[junyi_zhu]

mike777, on Oct 12 2004, 07:11 PM, said:

AXX=K=KXX=AKQXXX

Playing 2/1 Walsh style.
1)What would you open? If one club then:
2)rebid over 1D?
3)Rebids of other one suiter hands, say, 17+ to 20(-) that you would not open strong 2clubs with and you would not jump rebid 4 of major
example=1H=1s=not good enough for 4h but better than 3h? or....1d=1h=rebid?

Thank you in advance.

I have a device invented by myself to bid this type of hands, it's called cheapest jumpshift relay. So you can bid 2H over 1D to show either: true hearts, gameforcing one suiter, balanced 19 with 3 diamonds, GF with 4 diamonds.
1C 1D
2H 2S(relay)
2N(true hearts)
3C gameforcing one suiter.
3D gameforcing raise with 4 diamonds
3H 5 hearts.
3S self splinter, solid clubs.
3N 19, balanced, 3 diamonds.

[lowerline]

The 'device' you claim to have invented, was posted by me earlier in this thread. I got it from the AMBRA system, a system developed by Benito Garozzo for the Italian juniors. So I guess Garozzo got it from you then?

Steven

[junyi_zhu]

lowerline, on Oct 20 2004, 07:23 AM, said:

The 'device' you claim to have invented, was posted by me earlier in this thread. I got it from the AMBRA system, a system developed by Benito Garozzo for the Italian juniors. So I guess Garozzo got it from you then?

Steven

I don't know about AMBRA and never heard of it. But I am sure the design can't be the same. Also, I didn't read your post in the thread.

The following is my design. If it has something in common with Garozzo's, that only proves that great minds are alike.
Cheapest jumpshift relay.

A common problem for a large range one level opening system is how to handle
gameforcing one suiter. One suiter in nature is hard to bid because the basic
philosophy in bidding is that new suits tend to be forcing and one suiter has
no side suit. Thus a solution is to make the cheapest jumpshift by opener as
a two way bid and responder can then relay to ask the exact hand type.

1C 1D
2H 2S(relay)

2N: true hearts.
3C: one suiter.
3D: gameforcing, 4 diamonds.
3H: 5 hearts.
3S: self splinter in C.
3N: balanced 19 with 3 diamond support.

1C 1H
2S 2N(relay)
3C: true hearts
3D: GF one suiter.
3H: good 17-18 balanced, 4 card raise in hearts.
3S: 5 spades
3N: balanced 19, 3 hearts.
4C: 6 clubs, 4 hearts, about 19 HCP(direct 4C is weaker)
4D: super splinter, about 18-19 HCP(direct 4D is weaker)
4H: super splinter in S. about 18-19 HCP.

1C 1S
3D 3H(relay)
3S: spade support, balanced 16=18
3N: balanced 19, three spades.
4C: 6C+4sp, about 19 HCP.
4D: serious splinter
4H: serious splinter

1C 1S
3H(GF one suiter) responder can bid 3S to show 5 spades, or invite slam
by 4C or 4D as RKC.

1C 1N
3D(strong one suiter, either balanced or short D) 3H(relay)

3S(short D)
3N(balanced)

1C 1N
3H/S: strong one suiter, short H/S.

1D 1H
2S 2N
3C: true spades
3D: diamond one suiter.
3H: 4 hearts, balanced, good 17-18(we open 1NT with good 14 to normal 17)
3S: 5 spades.
3N: 19 balanced, 3 hearts.
4C/H: seriuos splinter in C/S
4D: about 19 HCP, 6D + 4H.

1D 1S
3C 3D
3H: true clubs
3S: 17-18, balanced 4 card raise.
3N: balanced, 19, 3 spades.
4C/H: serious splinter.
4D: about 19, 6 diamonds + 4 spades.

1D 1S
3H: strong one suiter.

1D 1N
3C 3D
3H(true clubs)
3S: short C, diamond one suiter.
3N: diamond one suiter, balanced.

1D 1N
3H/S: self splinter, strong one suiter.

1H 1S
3C 3D
3H: true clubs
3S: heart one suiter with 3 spades.
3N: heart one suiter without 3 spades.
4C/D: serious splinter.
4H: 6 hearts, 4 spades, GF.(about 19)
4S: 6 hearts, 4 spades, weaker.

1H 1N
3C 3D
3H(true clubs)
3S(strong one suiter, short S)
3N(strong one suiter, balanced)
4C/D/H: self splinter in C/D/S, set up H as trumps, but
not solid.
1H 1N
3S/4C/D: self splinter, solid H.

1H 1N
4H: to play, tend to deny shortness, can have stiff A or K somewhere.

[mike777]

Playing that treatment then I assume your rebid is 3c and now partner bids 3s.....

[lowerline]

You are right. It seems to be the same after 1♣-1♦, but after 1♣-1M Garozzo uses 2♦ to show the strong one suiter and after 1♦-1M he uses 2♣.

Comparing your structure with the one from Ambra, it is easy to see that the bidding in Ambra stays lower, giving more room to explore a slam. This is a definite plus.

If you are interested, you should take a look at Ambra. A complete write-up of the system is available on the net, both in English and Italian. Don't know the URL anymore, but Google should get you there.

Steven