[jillybean]

Flem72, on 2025-November-11, 08:35, said:

Don't most play 3C after 2S as GF+? 6C seems pretty easy after tht....

Since only 3AX pairs of 15 found this slam, apparently not.
Only when the game is played electronically will we be able to view and critique every auction.

[Cyberyeti]

Our auction:

P-1♣(4+♣, weak NT context)
2♥ (5+♥, 4+♣ not broke)-2♠
3♣(not close to an opening bid)-3♦(extras)
3♥(cue)-3♠(cue)
4♥(cue)-4♠(cue)
5♣-6♣

Partner has more or less bid xx, AKxxx, xx, xxxx without ♥Q, he denied a sixth heart when he didn't open a weak 2

[mw64ahw]

The 2♣ auction is is fairly straightforward
2♣ - 2♦
3♣ - 3♠ 5+♥ (switching ♠ & ♥)
3N - 4♣ SI to 6♣

[jillybean]

---

Crikey, not the auction I had.

[jillybean]

mw64ahw, on 2025-November-11, 12:12, said:

The 2♣ auction is is fairly straightforward
2♣ - 2♦
3♣ - 3♠ 5+♥ (switching ♠ & ♥)
3N - 4♣ SI to 6♣

2♣?

[mw64ahw]

Yep - I don't discount it as an option. With (4441) and the right controls I'd bid with a lower hcp.

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2025-November-11, 12:18, said:

---

Crikey, not the auction I had.

Don’t worry about it Some posters have an amazing ability to claim to play methods that just happen to match the hands shown. They’re always the same posters. I’m simply astounded that these posters don’t appear to ever actually win anything: their methods are so wonderful id expect them to be multiple world champions by now /snark
,

[Cyberyeti]

mikeh, on 2025-November-11, 13:02, said:

Don’t worry about it Some posters have an amazing ability to claim to play methods that just happen to match the hands shown. They’re always the same posters. I’m simply astounded that these posters don’t appear to ever actually win anything: their methods are so wonderful id expect them to be multiple world champions by now /snark
,

What do you play 1♣-2♥ as by a passed hand ?
We play it as fit opposite a 4+ card club and it then runs on rails. Not as easy if your club is 2+

[mikeh]

Cyberyeti, on 2025-November-11, 13:42, said:

What do you play 1♣-2♥ as by a passed hand ?
We play it as fit opposite a 4+ card club and it then runs on rails. Not as easy if your club is 2+

Since we don’t play Acol, lol, for us 1C 2H, by passed or unpassed hand is 5 spades and 4+ hearts, around 5-9 hcp. I play different methods with different partners. A lot depends on 2D….in my main partnership is is a very weak jumpshift in a major.

Our 1 C could be 3=3=5=2 or 3=2=5=3 so fit jumps don’t make much sense within the context of our methods…over 1D they do since 1D is unbalanced.

[Cyberyeti]

mikeh, on 2025-November-11, 17:30, said:

Since we don’t play Acol, lol, for us 1C 2H, by passed or unpassed hand is 5 spades and 4+ hearts, around 5-9 hcp. I play different methods with different partners. A lot depends on 2D….in my main partnership is is a very weak jumpshift in a major.

Our 1 C could be 3=3=5=2 or 3=2=5=3 so fit jumps don’t make much sense within the context of our methods…over 1D they do since 1D is unbalanced.

We also play ekren, so there is no passed hand with 5♠/4♥ and that range

[mikeh]

Cyberyeti, on 2025-November-11, 17:38, said:

We also play ekren, so there is no passed hand with 5♠/4♥ and that range

I’ve lost count of the number of times that I’ve said that building a system requires ensuring that everything meshes. It’s axiomatic that if you change one part of your system, you need to pay close attention to how that impacts other parts. Thus it’s silly, with respect, to ask ‘what do you do with such and such’ and, on getting an answer, reply, well…we don’t need to do that because we play such and such. Why should I care what you play when you ask me what I play?

You give the impression of asking only so that you can tell us that you play something different. I’m well aware of most gadgets available (not all, but I’m always learning) and the fact that I don’t play such and such will be due to my assessment that,in the context of a very complex bidding method, I have other uses that happen, imo, to be superior. I’m not saying that any one gadget is superior in isolation. I’m saying that in the context of my system, the gadget we play seems, at the moment, to be our best option.

