[awm]

I'm putting up a set of methods for bidding after 1♥-1♠. This assumes a fairly standard opening and response structure, so I'm not even sure this is the right forum for it. Still, this is where a lot of conventions seem to get discussed. Let me know what you think.
 1H1S.pdf (47.1K)
Number of downloads: 119

[straube]

Just started looking at it. It seems like a lot to remember. I assume 1H-1S denies a simple/constructive heart raise. Can 1H-1S be a GF hand with four spades?

[bluecalm]

Difficult to comment for me as the structure is not exactly my cup of tea (default raise with 3♠). I have no experience with tha style, so no idea about effectivness.
I really want to ask what kind of editor/software you use to put so nice PDF though

[helene_t]

bluecalm, on 2011-March-21, 13:38, said:

Difficult to comment for me as the structure is not exactly my cup of tea (default raise with 3♠). I have no experience with tha style, so no idea about effectivness.
I really want to ask what kind of editor/software you use to put so nice PDF though

The document is obviously typeset with LaTeX.

I like the structure, will play this with gwnn if he doesn't object (I am sure he won't).

[straube]

I like the idea of using the 1N rebid to show extra. Could it always show extra?

Then 1H-1S, 1N...

.....2C-asks further description, threatens to pass
.....2D-artificial GF based on 1N showing 16-18
.....2H-pathetic hand, 4S-2H
.....2S-pathetic hand, 6S

1H-1S,
.....2C-something in diamonds
.....2D-6H
.....2H-spade raise
.....2S-minimum, 5 clubs

other-natural, GF

[awm]

Let me suggest what I think are the problems with 1♥-1♠ auctions in standard (or 2/1) in case it helps clarify what the point is.

(1) Opener has a bit extra, like 15+ to 18- in high cards. Now there is a risk of missing a game on the auction 1♥-1♠-2m-PASS. There is also a risk of missing a 5-3 spade fit on the same auction, or after 1♥-1♠-3♥-PASS; in fact this 5-3 fit can be missed even if responder bids game (3NT or 4♥). Further, there are risks of getting too high after 1♥-1♠-2m-2♥ since opener will (presumably) bid on which will be too high if responder has true garbage.

(2) Opener has a GF hand. Certainly opener can jump shift, but the auction is now quite cramped and not that descriptive. It becomes hard for responder to distinguish hands with real slam interest from hands just looking for the right game (if an original limit raise bids 4♥, you destroy your cuebidding space on a promising hand, but if it bids 3♥ then this is the same call you'd make with a doubleton heart and garbage so it's hard to clarify sometimes what's going on). Opener's GF spade raise without shortage (4-5-2-2) can also be awkward since you have to jump to the four-level to show it (again, no space to cue). And opener's GF one-suiter with hearts is awkward because you either have to blast 4♥ (no space to cue) or start with a mis-descriptive 3m jump and try to back out of it later.

(3) Opener rebids a natural 2♦ and responder has a GF hand. Assuming "standard" agreements, the only way to force is to bid 3♣ (4th suit forcing) next. But this cramps the auction and gives very little help on the nature of responder's hand. He can't agree hearts (or diamonds, or spades) in a clearly forcing way below 3NT.

Of course, you can play Gazzilli, which helps on the first two problems (but not the third). However, the big loss from this treatment is that you can't bid 1♥-1♠-2♣-Pass when it is right any more (2♣ being an artificial force). My alternative treatment lets you get out in 2m with a pair of minimums while also fixing the first two problems and helping on the third. The main loss is that you can't play 1NT on the auction 1♥-1♠-1NT any more, but it's been pointed out that 4-3 and 5-2 major fits at the two-level usually outplay 1NT (at least double dummy) so this doesn't seem like a huge problem.

[straube]

I like it. One of my concerns was the ability to get into a low-level GF, but I think you do so after 1H-1S, 1N-2C, 2S and higher. Right? Because 2C promises 8+ and the 2H and higher rebids communicate 17+ hands.

[straube]

The more I look at it, this is really a good piece of writing. I know you play something similar for your limited heart openings, but you have to sort through 8-15 pt ranges. What would you recommend for a 10-15 range?

[awm]

In response to Bluecalm: the document is typeset using LaTeX and a nice set of bridge-related commands created by my friend Greg Humphreys (humper on BBO).

In response to Straube: I would play the 1NT rebid as 3+♦ (i.e. no strong meaning). After 1♥-1♠-1NT, 2♣ would be 4th suit GF (or however you normally play 4th suit forcing) and everything else is natural. I'd play opener's jump rebids (1♥-1♠-2NT and above) however you play them after 1♥-1NT. For me this is 2NT showing five hearts and a longer minor with a non-minimum and 3m showing 6♥-5m, but I know some play 3m as a good 5-5. In principle you could use 2♦ vs. 2♠ to distinguish between three and four card spade raises (2♦ being three-card raise so you can get out in 2♥); however my personal experience is that the good/bad raise distinction is more effective even when opener has a fairly limited range.

[Free]

Interesting idea. Is there any reason why you use 1♥-1♠-2♣ as 4+♣ and 1♥-1♠-1NT for 3+♦ instead of the other way around? The lower call should be most ambiguous, but here 2♣ should be considered lower than 1NT since showing the weak hand gets us to 2♦.

