[mike777]

Your rebid and why, please

MP Both NV

1H=1S
?

T2...AQJT84..A952...A

[mw64ahw]

3♦ as I play this as an intermediate x64x
Strong hands take a different route
If partner bids ♥ Ill take it to 4♥

---

[jillybean]

3♦ seems right if it shows 64 strong

[Huibertus]

Normally my preference with 6/4's is to rebid the suit of the 4 card, it makes 9 of your cards known, while rebidding the 6 card makes 6 of your cards known. The issue here is your hand is not strong enough for 3♦ which should be a GameForce. So 3♥ as it is not a GameForce.

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2025-May-21, 10:43, said:

3♦ seems right if it shows 64 strong

He said 6=4 intermediate. Have you noticed how on every bidding problem mw64 has an idiosyncratic treatment that just happens to handle the problem very well?

And his ideas are extremely far from mainstream. Imagine the frequency of his 1H 1S 3D auction…it shows precisely 6=4 intermediate: a shape and strength range that will be rare.

Which in turn means that he has to use other unorthodox methods to deal with other hands.

As for the hand itself, am I playing imps or mps? In a typical mp field, I’m not interested in diamonds. Axxx is not a slam suitable holding, although of course it’s great opposite KQxxx, lol.

At mps, I’m bidding 3H. It’s a matter of frequency….few hands will do better, for mps, in diamonds than in hearts.

I can’t jumpshift because that’s gf in normal bidding methods, absent a strong club method where it would be roughly 15 hcp and 5=5 or better. So 2D risks playing there opposite Axxx x Kxxx xxxx when 3H will usually score better.

At imps, it’s closer. Making 2D when we can make 3H is no big deal. Of course, opposite KQxx x Qxx xxxx 2D is not a good spot!

But 3H makes it very hard to find diamonds opposite something like AKxxx x KQxxx xx. I’m not convinced we’d get to slam after a 2D rebid, but we might, if he bids 4th suit then bids 4D over my 3H.

Sorry…I now see it’s MPs…so 3H for me.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

2D, and given another chance, I will follow up with 3H.
If I end up in 2D, I wont have missed any game.
Now I dont play MP (or more precise I dont have the concentration required to play it),
so I play MP the way I play IMP.

I dont play Gazilli, but the given hand type is most likely one reason, why it got invented.
https://bridge-tips....-Convention.pdf

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mike777]

Thanks for the responses.

This deal was from the local Monday club game in town. The entire field was in 2 or 3H except silly me in 2D.
I rebid 2D without a care in the world and afterwords wondered what the heck..

Somewhere I got the thought in my head that 2D, often, not always, but often enough, inferred possible extras and partner would make some courtesy rebid if at all possible. With a minimum I would strain to rebid 2s on 3 or rebid 2H or 1NT.

In this specific case partner would rebid 3D, which I would then rebid 4H. I later mentioned it to my first-time pick-up partner and a few others and they all looked at me as some space alien. Sometimes I wonder how these ideas pop into my skull. smile.

Again, thanks for taking the time to respond to my post.

[mw64ahw]

mikeh, on 2025-May-21, 11:34, said:

He said 6=4 intermediate. Have you noticed how on every bidding problem mw64 has an idiosyncratic treatment that just happens to handle the problem very well?

And his ideas are extremely far from mainstream. Imagine the frequency of his 1H 1S 3D auction…it shows precisely 6=4 intermediate: a shape and strength range that will be rare.

You are correct they are not mainstream, but are ideas picked up from convention cards etc. I play these with my main partner and of course they are plugged into my bidding machine.
For the Majors I can achieve the intermediate jumps playing KI5 and a transfer approach over ♠. I used to play the jumps as 55 intermediate, but I think a comment from you and running some simulations caused me to switch to 64(+).
Always happy to share for those who have a genuine interest or are prepared to critique to help improve.

[Cyberyeti]

mw64ahw, on 2025-May-21, 12:52, said:

You are correct they are not mainstream, but are ideas picked up from convention cards etc. I play these with my main partner and of course they are plugged into my bidding machine.
For the Majors I can achieve the intermediate jumps playing KI5 and a transfer approach over ♠. I used to play the jumps as 55 intermediate, but I think a comment from you and running some simulations caused me to switch to 64(+).
Always happy to share for those who have a genuine interest or are prepared to critique to help improve.

We play the jumps as very specific intermediate 5-5s and play 2♦ as nearly forcing, I can see the attraction of 3♥ with this suit though.

[P_Marlowe]

mike777, on 2025-May-21, 12:50, said:

Thanks for the responses.

This deal was from the local Monday club game in town. The entire field was in 2 or 3H except silly me in 2D.
I rebid 2D without a care in the world and afterwords wondered what the heck..
<snip>

What was p hand?
Usually p should only pass 2D, if his diamonds are 2 cards longer than hearts.
One reason: due to the fact, that 2H could be only 3 carder.
This depends on how you treat bal. 5332 hands strong enough to open 1NT, the 3 carder
scenario is relevant if you regular open the major, what I usually do.

Hence I am used to, that p correct back to hearts most of the time.

[mike777]

J9873...7...KT73...K87

Often open 1nt with 5 card majors

This first-time partner would not know this but I often open 1nt on off shape hands, more than most.

[Cyberyeti]

mike777, on 2025-May-21, 13:53, said:

J9873...7...KT73...K87

Often open 1nt with 5 card majors

This first-time partner would not know this but I often open 1nt on off shape hands, more than most.

Auto 3♦ for us - 3♥-3N

[P_Marlowe]

mike777, on 2025-May-21, 13:53, said:

J9873...7...KT73...K87

Often open 1nt with 5 card majors

This first-time partner would not know this but I often open 1nt on off shape hands, more than most.

