Help
I'd like to hear from you about the following.
---------------------------------------------------
I just ask one favour:
I am sure the agreements we have might not be the best, and I am sure most of you have better ones.
But if your post will focus on changing RADICALLY the structure, it will hardly help me with my current p
(I cannot change the system every week).Of course, suggestions for minor modifications and corrections are more than welcome- that's why I post here
.But, even in the case you dislike the structure, I would greatly appreciate if you also included, maybe at the end of your post, what would be your choice if you were forced with a gun on your head to play something like that !
Thanks !!
---------------------------------------------------
THE CURRENT SYSTEM
In my partnership we play Precision, so 1M opener is max 15 hcp.
We have coupled this limited opening style with the 2/1 framework similar to Mike Lawrence style:
1) a 2/1 is absolute GF (actually may stop in 4m)
2) a 2/1 in a minor guarantees 5 cards of at least QTxxx quality (if the suit quality is lower, we treat it as a 4 bagger); if 2/1 is a major (2H over 1S), requirement may lower down;
3) 2NT is a forcing raise a la Jacoby, 3m are Bergen raises , jump raises are preemptive;
4) the balanced GF hand goes via 2C which is 2-way: either balanced (2+ cards in C) OR with 5+ clubs and good suit;
We play a fairly simplified scheme on this, perhaps too simplified, and I'd appreciate feedback onn the followups.
Keep in mind I have to play with a pard who often forgets even simple conventions, so some gadget that lasts one round of bidding is ok, but tools that start relays for 2-3 bidding rounds would be unplayable with such a pard
Over the 2C response, opener may use a 2D = a "waiting bid". It is used for most featureless hands , unsuitable for 3-level rebids (distributional reverses), or for weak single suiters. (other responses are "natural"- keeping in mind opener has 15 hcp max, so extras are in shape - except opener's major rebid, which corresponds to a raise of clubs if responder's clubs are real).
Other bids except 2D are natural (bids at 3 level are distroibutional reverses, usually with concentrated values, 5 losers), except opener's major rebid, which shows a hand that would raise responder's clubs if they were real.
Over 2D, responder should clarify his hand.
We have set this simple agreement:
- any NT rebids show the balanced hand. Jump to 3NT is 16-18, whereas 2NT is 12-15 OR 19+ balanced.
- any suit rebid shows real clubs and the side suit.
---------------------------------------------------
THE QUESTION
Keeping in mind this, I have discovered a "hole" in this agreement after the sequence 1M:2C:2D:?
The point is: WHAT SHOULD RESPONDER REBID WHEN HE HAS A BALANCED HAND WITH 3 CARD SUPPORT IN THE MAJOR ?
Bidding NT does not deliver immediately the support, and this can be awkward in some cases; on the other hand supporting over 2D relay may give a distorted picture of the hand (unbalanced).
This choice affects the developments.
Example:
Let us assume that balanced responder with 3 card support rebids 2NT
1S:2C
2D:2NT
?
Now the critical point is: what would 3 clubs or 3 diamonds mean.
Option a.
So far, we have played it as showing a natural suit, but not good enough to bid it immediately at the 3 level, so usually the qualkity of the hand is bad: so it is not a slam try (also because opener has max 15), but rather tells pard: "Hey, I am subminimum opener with 2 suits, not unlikely I might have a good 9 up to bad 11 in 55, so watchout if you want to play 3NT".
A decent opener would simply signoff in 3NT instead.
Option b.
Using 3C by opener over responder's 2NT as a sort of checkback to find out about 3 card support.
This may work fine, but loses the option of "pulling the brakes" as in option a.