with own suit.

The only thing you sacrifice if you play Weak Jump Shifts is 1♦-2♥ as weak with hearts. You can use WJS in all other instances (1♣-2♦ should never be used as WJS imo).

Roland

[luke warm]

kewl, that does look good... i've occasionally played reverse flannery, but there really aren't that many who do play it so it isn't a high priority... thx

[FrancesHinden]

I really hate any method that includes "stopper showing" after an inverted raise, because it makes slam bidding very difficult, and because stops aren't everything for NT (xxx opposite xxx for example). I much prefer methods where you show distribution.

My current 1C opening is not the same as yours (I open 1D with balanced hands with 4 diamonds), so the methods I play wouldn't work. But with a slight modification they would, namely:

1C - 2C
2D = balanced, 2-4 clubs
2H = natural, 5 clubs, 4+ hearts
2S = natural, 5 clubs, 4+ spades
2NT = 4 diamonds, 5+ clubs
3C = minimum NF 5+ clubs
3D/H/S = singleton, slam interest
3NT = 15-17, 6 clubs, unsuitable to open 1NT (depends how often you open 1NT on these hands)
4C = keycard in clubs

1C - 2C
2D - 2H FG enquiry (see below)
- 2S/3D/3H singleton, slam interest even opposite short clubs
- 2NT nat NF (opener can pass or bid 3C NF, anything else FG)
- 3C nat NF (opener can bid 3NT with a max)
- 3NT pass unless you are 17+ bal

1C - 2C
2D - 2H
2S = 2 or 3 clubs
2NT = 4 clubs, suitable to be declarer in NT
3C = 4 clubs unsuitable to be declarer
3D+ fragment with 5 clubs

(if 4/5 major/minor would open 2C then these methods won't work)

We once wrote some detailed methods where opener could show his exact shape after various relays, but found they didn't seem to gain very much.
By the way, I have no problems playing inverted minors can include a 4-card major, particularly if they have slam interest because it can be so messy getting your primary support over later.

After a 1D opener showing 4441 or 5+ diamonds (I assume) you can modify the methods a bit, as there's no requirement to play in 2NT. In fact I'd play something completely different... but I haven't written it because I don't play this 1D opening.

[paulg]

Our 1C opener is similar and we play ...

1C-2C
2D = balanced 11-13 or minimum with clubs, or club/diamond 2-suiter
2H/S = 5+ clubs, 4+ major, does not promise extra values
2NT = balanced 17-19
3C = clubs, non-minimum
3D/H/S = singleton

Continuations are:

1C-2C
2D-2H = slam interest relay
- 2S = game forcing relay
- 2NT 10-11 balanced, NF
- 3C NF

But we may change this now the EBU regulations on the meaning of 1C-1S are being relaxed.

cheers

Paul