I also think the hand is worth a courtesy raise, esp. if you have a 44 for sure, but if p cannot be sure,
than pass is sensible.

[mikeh]

mw64ahw, on 2025-May-21, 12:52, said:

You are correct they are not mainstream, but are ideas picked up from convention cards etc. I play these with my main partner and of course they are plugged into my bidding machine.
For the Majors I can achieve the intermediate jumps playing KI5 and a transfer approach over ♠. I used to play the jumps as 55 intermediate, but I think a comment from you and running some simulations caused me to switch to 64(+).
Always happy to share for those who have a genuine interest or are prepared to critique to help improve.

I play that 1H 1N 3m is intermediate 5=5 or better, but that’s because we play 2S as a multi-meaning gf….sometimes 5=6 majors but more commonly a gf hand with 4+ minor…responder usually bids 2N to ask.

It doesn’t work after 1H 1S, since (absent other science such as Gazilli) you need the jumpshift as gf. Now, Gazilli is definitely an interesting gadget, and very popular in some WC circles, but it’s not caught on much in NA. And one definitely can’t just sit down and play Gazilli unless you and partner have agreed on the details.

Even so, I don’t think many Gazilli players would limit 3m to 6=4. Not that I’m an expert on Gazilli…I know the very basics but not more than that.

[mikeh]

mike777, on 2025-May-21, 13:53, said:

J9873...7...KT73...K87

Often open 1nt with 5 card majors

This first-time partner would not know this but I often open 1nt on off shape hands, more than most.

I agree with your partner. 2D carries zero inferences about strength…it’s basically 11 to a soft 18 with short spades. Now, in traditional standard methods the sequence 1H 1S 2D 2S or 2N then 3H by opener shows a strong hand, while 1H 2S 2H 2N 3m shows a minimum hand, both 6=4.

But the key is that 2D could be, say, Qx KQJxx Axxx xx…I don’t think raising to 3 D is very good opposite that…..and you were playing mps!

If he raised on his foot (I can’t call that a hand) what should he do with Axxxx x Kxxx Kxx? And how does opener know which hand he has?

I doubt I’d raise 2D even at imps, not vulnerable, but I think raising at mps is a bad idea….just as I think bidding 2D is as well, for reasons I gave earlier.

[DavidKok]

mikeh, on 2025-May-21, 14:50, said:

Even so, I don’t think many Gazilli players would limit 3m to 6=4. Not that I’m an expert on Gazilli…I know the very basics but not more than that.

I'm no expert either, but I know a little over a half dozen versions. Over here people have been experimenting with the direct jumps to the 3-level. The traditional '13-15 5-5' is bad for two reasons: frequency, and it doesn't really gain when it comes up. Some people have shifted to 6-4, though it's not clear to me why that's much better (similar frequency, slightly higher gains if it comes up, but doesn't address the key issues). Instead using it as a stronger hand type (GF 6-4, with GF 5-5 bidding 2NT-then-a-suit, and strong hands in 2♣ therefore having less extreme shape - some people invert some of these routes) has been somewhat popular here - it's still uncommon though the wider upper limit helps with that a bit, but also now it can actually gain by describing our hand well and relatively cheaply as a prelude to slam.

As a side remark, I think the negative inferences from the opponents' silence should encourage bidding slowly with weak shapely hands on this start. Partner is likely strong, and we likely don't have an amazing side suit fit. This is an aspect of traditional Gazzilli (strong hands in 2♣, all higher bids are weaker) that I think is not given proper weight.

[mike777]

 mikeh, on 2025-May-21, 14:58, said:

I agree with your partner. 2D carries zero inferences about strength…it’s basically 11 to a soft 18 with short spades. Now, in traditional standard methods the sequence 1H 1S 2D 2S or 2N then 3H by opener shows a strong hand, while 1H 2S 2H 2N 3m shows a minimum hand, both 6=4.

But the key is that 2D could be, say, Qx KQJxx Axxx xx…I don’t think raising to 3 D is very good opposite that…..and you were playing mps!

If he raised on his foot (I can’t call that a hand) what should he do with Axxxx x Kxxx Kxx? And how does opener know which hand he has?

I doubt I’d raise 2D even at imps, not vulnerable, but I think raising at mps is a bad idea….just as I think bidding 2D is as well, for reasons I gave earlier.

Thanks for taking the time to elaborate
Appreciation.

I guess on your example hand I would have rebid 1NT as I mentioned.
Straining to limit my hand as a minimum somehow.. when possible.

Again ty Mike

[HardVector]

After reading all of these, the only thing that came to my mind was "When did jump-shifts stop being game forcing?" Bidding 3d is 100% game forcing. If you are ready to go to some game (3n) on this hand, you have some serious rose tinted glasses on.

[DavidKok]

HardVector, on 2025-May-21, 15:10, said:

After reading all of these, the only thing that came to my mind was "When did jump-shifts stop being game forcing?" Bidding 3d is 100% game forcing. If you are ready to go to some game (3n) on this hand, you have some serious rose tinted glasses on.

Allegedly Gazzilli was first published in 1984, so 41 years ago. Though presumably the idea predates Gazzilli as a whole. These non-GF jump shifts are combined with artificial cheap forcing rebids that contain most or all strong hands, saving space.

[mw64ahw]

One I may have posted before.
Playing a version of KI5 with transfers
1♥-1N 5+♠ weak
.. Pass to play
.. 2♣ 4+♦, 25x4, GF/GI ♣
.. 2♦ 6♥, GF/GI ♦, (option 18-19)
.. 2♥ s5x4,
.. 2♠ to play
.. 2N+ various options,
So on the hands above I stop in 2♦