[frank0]

Recently I've tried to construct the detail agreement after 1♣(3+)-1♦-1NT some problem comes up,
1. If 1NT deny 4M what is the meaning of 1♣-1♦-1NT-2♦-2♥/2♠?
2. What's the meaning of reverse by responder?

My construction
1♣-1♦-1NT-2♦-?
opener has
2♥:2335
2♠:3235
2NT:3334
3♣:3325
Responder's next bid set trump suit.

1♣-1♦-1NT-2♣-2♦-?
responder has
2♥:1453
2♠:4153
3♣:5♦4♣+ invite
2NT: other shapes with 5♦
Opener can choose to sign off 2M/2N/3C/3D if not accepting invitation, based on the information responder gives.

Reverse shows 6♦4M

Any opinion on this?

[mike777]

no 1nt denies unbal hand , yes and somewhat rare but yes.

1) xyz artficial gf.
2) 1c=1d=1nt=2major.....natural gf....5+d and 4M: 1nt does not deny a major just an unbal hand.


I play xyz on after any 1x1y1z=2c or 2d.

[mgoetze]

Your poll should allow multiple answers, and also "other". For instance to question one I can answer all of "yes, I play walsh", "no, I don't play walsh", and "I play transfer walsh, so 1NT only denies 4 hearts, as I would raise partner's suit if I could" depending on which partnership.

Also I'm not sure what "only 4" diamonds is all about - I'm told some people bid 1♣-1♦ on 3 diamonds in certain situations.

Aside from the poll, my opinion is that this auction is not something worth spending a lot of time on.

[Zelandakh]

When I play (English) Acol then 1♣ - 1♦ - 1NT denies a 4 card major because with 4432 shape you open the major. If I play Swiss Acol or a 5 card major system then the 1NT rebid does not deny a 4 card major unless the agreement is to play "suits up the line". Obviously the later bidding is affected by the choices made. It sounds like you want to play "suits up the line" in which case you should probably devote a lot more time and effort into sorting out the issues arising from the 1♣ - 1♦ - 1M auctions than after the 1NT rebid.

[Bende]

I play that 1♦ denies a major unless the hand is strong and 1NT shows a balanced hand and does not deny a major.

After 1♣-1♦; 1NT, responder's 2♥ is either natural GF or artificial GF. Opener bids 2♠ with four card hearts. The rest of the bidding is natural.

[mikeh]

I play walsh....yes, I think transfer walsh is better, but that isn't part of the OP discussion, as far as I can see.

Given that I play walsh, we have two ways for responder to gf, with a 4 card major, over the 1N rebid, which could be as full of majors as 4=4=2=3.

I think that responder should bid 2♦, artificial gf, on hands on which he feels that the best way forward would be if opener showed a major, and responder were able, with a fit, to make a slam try by bidding 3 of the major.

so

1♣ 1♦
1N 2♦
2♥ 3♥

Shows 4=5 or better in the reds with slam interest opposite an 11-14/12-14 1♣ opening bid.


1♣ 1♦
1N 2♥

is natural and a reverse, and thus gf. Responder lacks slam interest in most cases: on slam hands, responder will by definition have a significantly stronger hand than opener, and in those circumstances, I think that an efficient approach will usually require that opener, whose shape and range is already well-defined, do the describing rather than responder, and this usually works best after responder has bid 2♦...opener is the one to start slam cooperation over 3♥, while with responder reversing, responder is the one starting the slam cooperation over 3♥.

[awm]

For Elianna and me:

1nt denies a major
We always bid our longest suit first over 1c.
We will often bypass 4d to bid 1M or 1nt, but not always (it depends on honor location).
Over 1nt we play either 2m as signoff in this auction.
To force over 1nt we can bid 2M, which is ostensibly natural but could be concentration of values in a minor-oriented hand. We also have 3M (splinter) available and an original SJS.

[Zelandakh]

mikeh, on 2012-March-20, 12:21, said:

I think that responder should bid 2♦, artificial gf, on hands on which he feels that the best way forward would be if opener showed a major, and responder were able, with a fit, to make a slam try by bidding 3 of the major.

Out of interest, Mike (and others for that matter), what do you think of the method where 2♣ is "weak with diamonds or any invite", 2♦ is GF with hearts and 2♥ GF with spades?

[mikeh]

Zelandakh, on 2012-March-21, 07:38, said:

Out of interest, Mike (and others for that matter), what do you think of the method where 2♣ is "weak with diamonds or any invite", 2♦ is GF with hearts and 2♥ GF with spades?

Interesting idea, but I am not sure that it is needed.

As I suggested in my earlier post, it does seem to me that there is some utility in giving responder the ability to ask or tell: 2♦ gf asks, 2M, gf, tells. Obviously the 2♦ encompasses a wide range of hands, and doesn't imply a major, altho opener's first priority is the show a major if he holds one (and to bid 2♥ with 4=4 although I suppose one could use 3♦ for that purpose, but that's another issue).

Your suggestion appears to eliminate this approach, in that responder must 'tell'.

More to the point, using 2♦ to show hearts means that responder lacks a generic gf at the 2-level. There will usually (always?) be work-arounds for the gf hands that lack a major, but it seems to me to be an unnecessary surrender of bidding space to limit the cheap 2♦ rebid to one specific holding. Add to this the loss of responder's ability to choose to ask or tell, and force him to tell, and I don't care for the idea.

[kenrexford]

FWIW, here's my answer to one of the questions. Assuming Walsh, what is 1♣-P-1♦-P-1NT-P-2♦-P-2M?

I play this as a "super-accept of diamonds" with something here. An Ace if Responder is known to be light.


E.g.,

♠Ax ♥xxx ♦KQx ♣Axxxx

♠xxx ♥Ax ♦AJxxxx ♣xx

1♣-1♦

1NT(11-14)-2♦(long diamonds)

2♠(super-accept diamonds, spade card)-2NT(interested, hearts controlled)

3NT

[JLilly]

My two main partners and I play something pretty basic and natural. 1♣-1♦; 1NT is a balanced hand---it could even have both majors if it's 4=4=2=3. Responder's 2♣ is then checkback, with opener's third bid showing, in descending priority, four hearts, four spades, four diamonds, or none of the above, at the two level with a min and at the three level with a max. 1♣-1♦; 1NT-2♦; 2M is diamond support with a M control, like in Ken's post above.

With one of my partners, we're thinking of switching to a transfer structure rather than natural. We play mainly matchpoints, so we want to be able to stop in 2N even when a good minor fit is found. The current incarnation of what we're playing around with is:
After 1♣-1♦; 1NT,
2♣ = relay to 2♦, then
. . . . .pass = signoff
. . . . .2NT = quantitative invitation to 3NT
. . . . .3♦ = GF with diamonds, no slam interest
. . . . .something else = minor slam exploration (probably something like 2-lv to find the strain, 3-lv = autosplinters)
2♦ = tr. to hearts, inv+
2♥ = tr. to spades, inv+
2♠ = tr. to clubs. Shows filling club honors to invite a light 3NT contract, OR, GF with clubs but no slam interest. Opener declines with 2NT.
2NT = asks for filling diamond honors for a light 3NT contract.
3♣ = weak, preemptive
3♦ = weak, preemptive