I don't like to raise on every hand with a 3 card support, but getting that part out would mean that both opener's minor suit rebids are 3+ cards. It's a tradeoff you can make ofcourse, without changing anything else.

[Vampyr]

awm, on 2011-March-21, 17:09, said:

The main loss is that you can't play 1NT on the auction 1♥-1♠-1NT any more, but it's been pointed out that 4-3 and 5-2 major fits at the two-level usually outplay 1NT (at least double dummy) so this doesn't seem like a huge problem.

It's great if you have one, but if you don't?

I assume that this method is not suitable for systems with a strong NT, since they need the 1NT rebid to show a weak NT.

[helene_t]

Vampyr, on 2011-March-23, 05:08, said:

I assume that this method is not suitable for systems with a strong NT, since they need the 1NT rebid to show a weak NT.

No, with a weak NT you raise spades, except if you are 2=5=3=3 in which case you pretend to have four diamonds.

[MickyB]

I agree completely that this is a sequence where it is wasteful to use 1NT as natural. I have played several different versions of transfers and forcing 1NT rebids here, but this is remarkably similar to the structure that I have just switched to playing. So, in short, I approve!

[awm]

Free, on 2011-March-23, 02:21, said:

Interesting idea. Is there any reason why you use 1♥-1♠-2♣ as 4+♣ and 1♥-1♠-1NT for 3+♦ instead of the other way around? The lower call should be most ambiguous, but here 2♣ should be considered lower than 1NT since showing the weak hand gets us to 2♦.

The idea is to give responder an extra temporizing call. This allows responder to distinguish for example between direct raise and temporize-then-raise, or direct jump rebid of spades versus temporize-then-rebid. One sequence can then be invitational while the other is GF. The lack of such a cheap temporizing bid is one of the big problems in the natural 1♥-1♠-2♦ auction. If 1NT showed clubs and 2♣ showed diamonds, then there would still be no such temporizing bid over 2♣ showing diamonds. The step you have gained (by bidding 2♣ instead of 2♦) is lost because pass is no longer an option. So you pretty much would have to play 2♦=to play, 2♥=to play, and 3♣ would be your 4th suit forcing call. You have managed to guarantee opener a third call if he wants one, but this is not the primary goal of the method.

[straube]

What do you rebid with a minimum 3-5-(50) pattern? Show the fit or the minor?

With a minimum 3-6-x-x, do you rebid 2H or 2S?

[awm]

straube, on 2011-March-23, 10:51, said:

What do you rebid with a minimum 3-5-(50) pattern? Show the fit or the minor?

With a minimum 3-6-x-x, do you rebid 2H or 2S?

You have choices. I usually raise, but obviously it depends somewhat on suit quality.

[MickyB]

I think Free was asking why you rebid 1NT instead of 2C on a 2533.

[awm]

MickyB, on 2011-March-23, 11:24, said:

I think Free was asking why you rebid 1NT instead of 2C on a 2533.

It's probably not hugely important, but my way mildly increases the frequency of an immediate pass or raise of opener's second suit.

[mike gill]

Noble and I have been playing something similar but simpler for a while now, if anyone wants an alternative that's easier and probably better in a strong club context anyway.

1♥ 1♠
1n = 2533 or 4+♦
2♣ = clubs
2♦ = 3-card spade support

Other bids remain unchanged. The advantages this has over Adam's method are

1) When opener shows 3-card support with 2♦, you can decide which major suit fit to play instead of being forced to play spades. I think this is somewhat important since you are semi-forced to raise spades with 35(32) since your only other option is to fake a minor.

2) Immediately distinguishing 3 from 4 card support immediately makes responder's evaluation much easier I think. If responder has, say, a 4126 10 count and opener raises 1s to 2, this is probably worth 4s if partner has 4 but you really don't want to be at the 3-level if he has 3.

3) I definitely recommend this in a precision context since you don't have to really change all that much to accommodate it - you get your 4th suit forcing over diamonds at the 2-level and can just play everything else the way you always have. There aren't strong hands to resolve so it's much easier. That being said I have played this in a 2/1 context for a while and it seems to go fine without any real further agreements.

[awm]

My experience with the 3-card raise vs. 4-card raise is very different from Mike and Noble's.

There are a few reasons for this. Perhaps the main one is that the direct raise in my style is very often a 3-card raise (when it's a 4-card raise it's a pretty pitiful hand, almost always 4522 and very minimum)... and the 2♦ bid is almost always a 4-card raise (could be a very maximum 3-carder that might make game opposite Mike's 10-count). So in this sense it does not matter all that much. The issue is that hands like Mike's example are much less common than balanced 11-12 counts, which have an easy pass over my "bad raise" and bid on over my "good raise." Knowing your total trump length doesn't necessarily help you here since you still have to try for game with 11-12 opposite a full 10-15 even if you know that you only have a seven-card spade fit. I get out in 2♠ a lot on these hands, and also collect the occasional number when opponents make an ill advised balancing call, and I think this is a much bigger win than getting to your 5-2 heart fit instead of your 4-3 spade fit at the two-level.