[whereagles]

Hannie, on Jul 23 2005, 03:34 PM, said:

Not sure I like this structure.

Compared to the standard "bid stoppers up-the-line", this does worse when opener is minimal and responder is a minimal GF. In standard you may already have found that you are missing a stopper and you can stop in 3m. Here, you have to start looking for stoppers at the 3-level.

You don't need to like the structure I'm not trying to convince anyone this is the best thing since sliced bread (which it is ).

As for signing off in 3m when a stopper is missing, well, you can stop at the 4-level here. If a stopper is missing and a singleton is present, 4m on 25-26 hcp should still make. In any case this minor setback is, I think, greatly offset by the benefits of opener show what kind of hand/strenght he has, instead of clouding the issue with muddy stopper bids. That way responder knows where we stand and can take charge.

[whereagles]

keylime, on Jul 23 2005, 09:55 PM, said:

having more pieces of structure equals less pieces of overall control of the auction.

Actually, it is the other way around.

It is when you have gadgets to limit opener's or responder's hand that one of the players can control the auction. Playing without gadgets can be easier on your memory but increases the randomness of the level you play at. It is of course doable, provided you don't care much about missing a few borderline slams.

[whereagles]

luke warm, on Jul 24 2005, 12:36 AM, said:

i went back to the link posted.. i like roland's structure just fine

I didn't like it too much because opener doesn't say how strong he is. That puts a lot of stress on responder and stress increases the likelyhood of failure.

I also didn't like Fred's (and Ben's) structure because it wastes a couple bids that can be much better used. For instance, I see little interest in having two bids for balanced hands, and even less interest in showing how many cards you have in the minor when the hand is balanced.

All in all I took a little bit of here and there, souped it up with some ideas of my own and cooked up my own scheme.

[badderzboy]

I play ACOL/Weak NT and my partner and I are looking to use inverted minors, my current thoughts are to allow it to include a 4 card major!

1♣-2♣!-2X unbal hand either 5431 or 4441 or better either weak or poor 2nd suit in good hand (at most 1 of AK say)

(i) ptr can a higher suit at 2 level to check for 4441
(ii) 3♣ or 3X is a limit raise to 3 level if 44 10/11
(iii) 3Y stopper ask / long suit trial bid denies AK in suit
(iv) Game raise to 4Y
(v) 4♦ RKCB ask
(vi)2NT is bal 10/11 by responder with o/s suits stopped.
(vii)3NT is bal 12/13

1♣-2♣!-2NT Bal 15-17 pt hand 3♣ is now stayman

1♣-2♣!-3♣ is weak 11-14 no o/s 4 card suit
1♣-2♣!-3Y Good hand 15+ good suit any 3 level resp to 3 Y stopper ask


1♣-2♣!-3NT Bal 18-19 pt hand 4♣ is now stayman / 4♦ RKCB in ♣'s, 4HS ExRKCB?

1♣-2♣!-4♣ is strong 15+ forcing to 4NT no o/s 4 card suit

Thats my thoughts so far. How mad a scheme is it

Steve

[whereagles]

Seems ok to me.

But you might want to have another look at the sequence 1♣-2♣-3♣. If that's 11-14, pard will have to do some guesswork if he's on the 11-12 range

[badderzboy]

Thanks Whereeagles for your comments.

Partner can bid with a 4 card major but not a 5 card major

I've amended the scheme to the following :-


1♣-2♣!-2♦!
No 4 card major - Unbalanced - may have 4 diamonds or Weak in clubs - would pass a min raise to 3♣

Partner can stopper ask with 2♥/♠

Partner should bid 3♣ rather than 3♦ with minimum 10/11 hand

2NT is bal 10/11 by responder with o/s suits stopped.
3NT is bal 12/13

1♣-2♣!-2♥
Can have 4 ♦s.

4 card suit weak hand 12-14 or weak suit if 15+ at most 1 of AKQ in suit unbalanced 5431 or more unbalanced otherwise would bid NT

(i) ptr can a higher suit at 2 level to check for 4144
(ii) 3♣ or 3♥ is a limit raise to 3 level if 44 10/11
(iii) 3♠ stopper ask / long suit trial bid denies AK in suit
(iv) Game raise to 4♥
(v) 4♦ RKCB ask
(vi)2NT is bal 10/11 by responder with o/s suits stopped.
(vii)3NT is bal 12/13

1♣-2♣!-2♠

4 card suit weak hand 12-14 or weak suit if 15+ at most 1 of AKQ in suit unbalanced 5431 or more unbalanced otherwise would bid NT

(i) ptr can a higher suit at 2 level to check for 4441
(ii) 3♣ or 3♠ is a limit raise to 3 level if 44 10/11
(iii) 3♥stopper ask / long suit trial bid denies AK in suit
(iv) Game raise to 4♠
(v) 4♦ RKCB ask
(vi)2NT is bal 10/11 by responder with o/s suits stopped.
(vii)3NT is bal 12/13

1♣-2♣!-2NT Bal 15-16 pt hand 3♣ is now stayman

1♣-2♣!-3♣ is weak 11-14 no o/s 4 card suit

1♣-2♣!-3♥/♠ Unbalanced - Good hand 15+ good suit at 2 of AKQ in suit

(v) 4♦ RKCB ask

(vi) 3NT is bal 10/11 by responder with o/s suits stopped.



1♣-2♣!-3NT Bal 18-19 pt hand 4♣ is now stayman / 4♦ RKCB in ♣'s, 4HS ExRKCB?

1♣-2♣!-4♣ is strong 15+ forcing to 4NT no o/s 4 card suit unbalanced bid cue-bid up line or 4♦ RKCB

Any constructive comments out there?

Steve

[whereagles]

Seems ok, but you didn't yet 'fix' the 1♣-2♣-3♣ problem Maybe make the 3♣ rebid 13-14 (gf), and with 11-12 bid 1♣-2♣-2♦ ?