[ManUtdNZ]

Just spotted your response. I tried creating a text file on Notepad and then running the bml2html.py converter but that seems a very crude way for me to make my html files and I made so many mistakes.

The Lakebeach NT page has some nice dropdown links that appeal to me. I've downloaded Emacs and I'm prepared to take the time to use it. Any chance of getting any updated bml2html.py converter or the converter for Emac files you might have I could use on my Windows 10 PC and perhaps any other updates that could help me?

Many Thanks
Brian

[Kungsgeten]

ManUtdNZ, on 2021-February-12, 19:07, said:

Just spotted your response. I tried creating a text file on Notepad and then running the bml2html.py converter but that seems a very crude way for me to make my html files and I made so many mistakes.

The Lakebeach NT page has some nice dropdown links that appeal to me. I've downloaded Emacs and I'm prepared to take the time to use it. Any chance of getting any updated bml2html.py converter or the converter for Emac files you might have I could use on my Windows 10 PC and perhaps any other updates that could help me?

Many Thanks
Brian

Sure, I can upload the relevant resources and a short example. I'll post here and will also send you a PM when its up.

[Kungsgeten]

Here's the relevant files and some instructions: https://github.com/K...eten/bridgehtml

[Zelandakh]

Kungsgeten, on 2021-February-11, 18:06, said:

Yes, they're a problem since 2NT after a transfer isn't natural INV but shows both majors. Not quite sure how to solve that. In the original version 2C-2D; 2H-2S is natural, which solves a lot of issues

Edit:

Maybe something like this:

The call that solves most of the system issues is the otherwise strange looking 2NT response showing 5♠4♥ INV. Add that and I am fairly sure you can resolve everything else. Something like:-

2♣ - 2♦; 2♥
==
2♦ = 6+♥, weak; or 4+♥ INV+; or GF and wanting to relay
... - 2♥ = 0-2♥
... - ... - 2♠ = relay (<4♠, INV; or any GF)
... - ... - ... - 2NT = min, 5-6♣
... - ... - ... - ... - 3♦ = relay -> responses as for max)
... - ... - ... - 3♣ = min, 7+♣
... - ... - ... - ... - 3♦ = relay
... - ... - ... - ... - ... - 3♥ = 0-1♠
... - ... - ... - ... - ... - 3♠ = 2227
... - ... - ... - ... - ... - 3NT = 0-1♥
... - ... - ... - ... - ... - 4♣+ = 0-1♦
... - ... - ... - 3♦ = max, 7+♣
... - ... - ... - ... - 3♥ = relay
... - ... - ... - ... - ... - 3♠ = 0-1♠
... - ... - ... - ... - ... - 3NT = 2227
... - ... - ... - ... - ... - 4♣ = 0-1♥
... - ... - ... - ... - ... - 4♦+ = 0-1♦
... - ... - ... - 3♥ = max, 5-6♣, 0-1♥ (4135, 4126, 4036, 3136)
... - ... - ... - 3♠ = max, 3236
... - ... - ... - 3NT = max, 1246
... - ... - ... - 4♣+ = max, 4216 (+zoom)
... - ... - 2NT = 4♠, INV
... - ... - 3♣ = 4♠, 2+♣, 4+♥, INV
... - ... - 3♦ = nat, GF
... - ... - 3♥ = nat, INV
... - 2♠ = 3♥, 6+♣
... - 2NT+ = 4♥
2♥ = 6+♠, weak; or 4+♠, INV+
... - 2♠ = 0-2♠
... - ... - 2NT = INV
... - ... - 3♣ = to play
... - ... - 3♦ = nat, GF
... - ... - 3♥ = 5+♥, GF
... - ... - 3♠ = 6+♠, INV
... - 2NT = 3♠, 6+♣, min
... - 3♣ = 3♠, 6+♣, max
... - 3♦+ = 4♠
2♠ = range ask (bal/minor INV; or SI major)
... - 2NT = min
... - ... - 3♣ = nat, INV
... - ... - 3♦ = nat, INV
... - ... - 3♥ = 6+♥, SI
... - ... - 3♠ = 6+♠, SI
2NT = 5♠4♥, INV
3♣ = weak raise
3♦ = nat, sign-off
3♥ = 5+♥, 5+♠, INV *
3♠ = 2+♣, SI

* or make 2♣ - 2NT and/or 2♣ - 2♦; 2♥ - 2NT 4+ as per the original scheme and then 2♣ - 3♥ becomes SI with long diamonds, as in my original structure.

This does lose the mixed raise and means the one or other relay sequence is a little higher but you gain range information on the way and can therefore handle the difference between 5M invites with/without the other major when combined with the 2NT response. I daresay you can improve on this - I put it together relatively quickly and your 2♣ opening has different hands in it to what I am used to - but perhaps it will be useful in some way.

[Kungsgeten]

Zelandakh, on 2021-February-14, 14:21, said:

The call that solves most of the system issues is the otherwise strange looking 2NT response showing 5♠4♥ INV. Add that and I am fairly sure you can resolve everything else. Something like:-

[...]

This does lose the mixed raise and means the one or other relay sequence is a little higher but you gain range information on the way and can therefore handle the difference between 5M invites with/without the other major when combined with the 2NT response. I daresay you can improve on this - I put it together relatively quickly and your 2♣ opening has different hands in it to what I am used to - but perhaps it will be useful in some way.

Thanks! I'm not currently playing this structure (we use fairly standard methods over 2♣, with 2NT+ as transfers), but it is nice to see what can be done. One variant could be to just accept that we'll be playing 3 clubs when opener has 6+ clubs and responder wants to invite. Then maybe something like this:

2C-2D; 2H---
2S = GF relay.
2NT = INV with 4--5 hearts. Opener bids again with 6+ clubs.
3C = INV with 4 spades.
3D = INV with 6+ hearts and 4 spades (relay with GF diamonds).

However then it is possible we'll play 2NT with a club fit when opener have 4-1-3-5 and responder holds 3+ clubs and 4+ hearts. To solve that, maybe:

2C--
2D = Hearts or relay.
2H = Spades.
2S = Range ask, could be weak club raise.
2NT = 5S, 4H, INV.
3C = 3+C, 4--5H, INV.

2C-3C;
Pass = Minimum, usually not 3 hearts unless some belief that missing game isn't an issue.
3D = Three hearts. Now 3H is NF INV (opener bids again with max), while 3S asks range (3NT max, 4C min).
3H = Four hearts, minimum.
3S = ?? Maybe max and some concern for spades?
3NT = To play, 0-2 hearts.

Here responder will sometimes have to decide if we should play 3H on a moysian, or 4C, or even 3NT with sub-values.