[thepossum]

Not sure when this forum became the intermediate forum, and so obnoxious by some
It is the NB forum. No place for snarkiness in anything below expert
All these poor NBs feeling bad at never having won anything </end rant>

[Cyberyeti]

mikeh, on 2025-November-11, 18:58, said:

I’ve lost count of the number of times that I’ve said that building a system requires ensuring that everything meshes. It’s axiomatic that if you change one part of your system, you need to pay close attention to how that impacts other parts. Thus it’s silly, with respect, to ask ‘what do you do with such and such’ and, on getting an answer, reply, well…we don’t need to do that because we play such and such. Why should I care what you play when you ask me what I play?

You give the impression of asking only so that you can tell us that you play something different. I’m well aware of most gadgets available (not all, but I’m always learning) and the fact that I don’t play such and such will be due to my assessment that,in the context of a very complex bidding method, I have other uses that happen, imo, to be superior. I’m not saying that any one gadget is superior in isolation. I’m saying that in the context of my system, the gadget we play seems, at the moment, to be our best option.

I agree with most of this, my point is actually that playing particular systems, while they may have clear advantages, may also have disadvantages.

Playing a 4 card club makes this hand trivial, and I was trying to indicate WHY we play PH 1♣-2♥ as we do.

[mikeh]

Cyberyeti, on 2025-November-12, 05:23, said:

I agree with most of this, my point is actually that playing particular systems, while they may have clear advantages, may also have disadvantages.

Playing a 4 card club makes this hand trivial, and I was trying to indicate WHY we play PH 1♣-2♥ as we do.

I couldn’t disagree more. Your post implies that there are some systems that don’t have disadvantages. In my experience literally every ‘system’….id go further and say literally every company invention/treatment/agreement has disadvantages. Name a convention and I’ll tell you the cost of using it.

A simple example: 1N 2C stayman. Explain to me how you get to stop in 2C.

Ok, I and afaik every bridge player in the world sees using 2C as an artificial response affords advantages that outweigh the loss of being able to sign off in 2C but that’s not remotely the same as saying that such a loss is not a disadvantage. I have zero interest in what you play. Your foundational understandings…4 card majors, 1C promises 4+ clubs…make absolutely no sense within the context of my methods…they are literally unplayable in our methods. You are perfectly entitled to feel the same way about my methods, but don’t ask me to elaborate on my methods simply so you can tell me about yours. Ask because you’re interested in exploring other methods…I’d be happy to oblige.

[mw64ahw]

I play both 5 & 4-card Majors regularly and I like to see alternative approaches. The issue I find is that 5-cM players are happy to develop, but it is a struggle to get 4cM players to move out of their comfort zone. Even getting the weak NTers to commit to an approach over 1N-(X) has been hard.

[Cyberyeti]

mikeh, on 2025-November-12, 08:20, said:

I couldn’t disagree more. Your post implies that there are some systems that don’t have disadvantages. In my experience literally every ‘system’….id go further and say literally every company invention/treatment/agreement has disadvantages. Name a convention and I’ll tell you the cost of using it.

A simple example: 1N 2C stayman. Explain to me how you get to stop in 2C.

Ok, I and afaik every bridge player in the world sees using 2C as an artificial response affords advantages that outweigh the loss of being able to sign off in 2C but that’s not remotely the same as saying that such a loss is not a disadvantage. I have zero interest in what you play. Your foundational understandings…4 card majors, 1C promises 4+ clubs…make absolutely no sense within the context of my methods…they are literally unplayable in our methods. You are perfectly entitled to feel the same way about my methods, but don’t ask me to elaborate on my methods simply so you can tell me about yours. Ask because you’re interested in exploring other methods…I’d be happy to oblige.

I was interested because I couldn't imagine using 2♥ for anything else, and you gave a sensible other use, just one that is not much use to me. Also while you may not care about my methods, there are N/Bs in this thread that may not have heard of either of the methods and may learn something.

Yes, every system has advantages and disadvantages, or we'd all be playing exactly the same thing.

[pescetom]

I agree with thepossum that this conversation has gone off the rails of N/B, which is why I gave up on it early and am not surprised to see now how it finished.
Why on earth a novice should know about Ekren or worry about accurately bidding slams beats me
OP could have figured that it was a hand (and problem) more suited to I/A.

Having said that, it is not too late to move the thread to I/A where it would be a useful discussion.
FWIW following our system it might well go:
______ P
1♣(2+) - 1♥
2♠ - 3♣
3♦ - 4♣ (SI)
4♦(ctl) - 4♥(ctl)
4♠(ctl) - 5♣ (odd kc)
6♣ - P

I wouldn't be surprised if an N/B partner passed 3♣ and I would be pleased if she saw 3NT.