[Cyberyeti]

 jillybean, on 2021-March-05, 17:09, said:

Utterly legal and specified as such in EBUland or I wouldn't do it.

[TylerE]

 jillybean, on 2021-March-05, 14:51, said:

Is there a better approach?

MAFIA. Don't bid up the line. 1♦ is either weak or GF with strong diamonds. No one cares about diamonds. Majors win.

[jillybean]

 mikeh, on 2021-March-05, 13:13, said:

I cannot be objective on where my regular partners and I would have ended up (were we to be playing a weak 1N....with one partner we play 10-12 1/2 nv, but with both we play 14-16 red)

I wonder if this has a direct correlation to the level of bridge we are playing. We play rather random club bridge where I open 12-14 (or a "good" 11) and 10-12 3rd seat NV. Good results are often a result of our opponents not having methods to bid over 1nt, or not finding the best defence.

It's a different story when we play against a stronger field.

[jillybean]

 Cyberyeti, on 2021-March-05, 17:21, said:

Utterly legal and specified as such in EBUland or I wouldn't do it.

You can legally read your system notes when playing online under EBU rules?

[Cyberyeti]

 jillybean, on 2021-March-05, 18:34, said:

You can legally read your system notes when playing online under EBU rules?

Yup, because it's impossible to police to prevent, so it means opps get better information

[Zelandakh]

 mikeh, on 2021-March-04, 21:03, said:

Assuming that, as most good pairs play these days, 2D over 1N is an artificial gf,

Artificial yes, but not necessarily asking, right? When Frances posted here she was an advocate for using 2♣ puppet combined with 2♦+ as transfers. I do not remember exactly how her structure worked but presumably 2♠ would deny a 4 card major and show doubt about the final denomination. After that sort of start, I imagine even club players would have a chance of getting it right, let alone a BB pair. And that is even assuming the structure does not have a specific splinter call, which is certainly a possibility.

[mikeh]

 Cyberyeti, on 2021-March-06, 03:56, said:

Yup, because it's impossible to police to prevent, so it means opps get better information

In the current team trials in Canada, it is legal to have system notes available. I think it’s the best way to go, since (unfortunately) I expect even some Canadians would be using their notes if doing so were illegal. This way, it’s a level playing field.

[jillybean]

 TylerE, on 2021-March-05, 17:25, said:

MAFIA. Don't bid up the line. 1♦ is either weak or GF with strong diamonds. No one cares about diamonds. Majors win.

My question above was in regards to playing a 12-14 nt, and how I bypass a 4 card major to show the 15-17 hand.

Isn't MAFIA an approach some use in a strong club system, how does this help me?

[akwoo]

I think a reasonable agreement is that 1C-1D-1N-2H/S shows a game forcing hand with 4 in the major and some specific number of diamonds (5?), and with any other number of diamonds, one bids 2D over 1N and manages the auction from there. This is, after all, the usual way to treat 1C-1H-1N-2S, which I have seen as game forcing and specifically 4-4 and also as game forcing and specifically 5-4.

As to why play 12-14, I play 12-14 because I find it leaves me better placed in various competitive situations, and besides by now my instincts in competitive situations have been trained to 12-14. I like the having the inference that, when partner opens 1m, they must be either unbalanced or 15+. Example from yesterday (which I messed up): You hold a 1=5=3=4 10 count after 1C-(2S). Playing 15-17, you have to make a negative double, and when the auction continues 1C-(2S)-X-(3S)-3N-(P) you don't know whether you belong in 3N or 4H. Play 12-14, it's pretty safe to bid a forcing 3H in the first place.

[TylerE]

 jillybean, on 2021-March-06, 11:00, said:

My question above was in regards to playing a 12-14 nt, and how I bypass a 4 card major to show the 15-17 hand.

Isn't MAFIA an approach some use in a strong club system, how does this help me?

No. It's simple. When responder bids 1♦ over 1♣, they NEVER have a major, unless strong enough to always insist on it later. Thus opener has no need to probe for one. This makes subsequent auctions much easier. You just bid 1N and get on with your life, and later bids a major are stopper/cue. You're never trying to back into a major suit fit unless responder goes through a 4SF type auction.

[jillybean]

 TylerE, on 2021-March-06, 21:02, said:

No. It's simple. When responder bids 1♦ over 1♣, they NEVER have a major, unless strong enough to always insist on it later. Thus opener has no need to probe for one. This makes subsequent auctions much easier. You just bid 1N and get on with your life, and later bids a major are stopper/cue. You're never trying to back into a major suit fit unless responder goes through a 4SF type auction.

Playing a 12-14nt, we use 1m 1x 1nt to show 15-17. How else can we show the strong nt hand?

[nullve]

 TylerE, on 2021-March-05, 17:25, said:

MAFIA. Don't bid up the line. 1♦ is either weak or GF with strong diamonds. No one cares about diamonds. Majors win.

MAFIA = MAjors FIrst Always, which is not the same as

 TylerE, on 2021-March-06, 21:02, said:

When responder bids 1♦ over 1♣, they NEVER have a major, unless strong enough to always insist on it later.

which looks like Walsh.

[TylerE]

 jillybean, on 2021-March-07, 01:45, said:

Playing a 12-14nt, we use 1m 1x 1nt to show 15-17. How else can we show the strong nt hand?

That's not the point. Of course that's what it shows. The point is that after 1c-1d-1N, opener's (and respodners) major rebids are never natural, because responder already denied a 4 card major.

[mikeh]

 TylerE, on 2021-March-07, 17:01, said:

That's not the point. Of course that's what it shows. The point is that after 1c-1d-1N, opener's (and respodners) major rebids are never natural, because responder already denied a 4 card major.

Only if you have that specific agreement. In my variable notrump partnership, playing transfers, 1C 1S is diamonds, any, or weak bal. if over opener’s rebid we bid 2M it is natural, gf, with longer diamonds.

Having to lump all of the 4+M and longer D gf hands into 2D over 1N means that opener is describing. Sometimes responder should be describing, allowing opener to better assess his holdings. When I show 4m 5D, gf, I want partner to be enthusiastic about holdings such as HJxx M and Hx(x) diamonds, and no quacks in the unbid.

So I’ll have a different hand than using 2D over 1N, even though the shape may be the same. I’ll have better suits to take charge, and be in need of fillers (and have better values elsewhere) when I show my shape.